• Jordan P Davis, Katie A Ports, Kathleen C Basile, Dorothy L Espelage, and Corinne F David-Ferdon.
• University of Southern California, Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, USC Center for Artificial Intelligence in Society; USC Center for Mindfulness Science; USC Institute for Addiction Science, 669W 34th Street, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA. jordanpd@usc.edu.
• J Youth Adolesc. 2019 Dec 1; 48 (12): 2343-2359.

AbstractPrior research has demonstrated the scope and impact of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on health and wellbeing. Less is known about the trajectories from exposure to ACEs, such as witnessing family conflict and violence in the community, to teen dating violence perpetration, and the protective factors that buffer the association between early exposure to ACEs and later teen dating violence perpetration. Students (n = 1611) completed self-report surveys six times during middle and high school from 2008 to 2013. In early middle school, the sub-sample was 50.2% female and racially/ethnically diverse: 47.7% Black, 36.4% White, 3.4% Hispanic, 1.7% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 10.8% other. Youth were, on average, 12.7 years old. Latent transition analysis was used to assess how trajectories of exposure to parental conflict and community violence during middle school transition into classes of teen dating violence perpetration (e.g., sexual, physical, threatening, relational, and verbal) in high school. Protective factors were then analyzed as moderators of the transition probabilities. Three class trajectories of ACEs during middle school were identified: decreasing family conflict and increasing community violence (n = 103; 6.4%), stable low family conflict and stable low community violence (n = 1027; 63.7%), stable high family conflict and stable high community violence (n = 481; 29.9%). A three class solution for teen dating violence perpetration in high school was found: high all teen dating violence class (n = 113; 7.0%), physical and verbal only teen dating violence class (n = 335; 20.8%), and low all teen dating violence class (n = 1163; 72.2%). Social support, empathy, school belonging and parental monitoring buffered some transitions from ACEs exposure trajectory classes to teen dating violence perpetration classes. Comprehensive prevention strategies that address multiple forms of violence while bolstering protective factors across the social ecology may buffer negative effects of exposure to violence in adolescence.

19 keywords...

hide…