Childhood adversities among students at an English University: A latent class analysis

Abstract

University students routinely participate in research, including research on trauma and adversity, but the unique implications of trauma and adversity for educational and developmental outcomes for this group have received less attention. This study surveyed first year undergraduate students at an urban university located in the most ethnically diverse district in England, with the second highest poverty rate. Of approximately 7,825 students, 858 responded; a response rate of 11%. The survey included thirteen questions about adverse circumstances before age 18. Four in five students (79%) reported at least one adversity, 51% reported three or more, and 20% reported at least six. Female students reported a higher mean number of adversities than men, but men were significantly more likely to report having been 'attacked, stabbed, shot or robbed by threat'. Where comparisons were possible, rates were higher than for the general population or for the only other UK university survey. A Latent Class Analysis produced four groupings. Besides the 'No adversity' (36%) and 'Intermediate' (46%) classes, there were two 'High adversity' groups, differentiated by high (12%) or moderate (6%) adversities related to cohabitation (parental separation, lived with depressed person, lived with alcohol/drug user, and lived with incarcerated person). Higher rates of adversities, and latent class membership, were related 2 to predictions that one would not complete one's degree. Implications and next steps are discussed.

Cognitive variations following exposure to childhood adversity: evidence from a pre-registered, longitudinal study

“…The past studies that have used clustering techniques (e.g., latent class analysis) have found between 3 and 5 classes of adversity. 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 While the number of classes and the corresponding co-occurring adversity types will likely vary across studies based on the number and severity of individual adversity types examined, there is little doubt that the clustering technique provides an alternative or complementary approach to studying childhood adversity, leading to a more nuanced understanding of the effects of adversity on outcomes, obtained through the pathways of adversity classes. Using latent class approach could further reveal the population distribution of the co-occurring adversity patterns among participants who may be at the greatest health risk and thus, prompt some form of intervention that targets the developmental areas of need for such high-risk groups.…”

“…Previous studies testing dimensional models using latent class analysis found a varying number of latent classes, predominantly populated by participants reporting low levels of adversity. 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 However, no previous study, to our knowledge, has attempted to connect different adversity subgroups or classes to differences in cognitive functioning.…”