Dating aggression occurs frequently in early to mid-adolescence and has negative repercussions for psychosocial adjustment and physical health. The patterns of behavior learned during this developmental timeframe may persist in future dating relationships, underscoring the need to identify risk factors for this outcome. The current study examined longitudinal relations between beliefs supporting aggression, anger regulation, and dating aggression. Participants were 176 middle school students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade (50 % female; 82 % African American). No direct effects were found between beliefs supporting reactive or proactive aggression and dating aggression. Beliefs supporting reactive aggression predicted increased rates of anger dysregulation, and beliefs supporting proactive aggression led to subsequent increases in anger inhibition. Anger dysregulation and inhibition were associated with higher frequencies of dating aggression. An indirect effect was found for the relation between beliefs supporting reactive aggression and dating aggression via anger dysregulation. Another indirect effect emerged for the relation between beliefs supporting proactive aggression and dating aggression through anger inhibition. The study's findings suggested that beliefs supporting proactive and reactive aggression were differentially related to emotion regulation processes, and identified anger dysregulation and inhibition as risk factors for dating aggression among adolescents.

This study examined relations between patterns of dating aggression and victimization and school environment factors among 4,114 early adolescents attending 37 middle schools in four sites in the United States (51% Black, non-Hispanic, 21% Hispanic, and 17% White). Latent class analyses revealed a five-class solution that differentiated among youth classified as uninvolved (54%), psychologically aggressive victims (18%), aggressors (11%), victims (11%), and aggressive victims (5%). These groups differed in their perceptions of school environment factors, including the quality of student–student and student–teacher relationships, awareness/reporting of violence, school safety problems, and school norms for aggression and nonviolence. Our findings underscore the need for dating violence prevention efforts in early adolescence and the relevance of school environment and more selective interventions.

Objective Headaches are common among youth and are associated with significant negative outcomes. Despite advances in interdisciplinary treatments for youth with chronic pain, research suggests disparities in access to these services. Methods A total of 186 youth (M = 14.19 years old, 70.8% female) presenting to a neurology appointment at a children’s hospital system were screened using the Pediatric Pain Screening Tool (PPST), a brief, validated measure to identify youth that may benefit from additional pain management services. Results Two-thirds of participants (n = 124, 66.7%) screened as medium or high risk on the PPST. Risk categorization did not vary by patient age or sex. A greater proportion of Hispanic/Latino patients were categorized as low-risk relative to non-Hispanic/Latino patients (55.6% vs. 30.1%), and a somewhat lower proportion of patients of color were categorized as medium-risk relative to White patients (14.0% vs. 30.5%). Three-quarters (n = 94, 75.8%) of patients who were screened as medium or high risk were not referred for any additional pain management services. Referrals did not vary by patient age or ethnicity. While not statistically significant, a lower proportion of males received referrals at both medium (8.3% vs. 17.6%) and high levels of risk (15.8% vs. 34.5%), and a greater proportion of youth of color who screened as medium risk received referrals relative to White youth categorized as medium risk (37.5% vs. 10.3%). Conclusion Future research should continue to explore factors influencing decision-making regarding referral to specialized pain management services for youth with headache.

No abstract