Review this 

handout

 on adolescent dating violence. Discuss the benefits and risks of adolescent romantic relationships. Imagine you were designing an informational pamphlet for adolescents describing the risks and benefits of dating in adolescence. What information would your pamphlet contain?

Teen Dating Violence
by Jane Powers and Erica Kerman

February 2006

Continued on page

2

Over the last several decades, dating violence has
emerged as a significant public health issue. However,
until recently most dating violence research has focused
on adult couples or college students, not on adolescents.
Evidence suggests that dating violence among high
school students is more widespread than previously
believed, and may have serious developmental
consequences. Adolescents are especially vulnerable to
this form of violence since it may interfere with two tasks
that are integral to healthy social development: 1)
establishing caring, meaningful relationships, and 2)
developing interpersonal intimacy. Adolescents may be
at even greater risk than adults for physical and
psychological harm given their lack of experience, desire
for independence, and reliance on support from

inexperienced peers (Callahan, 2003). These factors limit
their ability to respond to violence and access effective
intervention. Additionally, individuals who experience
dating violence during adolescence may be at increased
risk for continued interpersonal violence in adulthood both
as victims and/or perpetrators.

Scope of the Problem

Although once narrowly conceptualized as involving only
physical force, dating violence is now more broadly
recognized as a continuum of abuse which can range from
incidents of emotional and verbal abuse to rape and
murder (Hickman et al, 2004). It involves a pattern of
coercive, manipulative behavior that one partner exerts
over the other for the purpose of establishing and
maintaining power and control. Efforts to measure the
extent of dating violence suggest that as many as one in
three teens may experience this problem.
Using a national sample, the Centers for Disease Control
(2000) reported that the average prevalence of dating
violence for high school and college students is 22% and
32% respectively. Recently, Silverman et al (2002)
analyzed 1997 and 1998 data from the Massachusetts
Youth Risk Behavior Survey and estimated that one in
five adolescent high school girls experienced dating
violence. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study

National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and
Prevention Week is February 6-10th.

For more information and a free tool kit, visit:
www.abanet.org/unmet/missionstatement.html

In recognizing the impact of teen dating violence in their
lives, teens throughout New York State designed posters
and artwork as entries for the 2005 Teen Dating Violence
Media Contest. For more information: www.opdv.state.ny.us

2

of Adolescent Health collected during the 1994-95
school year, Halpern et al (2001) found that 32% of
adolescents in 7-12th grade reported experiencing some
kind of violence in dating relationships within the 18
months prior to the interview. Other smaller scale studies
have found prevalence rates of dating violence ranging
from 9% to 57% (O’Keefe, 2005).

Reasons why prevalence rates vary so significantly have
to do with the lack of standardized definitions used to
assess dating violence. Some researchers include
psychological and emotional abuse in their definition
while others are more restrictive and only include
physically violent acts. Furthermore, sexual violence is
often excluded from definitions. Some studies only
record violence that has occurred in a single or recent
relationship while others consider violence occurring in
multiple relationships across longer periods of time. In
addition, the reliability of these data is questionable since
most dating violence research relies on self-report
measures which are subject to socially desirable
responses.

The Role of Gender

Studies demonstrate that non-sexual violence in dating
relationships frequently involves the reciprocal use of
violence by both males and females. In fact, a consistent
but counterintuitive finding is that female adolescents
inflict more physical violence than male adolescents, with
female perpetration rates ranging from 28% to 33% in
contrast to male perpetration rates ranging from 11%
to 20% (Foshee, 1996; Malik et al, 1997; O’Keefe,
1997). Although this finding supports the general trend
of increased aggression among adolescent girls (e.g.,
Cummings et al., 2000), the context of the violent
incident must be taken into account: girls often inflict
harm on others in self defense. Reporting biases also
come into play. Whereas males may tend to underreport,

deny or minimize their own aggression, females may over
report to accept blame and take greater responsibility
for initiating violence (Jackson, 1999; Le Jeune and
Follette 1994). When sexual violence is examined,
however, dramatic gender differences emerge with
females sustaining significantly more sexual victimization
than males (Foshee, 1996; Molidor et al, 2000).

Gender also appears to influence the reasons why
teenagers engage in dating violence. Although anger is
the most frequently cited motive for both male and female
adolescents, females more often cite self defense while
males cite the desire to control one’s partner (Foshee,
1996; O’Keefe, 1997; Watson, 2001). Gender also may
influence the impact of dating violence. Given their often
greater size and strength, adolescent males are more likely
to exert greater harm on their female victims. Compared
to boys, girls are more likely to sustain injuries and require
medical treatment as a result of dating violence
(Makepeace, 1987). Furthermore, males and females may
perceive their victimization differently: females indicate

significantly more emotional hurt and fear (Foshee, 1996;
O’Keefe and Treister, 1998). For example, Molidor et al
(2000) found the majority of adolescent boys in their
sample (56%) were not hurt at all by the worst reported
incident of dating violence, however, only 9% of girls

3

Photos courtesy of the New York State Center for
School Safety and their Please Stand Up! CD.
Available at www.pleasestandup.org

reported being unhurt while nearly half (48%) reported
being hurt “a lot.”

Risk Factors for Dating Violence Perpetration
and Victimization

Studies suggest that certain early childhood experiences
may predispose individuals to violent tendencies in their
romantic relationships as adolescents and adults.
Adolescents who experienced greater family instability,
maltreatment, or social disadvantage tend to date at a
younger age and experience dating violence at higher than
average rates. Among a sample of 14-16-year old girls
receiving child protection services, 90% had begun dating
and over 50% experienced sexual and physical violence
in a romantic relationship (Wekerle & Wolfe, 1999).

Young people who witness domestic violence in their
family of origin are at a higher risk of inflicting violence
upon later romantic partners, although these findings have
been somewhat inconsistent. This association appears
to be stronger for males than for females. The witnessing
of inter-parental violence plays a less significant role in
becoming a victim of dating violence for both genders
(O’Keefe, 2005).

The relationship between community violence and dating
violence has also been documented. Evidence suggests
that exposure to violence in one’s neighborhood is
correlated with the perpetration of relationship violence
for both genders (Malik, et al.1997; O’Keefe, 1997;).
For girls, witnessing community violence is also
associated with becoming a victim of aggressive male
behavior. Community violence may have a spillover effect
and increase individuals’ use of violence in intimate
settings, possibly by increasing the acceptance of violence
as a legitimate form of expression.

A number of psychological risk factors have been
identified. For both males and females, low self-esteem
is often a characteristic of adolescents involved in dating
violence. Males who have low self-esteem are more likely
to initiate dating violence while females with low self
esteem are more likely to become victims (O’Keefe,
1997). Depression and suicidal thoughts have also been
linked to victimization for males and females (Kreiter et
al., 1999). However, it is unclear whether depressive
tendencies are a cause or consequence of relationship
violence.

Evidence suggests that certain risky behaviors are strongly
associated with committing or receiving acts of aggression
in an adolescent relationship. These include the use of
alcohol and other illegal drugs, as well as risky sexual
behavior, such as promiscuity and unsafe practices
(O’Keefe, 1997).

Prevention Efforts to Combat Adolescent Dating
Violence

A number of programs have been developed to prevent
dating violence. Most are school based programs which
use a group format and target students in grades 7-12.
These programs typically try to change attitudes about
violence and gender stereotyping, teach conflict
management or problem solving skills, and frequently
include activities that increase awareness and dispel myths
about relationship violence. Only a few studies have
empirically investigated the effectiveness of these
prevention programs, several of which have shown
promising results – especially in increasing knowledge
about dating violence, changing norms, and improving
communication skills. Although many of these programs
may have some impact on attitudes and beliefs related to
partner violence, it is not known whether these changes
endure or have an influence on behavior during
adolescence and into adulthood.

The prevention of dating violence requires an integrated
and comprehensive approach in schools and communities
— efforts should include community collaboration,
education, prevention programs, as well as treatment for
perpetrators and support services for victims. Education
programs should be implemented not just for students,
but for the entire school community – teachers, staff and
parents – all of whom play essential roles in promoting
the health and well being of young people.

The Upstate Center of Excellence invites you to visit the ACT for Youth website

where additional copies of this newsletter and many other youth development

resources are available.

www.actforyouth.net

4

Cornell University
Family Life Development Center
Beebe Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
TEL: 607.255.7736
FAX: 607.255.8562

Please help us maintain the accuracy of our
mailing list. If you are receiving more than
one copy, or if there is an error in your name
or address, please let us know. Thank you!

References

Callahan, M., Tolman, R., Saunders, D. (2003). Adolescent Dating
Violence Victimization and Psychological Well-Being. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 18 (6), 664-681

Le Jeune, C., & Follette, V. (1994). Taking responsibility-sex
difference in reporting dating violence. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 9, 133-140.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control (2000). Dating Violence. Available
at www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/datviol.htm.

Halpern, C. T., Oslak, S.G., Young, M.L., Martin, S.L., & Kupper,
L.L. (2001). Partner violence among adolescents in opposite-sex
romantic relationships: Findings from the National Longitudinal
Study of Adolescent Health. American Journal of Public Health,
91, 1679-1685.

Silverman, J. G., Raj, A, Mucci, L.A., & Hathaway, J.E. (2001).
Dating violence against adolescent girls and associated substance
use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy,
and suicidality. Journal of the American Medical Association, 286,
372-379.

Malik, S., Sorenson, S. B., & Aneshensel, C. S. (1997). Community
and dating violence among adolescents: Prepetration and
victimization. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21(5), 291-302

Makepeace, J. M. (1987). Social factors and victim offender
differences in courtship violence. Family Relations, 36(1), 87-91.

Molidor, C., Tolman, R. M., & Kober, J. (2000). Gender and
contextual factors in adolescent dating violence. Prevention
Research, 7(1), 1-4.

O’Keefe, M. (1997). Predictors of dating violence among high
school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 546-568.

O’Keefe, M., & Treister, L. (1998). Victims of dating violence
among high school students: Are the predictors different for males
and females. Violence Against Women, 4(2), 195-223.

O’Keefe, M. (2005). Teen Dating Violence: A Review of Risk
Factors and Prevention Efforts. National Electronic Network on
Violence Against Women.[Online]
Av a i l a b l e : w w w. v a w n e t . o rg / D o m e s t i c Vi o l e n c e / R e s e a r c h /
VAWnetDocs/AR_TeenDatingViolence

Watson, J. M., Cascardi, M., Avery-Leaf, S., & O’Leary, K. D.
(2001). High school students’ responses to dating aggression.
Violence and Victims, 16(3), 339-348.

Hickman, L., & Jaycox, L., Dating Violence Among Adolescents
Prevalence, Gender Distribution, and Prevention Program
Effectiveness. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5(2), 123-142.

Cummings, A., Cunningham, A., Leschied, A.W., Saunders,A.,
Van Brunschot,M. (2000). Female Adolescent Aggression: A
Review of the Literature and the Correlates of Aggression. Public
Works and Government Services Canada. [Online] Available:
w w 2 . p s e p c – s p p c c . g c . c a / p u b l i c a t i o n s / c o r r e c t i o n s /
200004_Leschied_report_e

Foshee, V. (1996). Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse
prevalence, types, and injuries. Health Education Research, 11
(3), 275-286.

Hickman, L.J., Jaycox, L.H., Aronoff, J. (2004). Dating Violence
Among Adolescents: Prevalence, Gender
Distribution, and Prevention Program Effectiveness. Trauma,
Violence, & Abuse, 5 (2). 123-142.

Jackson, S.M. (1999). Issues in the dating violence research: A
review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4 (2),
233-247.

Kreiter, S. R., Krowchuk, D. P., Woods, C. R., Sinal, S. H., Lawless,
M. R., & DuRant, R. H. (1999). Gender differences in risk
behaviors among adolescents who experience date fighting.
Pediatrics, 104 (6), 1286-1292.

Wekerle, C., & Wolfe, D. A. (1999). Dating violence in mid-
adolescence: Theory, significance, and emerging prevention
initiatives. Clinical Psychology Review, 19 (4), 4