Phyllis Holditch Niolon, M.A. Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Ph.D. Georgia State University

1. Longitudinal Family Predictors of Adolescents’ Experiences of Physical and Psychological Aggression in Their Dating Relationships Phyllis Holditch Niolon, M.A. Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Ph.D. Georgia State University David C. Tate, Ph.D. Yale University School of Medicine Presented at the 2005 Biennial Conference of the Society for Research on Child Development, Atlanta, GA, April 7-10

2. Acknowledgements • Dissertation committee • Joseph P. Allen, Ph.D, PI of VSTF • Past graduate students, undergraduates, and staff of the Virginia Study for Teens and Families • Wrenn Thompson, project coordinator of the KLIFF project

3. Background • Prevalence of adolescent dating aggression (ADA) • Risk factors and correlates • Limitations of current research • Developmental psychopathology (Cicchetti, 1984) • Autonomy and relatedness as a potentially relevant developmental process

4. The Current Study • Examines how mothers’ and adolescents’ negotiation of autonomy and relatedness with one another longitudinally predicts adolescent involvement with dating aggression. • Examines gender, race/ethnicity, and risk as potential moderating factors

5. Participants • N=88 • 55% Caucasian, 44% African-American • 48% Female • 33% “At-risk” • Mean age at Time 1= 15.8 (0.87) • Mean age at Time 2= 18.2 (1.11) • Mean income=$31, 322 ($19,747)

6. Procedure • Recruited from local high schools • Consenting families brought in for two waves of data collection • Participants compensated for their time • Transportation and child care provided when necessary

7. Variables • Autonomy and Relatedness Variables (W1) • Mother’s Supporting and Inhibiting • Adolescent’s Supporting and Inhibiting • Aggression Variables (W2) • Physical Perpetration and Victimization • Psychological Perpetration and Victimization • Demographic Variables (W1)

8. Results • Preliminary Analyses • Few main effects of relatedness were consistent with hypotheses • Autonomy findings were contrary to hypotheses and were predominantly characterized by interactions with gender, race/ethnicity, and risk

9. Interaction of Gender with Maternal Autonomy Support in Predicting Physical Perpetration

10. Interaction of Gender with Maternal Autonomy Support in Predicting Physical Victimization

11. Interaction of Risk with Adolescent Autonomy Support in Predicting Physical Perpetration

12. Interaction of Race/Ethnicity with Adolescent Autonomy Support in Predicting Psychological Perpetration

13. Implications • Autonomy and relatedness predict ADA in distinct ways • Importance of ecological and contextual factors in the role of autonomy in dating aggression • Potential different meanings of/reasons for the use of aggression by moderators

14. Strengths • Theoretical framework--first study to examine autonomy and relatedness as predictors of ADA • Multi-method, longitudinal design • Highlights possibility of different pathways to aggression for different groups of adolescents • Examines perpetration and victimization

15. Limitations • Small sample size, limited power • Unable to examine the context of the dating relationships themselves • Did not examine fathers’ role in AR negotiation • Could not examine peer factors that may be more salient at this age

16. Future Directions • Examine potential differential pathways to ADA by gender, race/ethnicity and risk as markers of ecological context • Incorporate the context of aggression within dating relationships • Explore impact of autonomy and relatedness with peers

17. Contact Information Phyllis Holditch Niolon pholditch@gsu.edu Gabe Kuperminc gkuperminc@gsu.edu Dave Tate david.tate@yale.edu

18. Mothers’ Supporting Behaviors Negatively Predicting ADA

19. Mothers’ Inhibiting Behaviors Positively Predicting ADA

20. Adolescents’ Supporting Behaviors Negatively Predicting ADA

21. Adolescents’ Inhibiting Behaviors Positively Predicting ADA