Measuring teen dating violence perpetration: A comparison of cumulative and single assessment procedures.

Abstract

Objective: There are concerns about the measurement of teen dating violence (TDV) perpetration. The current study compares data on TDV perpetration derived from a cumulative assessment procedure and a single assessment procedure. The prevalence and frequency of TDV perpetration are examined, as well as their associations with hypothesized precursors of TDV. Method: A sample of court-referred adolescents (n = 147, Mage = 15.85) completed a baseline assessment that included measures of three hypothesized precursors to TDV: externalizing problems, exposure to community violence, and attitudes about dating violence. For the cumulative assessment procedure, adolescents then completed up to 6 phone interviews on their TDV perpetration (physical, sexual, and emotional), once every 2 weeks over the course of a 3-month period. Data from these interviews were aggregated to form a cumulative measure of TDV perpetration over the 3 months. For the single assessment procedure, adolescents completed an identical interview on their TDV perpetration in a lab assessment 3 months after baseline, but were asked about perpetration over the entire 3 months. Results: Results of within-subjects comparisons indicated that, compared with the single assessment procedure, the cumulative assessment procedure yielded higher prevalence and greater frequency of physical, sexual, and emotional TDV. Across analytic methods, all types of TDV perpetration were more strongly related to externalizing problems, and sexual TDV perpetration was more strongly related to exposure to community violence, when measured cumulatively. Conclusions: Cumulative assessment procedures might provide a more sensitive and valid measurement of TDV perpetration than single assessment procedures.

Cumulative Incidence of Physical and Sexual Dating Violence: Insights From A Long-term Longitudinal Study

“…Further, in using a cumulative incidence approach, we found higher rates of DV than even outlier (cross-sectional) studies using high-risk samples ( Alleyne-Green et al, 2012 ; Martin-Storey, 2015 ) and comprehensive measures ( Niolon et al, 2015 ). This pattern of results align with estimates derived from similar cumulative assessments over shorter timespans ( Jouriles et al, 2005 ; Krauss et al, 2020 ; Smith et al, 2003 ). Importantly, rates exceeded the field’s consensus on the prevalence for both sexual and physical DV in just three aggregated follow-ups, suggesting that future longitudinal research need not expend extensive resources to capture these numbers.…”

“…These approaches risk underreporting of DV due to respondents forgetting or misremembering events (i.e., when asking about lifetime) or limiting their recall to short spans of time or limited partners. Alternatively, cumulative assessment approaches aggregate repeated measurements across (often shorter) reference periods rather than rely on a single-point retrospective report ( Caiozzo et al, 2016 ; Jouriles et al, 2005 ; Krauss et al, 2020 ). Since it is likely that reference period influences prevalence rates, a cumulative approach can mitigate some measurement error by capturing violence “missed” by lifetime lookbacks.…”

“…Since it is likely that reference period influences prevalence rates, a cumulative approach can mitigate some measurement error by capturing violence “missed” by lifetime lookbacks. Past use of cumulative assessment strategies resulted in higher prevalence rates of DV among adolescents and, importantly, improved criterion validity with psychological correlates ( Jouriles et al, 2005 ; Krauss et al, 2020 ). Thus, cumulative assessment functions as a valid and potentially more accurate assessment of DV involvement than previously documented, making the onset of certain behaviors more identifiable and thus refining prevention approaches…”

The gender symmetry problem in physical teen dating violence: A commentary and suggestions for a research agenda

“…The lack of more fined‐grained data limits our ability to understand how processes over hours, days or weeks influence the occurrence of dating violence episodes. Such data are needed to better understand how cognitions, motivating negative emotions, routine activities and adverse life‐events affect change and stability in coercive and aggressive episodes among dating partners (Krauss et al., 2020). Ecological momentary assessments may help to address this limitation (Shiffman et al., 2008).…”

A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Learning Theory and Teen Dating Violence Perpetration

“…Additionally, these dimensions have had differing success in explaining offending, with differential association having the most empirical support and imitation having the least (Pratt et al, 2010). Previous meta-analyses have found that findings depend on crime type, demographics of sample, location, and research design (Kruis et al 2020; Pratt et al 2010).…”