Lasting Effect of Intimate Partner Violence Exposure During Preschool on Aggressive Behavior and Prosocial Skills

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) exposure can negatively affect children’s social behavior. However, it is unknown if the negative effects of IPV exposure during the preschool years are sustained through the early school years, if maladaptive behavior in one domain (e.g., aggressive behavior) is linked to subsequent maladaptive behavior in a different developmental domain (e.g., prosocial skill deficits), and if these relations differ by gender. This study addresses these gaps by using data from a sample of 1,125 children aged 3 to 4 at Time 1 and aged 5 to 7 at Time 2 from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being. A series of nested longitudinal structural equation models were tested. Aggressive behavior and prosocial skills were stable across time. Time 1 IPV was associated with increased aggressive behavior at Time 1, which in turn was related to increased Time 2 aggressive behavior. Gender differences emerged; Time 2 IPV was associated with prosocial skills deficits for girls but not boys. A cross-domain relation existed between Time 1 aggressive behavior and Time 2 prosocial skills deficits for boys but not girls. These findings support that behavioral problems demonstrated later in childhood may emerge from earlier adverse developmental experiences and that difficulties in one domain may spill over into other developmental domains. Gender-specific interventions to promote competence in children may contribute to diverting children from maladaptive developmental outcomes.

Keywords

intimate partner violence exposure aggressive behavior prosocial skills gender differences

Intimate partner violence (IPV) occurs at alarming rates in the United States. Seven million women each year experience physical, sexual, or psychological abuse by an intimate partner (Black et al., 2011), and approximately 13% of children between the age of 2 and 9 years are exposed to IPV during their lifetime (Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod, & Hamby, 2009). Such exposure has been linked to negative consequences, including social and behavioral problems (Kitzmann, Gaylord, Holt, & Kenny, 2003; Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith, & Jaffe, 2003), which may become more persistent during sensitive periods of development such as the school transition period from preschool to kindergarten (Rimm-Kaufman & Pianta, 2000). This transition period places additional stress on social development during which more demands are placed on children to get along with their peers and perform academically (Love, Logue, Trudeau, & Thayer, 1992).

Furthermore, the developmental psychopathology perspective (Sroufe & Rutter, 1984) emphasizes that early patterns of individual adaptation evolve into later patterns of adaptation while accounting for how environmental influences, such as IPV exposure, affect child outcomes. Yet, few studies known to the authors have prospectively investigated the effects of preschool-age IPV exposure on multiple outcomes during the early school years using a developmental psychopathology approach. Considering the sensitive developmental period of transition from preschool to kindergarten, it is not known if the effects of IPV exposure during preschool are sustained through the early school years and if maladaptive behavior in one domain (e.g., aggressive behavior) is linked to subsequent maladaptive behavior in a different developmental domain (e.g., prosocial skills deficits). If a child has trouble in one domain of functioning, this difficulty may spill over into other domains, compromising his or her ongoing development. Further, it is unknown whether these relations differ by gender. A more thorough, comprehensive understanding of these relations lends itself to interventions that may potentially target multiple or specific domains to diminish negative social and behavioral outcomes and bolster resilient ones. Moreover, focusing on the developmental progression of young children may provide practitioners with the most malleable time periods to intervene. To address the limited understanding in this area, the present study tested a series of nested longitudinal models to evaluate the influence of IPV exposure on young children’s aggressive behavior and prosocial skills, the likelihood of cross-lagged effects between developmental domains, and gender differences among hypothesized relations.

Effect of IPV Exposure on Children’s Aggressive Behavior

Persistent patterns of aggressive behavior during elementary and middle school years tend to be rooted in behavioral problems that can be detected as early as age 3 (Campbell, Sullivan, & Davidson, 1995; Olson & Hoza, 1993). Nevertheless, few researchers have examined the specific outcome of aggressive behavior. Therefore, studies examining externalizing behavior problems, which include measures for both aggressive behavior and delinquency, were reviewed. IPV exposure is associated with increased externalizing behavior problems for school-age children (e.g., Bauer et al., 2006; Emery, 2011; McFarlane, Groff, O’Brien, & Watson, 2003). Yet, inconsistencies appear in studies examining externalizing behavior problems among preschool-age IPV-exposed children; some found that IPV-exposed children exhibited more externalizing behavior problems than non-exposed children (e.g., Martin & Clements, 2002), whereas others found no relation (e.g., Ybarra, Wilkens, & Lieberman, 2007).

Longitudinal research has identified similar patterns in which IPV exposure during the school years was associated with externalizing behavior problems (Litrownik, Newton, Hunter, English, & Everson, 2003), but no relation was found linking IPV exposure and externalizing behavior problems during the preschool years (Ingoldsby, Shaw, Owens, & Winslow, 1999). A possible reason for the discrepancy may be a sleeper effect. Developmental psychopathology asserts that the absence or presence of certain early experiences can affect the capabilities of a child later in life; these capabilities or deficits emerge when the child’s level of mastery is tested in their environment (Sroufe & Rutter, 1984). For example, a recent longitudinal study identified a delayed effect in which children exposed to IPV before age 4 were more aggressive once they entered school (Holmes, 2013). Thus, aggressive behavior may not emerge in IPV-exposed children until they begin to socialize with peers more frequently.

Effect of IPV Exposure on Children’s Prosocial Skills

Prosocial skills, such as being cooperative and responsible, having self-assertion and self-control, and showing empathy, enable a child to interact effectively with others. Such prosocial skills in preschool have been linked to positive academic and social adjustment in elementary school (Ladd, 1990; Ladd & Coleman, 1997; Ladd & Price, 1987). Despite theoretical support and research indicating that well-developed prosocial skills in children act as a protective factor against negative developmental outcomes (Cicchetti & Valentino, 2006; Lansford et al., 2006), few studies have examined the effect of IPV exposure on young children’s prosocial skills. Howell, Graham-Bermann, Czyz, and Lilly (2010) studied IPV-exposed children aged 4 to 6 and found that frequent IPV exposure was negatively related to prosocial behavior. Similarly, McCoy, Cummings, and Davies (2009) found that destructive marital conflict when the child was in kindergarten was related to emotional reactivity and behavioral dysregulation; these outcomes were associated with prosocial skills deficits 3 years later. Because so few studies examining the effect of IPV exposure on children’s prosocial skills exist, more research is warranted.

Cross-Domain Relations Between Aggression and Prosocial Skills

Developmental psychopathology theory posits two reasons why areas of maladaptation, such as aggression, and areas of competence, such as prosocial skills, may become related to one another over time. First, it is possible that symptoms of maladaptation undermine adaptive functioning when problem behaviors interfere with the acquisition of prosocial behavior (Gresham & Elliott, 2008). For example, aggressive behavior may alienate peers, ultimately limiting peer interactions needed to develop prosocial skills. Second, failures in areas of adaptive functioning may contribute to symptoms of maladaptation. For instance, failures in salient developmental tasks could have consequences on the child’s self-perception of how others judge him or her that lead to increased aggression over time.

Researchers have identified a relation between externalizing behavior problems and social functioning. Keane and Calkins (2004) found that children who exhibited externalizing behavior problems in preschool were more likely to have poorer prosocial skills in kindergarten, but few studies have examined the possibility of IPV exposure setting off a chain of maladaptive behaviors in multiple domains of development (i.e., cross-domain associations). The only research known to the authors indicated that increased conflict between parents was related to greater externalizing behavior problems at ages 5 to 7, which in turn was linked to decreased prosocial behavior in preadolescence (Kouros, Cummings, & Davies, 2010). It is unclear whether similar effects occur with younger children.

The Role of Children’s Gender

Gender may be an important factor in considering the effect of IPV exposure on children’s aggressive behavior and prosocial skills. Some studies indicate that IPV exposure is related to greater externalizing behavior problems in boys than in girls (Moylan et al., 2010; Yates, Dodds, Sroufe, & Egeland, 2003), while others suggest that the effects of IPV may be equally damaging for both genders (Sternberg, Baradaran, Abbott, Lamb, & Guterman, 2006). Furthermore, continuity across development in children’s aggressive behavior and prosocial skills spurred by IPV exposure may differ by gender. General population research indicates that boys who engage in aggression early in development, compared with girls, continue to have behavioral problems as they age (Broidy et al., 2003). This may be attributable to gendered social scripts rewarding males and punishing females for aggressive behavior; similarly, females are rewarded for, and males are deterred from, engaging in nurturing behavior (Lorber, 1994). This idea may account for gender differences in the continuity of prosocial skills, which tend to emphasize sharing, caring, and empathetic behaviors in young children. It is unclear if gender differences exist in the effects of IPV on aggression and prosocial skills or in the effects of aggression on prosocial skills and vice versa for children of preschool age.

Present Study

To evaluate a developmental psychopathology perspective linking IPV exposure to later child aggressive behavior and prosocial skills deficits, a series of nested longitudinal models were tested. The methodology allowed for examination of associations between IPV exposure and later child aggressive behavior and prosocial skills deficits. Based on results of prior empirical literature and the developmental psychopathology framework, it was hypothesized that the frequency of IPV exposure during the preschool years would predict greater concurrent aggressive behavior and prosocial skills deficits. In addition, the methodology allowed for examination of longitudinal cross-domain associations (e.g., aggressive behavior during the preschool years to prosocial skills during the early school years) spanning ages 3 to 7. It was hypothesized that there would be cross-lagged relations from the preschool to early school years between prosocial skills and aggressive behaviors, anticipating that aggressive behavior problems would inhibit future prosocial skills and that prosocial skills deficits would be associated with increased future aggressive behavior. The models further investigated potential gender differences, but because of the lack of consistency in prior empirical research, specific hypotheses were not formulated about how gender might moderate any of the relations investigated.

Method

Data and Study Sample

A sample of 1,125 children was drawn from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW-I) data set (Barth et al., 2002), a national probability study designed to assess the outcomes of children who had been abused or neglected. NSCAW-I included 5,501 children, aged birth to 14 years old, who were investigated by Child Protective Services (CPS) for child abuse or neglect. Data were collected during five time points over 8 years. Because data collection was scheduled based on when the CPS cases were closed, the children’s ages varied at each assessment point. For the purposes of the current study, these data were restructured so that time points reflected the child’s age at the time of data collection, making time points consistent with data from the primary caregiver interviews and child assessments, which were based on the child’s age. Two time points were created: Time 1 (T1; preschool years) in which children were between 3 and 4 years old and Time 2 (T2; early school years) in which children were between 5 and 7 years old. The average time between measurements for the study sample (n = 1,125) was 2.6 years and included children who were between the ages of 3 and 7 and who had not been removed from their home.

Measures

Child aggressive behavior

Aggressive behavior was reported by the child’s mother using the Aggressive Behavior Problem Scale of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1981). The scale included 15 questions for children aged 3 years and 20 questions for children aged 4 to 7 years. Scores were summed and converted to t scores. The mean t score on the CBCL Aggressive Behavior Problem Scale was 50 (SD = 10), with scores between 65 and 69 to signify clinical concern and scores of 70 or above considered to signify clinical impairment. Internal consistency for the Aggressive Behavior Problem Scale was 0.89 for children 3 years old and 0.92 for children 4 to 7 years old.

Child prosocial skills

The Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) measured the caregiver’s perception of the child’s prosocial skills related to four domains: cooperation, assertion, responsibility, and self-control (Gresham & Elliott, 1990). The SSRS contained 39 items for children 3 to 5 years old and 38 items for children 6 to 7 years old. Items were on a 3-point scale (1 = never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = very often). Scores were summed and standardized based on percentiles for a normative sample. The standardized score had a mean of 100 (SD = 15). Children who score between 85 and 115 are considered to have average social skills, below 85 to have fewer social skills, and above 115 have more social skills. Reliability coefficients for the current study were 0.90 for children 3 to 5 years old and 0.84 for children 6 to 7 years old.

Exposure to IPV

Mothers were asked about the occurrence of physically assaultive behavior (e.g., pushed, slapped, choked, threatened with a knife or gun) that was directed at them in the past year by their current or former intimate partner using the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS; Straus, 1979). Response categories ranged from 0 (never) to 6 (>20 times), indicating the frequency of each behavior in the past year. The frequency of physical assault was calculated by summing the midpoint of each response category across items (e.g., 3 to 5 times = 4). Internal consistency was 0.81.

Data Analyses

A series of path models were estimated using Mplus 7 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012) to test study hypotheses. Full information maximum likelihood (FIML) was used, which includes respondents with missing data in the analyses for unbiased inference. Of the 1,125 children included in the sample, 30.6% had some missing data. Figure 1 depicts the multiple group analysis model-testing progression, gradually freeing parameters across Models 1 through 5, progressing from most restrictive to least restrictive. For Models 1 through 4, the freed factors were constrained to equality between the male and female groups. All paths were freely estimated across genders in the final model (i.e., Model 5).

Figure 1.

The final structural model (Model 5).

Three goodness-of-fit indices were used to test the model fit to the data: the comparative fit index (CFI), the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Values greater than .95 for the CFI, smaller than .05 for the RMSEA, and smaller than .08 for the SRMR indicate a good fit (e.g., Bollen, 1989; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Nested models were compared using χ² difference test (Δχ²; Bollen, 1989).

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. On average, children were 3.27 years old at T1 and 5.92 years old at T2. Approximately half of the mothers were White/Non-Hispanic, had graduated from high school, were living with a partner, and were receiving food stamps. More than half of the children were male and 55% of the sample had a substantiated case of child maltreatment. Nearly a quarter of the children had been exposed to at least one incident of IPV at either time point. Of the children exposed to IPV, an average of 17 incidents (SD = 31.44) were reported in the past year at T1 and 13 incidents (SD = 25.71) in the past year at T2.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the Sample (N = 1,125).

	M (SD)/%
Mother’s age	27.73 (7.97)
Mother’s race/ethnicity
White/Non-Hispanic	51.67
Black/Non-Hispanic	26.05
Hispanic	14.38
Other/multiracial	7.90
Mother’s education
Less than high school	34.20
High school graduate	47.52
High school plus	18.28
Living with a partner	43.99
Child’s gender (male)	52.44
Number of children in household	2.35 (1.22)
Food stamps	47.56
Child maltreatment case substantiated	55.43
T1 Child’s age	3.27 (0.38)
T2 Child’s age	5.92 (0.82)
T1 Aggressive behavior score	57.05 (8.64)
T2 Aggressive behavior score	57.83 (9.31)
T1 Prosocial skills score	87.91 (14.93)
T2 Prosocial skills score	91.41 (15.64)
T1 IPV frequency	4.09 (17.72)
T2 IPV frequency	2.99 (13.56)

Note. T = time; IPV = intimate partner violence.

At both time points, children, on average, scored within the normal range for both aggressive behavior and social skills. At T1, 7% of children were of clinical concern for aggressive behavior, 7% were exhibiting clinically impaired aggressive behavior, and 46% were considered to have fewer social skills. At T2, 8% of children were of clinical concern for aggressive behavior, 10% were exhibiting clinically impaired aggressive behavior, and 34% were considered to have fewer social skills.

Hypothesis Testing

The standardized path coefficients for paths freed in Models 1 through 4 are indicated in Table 2. Table 3 presents the fit statistics and model comparisons for the hierarchically nested structural equation models. Comparison between nested models using the chi-square difference test indicated that model fit significantly improved over the model progressions. Overall, model fit of the final model (Model 5) was excellent.

Table 2.

Standardized Coefficients for Hypothesized Nested Structural Equation Models Tested.

	β	SE
Model 1: Baseline
T1 aggression→ T2 aggression	.57**	.03
T1 prosocial skills → T2 prosocial skills	.49**	.03
Model 2: IPV exposure frequency age 3-4 years
T1 IPV → T1 aggression	.20**	.04
T1 IPV → T1 prosocial skills	.02	.04
Model 3: IPV exposure frequency age 5-7 years
T2 IPV → T2 aggression	.07*	.03
T2 IPV → T2 prosocial skills	−.07**	.03
Model 4: Cross-lag
T1 aggression → T2 prosocial skills	−.12**	.03
T1 prosocial skills → T2 aggression	−.04	.03

Note. T1 = Time 1, age 3-4 years; T2 = Time 2, age 5-7 years. Model 5 coefficients are presented in Figure 1.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3.

Fit Statistics and Model Comparison for Hierarchically Nested Structural Equation Models.

Model	df	χ²	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA	Model Comparison	Δχ²
1	28	113.493	.88	.17	.07	–	–
2	26	82.90	.92	.16	.06	1 vs. 2	p < .01
3	24	72.40	.93	.16	.06	2 vs. 3	p < .01
4	22	53.41	.96	.15	.05	3 vs. 4	p < .01
5	10	7.06	1.00	.02	.01	4 vs. 5	p < .01

Note. CFI = comparative fit index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation. Δχ² = χ² difference test.

Effect of IPV exposure on aggressive behavior and prosocial skills

It was hypothesized that the frequency of IPV exposure during the preschool years would predict greater concurrent aggressive behavior and prosocial skills deficits. Prior to examining the effect of IPV exposure on aggressive behavior and prosocial skills, the stability of the outcomes across the two developmental periods must be evaluated. In Model 1, paths from T1 to T2 aggressive behavior and from T1 to T2 prosocial skills were freely estimated. Continuity paths were stable for the two domains. Children with high aggressive behavior at T1 had high aggressive behavior at T2. Similarly, prosocial skills deficits at T1 predicted prosocial skills deficits at T2.

Next, Model 2 tested the hypothesis by evaluating the developmental stability of aggressive behavior and prosocial skills across the two developmental periods when IPV exposure frequency at T1 was included as an independent variable; paths from T1 IPV exposure to T1 aggressive behavior and T1 prosocial skills were freely estimated. Thus, by adding IPV exposure as an exogenous variable, the second model examined whether IPV exposure set off a maladaptive developmental process and whether these outcomes were stable over time. T1 IPV exposure was associated with increased T1 aggressive behavior, but not with T1 prosocial skills. As shown in Figure 1, the indirect effect from T1 IPV exposure through T1 aggressive behavior to T2 aggressive behavior was significant (β = .11, p < .01), indicating a maladaptive effect of IPV exposure on aggressive behavior at T1 that influenced children’s aggressive behavior at T2. The indirect effect of T1 IPV exposure on T1 prosocial skills through T2 prosocial skills was not significant.

Effect of IPV exposure on cross-domain relations of aggressive behavior and prosocial skills

It was hypothesized that there would be cross-lagged relations from the preschool to early school years between prosocial skills and aggressive behaviors, anticipating that aggressive behavior problems would inhibit future prosocial skills and that prosocial skills deficits would be associated with increased future aggressive behavior. To examine the cross-domain relations, Model 3 first tested the relation between T2 IPV exposure and T2 aggressive behavior and prosocial skills; paths were freed from T2 IPV exposure to T2 aggressive behavior and T2 prosocial skills. Results indicated a relation between T2 IPV exposure and decreased T2 prosocial skills and increased T2 aggressive behavior.

Next, Model 4 tested the likelihood of cross-domain relations between aggressive behavior and prosocial skills from T1 to T2; paths were freed from T1 aggressive behavior to T2 prosocial skills and from T1 prosocial skills to T2 aggressive behavior. T1 aggressive behavior predicted T2 prosocial skills deficits. No cross-domain relation was found between T1 prosocial skills and T2 aggressive behavior. A significant indirect cross-domain path was also significant in which T1 IPV exposure predicted T2 prosocial skills deficits through T1 aggressive behavior.

Differential effects of IPV on prosocial skills and aggression by child gender

Model 5 investigated the extent to which the patterns of associations reported in Model 4 were similar or distinct across gender (i.e., moderation). Due to the lack of consistency in prior empirical research, no specific hypotheses were formulated about how gender might moderate any of the relations investigated. Figure 1 depicts the final model in which all paths were freely estimated across genders. T2 IPV exposure was associated with prosocial skills deficits for female children but not for male children. Indirect effects differed by gender as well. The indirect path from T1 IPV exposure through T1 aggression to T2 aggression remained significant for both female (β = .09, p < .01) and male (β = .15, p < .01) children. However, the indirect path from T1 IPV exposure to T1 aggression to T2 prosocial skills remained significant for male children (β = −.03, p < .05) but not for female children.

Discussion

Exposure to IPV can have negative effects on children; however, less is known about how IPV exposure contributes to a process in which poor development in one domain relates to future deficits in similar and different developmental domains. Utilizing nested longitudinal models, this study examined IPV exposure and its relation to aggressive behavior and prosocial skills as a dynamic developmental process. Furthermore, research reported conflicting results about the effect of gender on these relations (Moylan et al., 2010; Sternberg et al., 2006; Yates et al., 2003); by examining the moderating effect of gender on the cross-lagged effect of IPV exposure on these developmental domains, this study enhances understanding about the role of gender in the development of maladaptive outcomes.

Although aggressive behavior demonstrated continuity across developmental periods, children’s preschool- and early school-age IPV exposure predicted greater concurrent aggressive behavior. These results were consistent with prior research (Kitzmann et al., 2003), suggesting that IPV exposure is related to poorer developmental outcomes. Furthermore, indirect effects showed that preschool-age IPV exposure was related to greater contemporaneous and later aggressive behaviors. Thus, IPV exposure during the preschool years indirectly affected aggressive behavior during the early school years by setting off a chain of maladaptive development. Developmental psychopathology asserts that children who have been exposed to IPV at an early age experience an interruption in their healthy developmental trajectory. Thus, as children age, their behavioral problems at home may be carried forward into other environmental domains, such as school (Hughes, White, Sharpen, & Dunn, 2000; Stormshak & Webster-Stratton, 1999). This is particularly important when considering the sensitive time period surrounding the transition from preschool to kindergarten. Because the preschool-age child is susceptible to influence from his or her environment (Pianta & Walsh, 1996), a small adjustment in social development in this period may have a disproportionate effect on the child’s later social and behavioral outcomes. Further, these difficulties in the social domain may be carried over to the child’s academic success.

Interestingly, prosocial skills demonstrated continuity across time, but preschool-age IPV exposure was not associated with decreased contemporaneous prosocial skills. Indirect effect analyses also did not support a negative adaptation in which IPV exposure at an early age would be related to prosocial skills deficits at a later age. Rather, early school-age IPV exposure was associated with greater concurrent prosocial skills deficits. When children enter formal education, their social networks begin to change from interacting primarily with adults to interacting primarily with children. It is possible that the effects of IPV exposure on prosocial skills do not emerge until children are more frequently interacting with their peers, such as in the school setting. Further, during the preschool years, teachers display more warmth and emphasize social development (Love et al., 1992). Yet, starting in kindergarten and through the early school years, teachers emphasize cognitive development and may spend less time fostering social development. This shift of emphasis from social development to academic skills has been reported to be one of the most challenging shifts during the preschool to kindergarten transition (Love et al., 1992). With the added stress of IPV exposure, children who have already struggled with the transition may be further disadvantaged due to less emphasis on prosocial skill development from their teachers during the early school years.

A cross-domain relation was found between aggressive behavior problems and prosocial skills, which was further exacerbated by early IPV exposure. Preschool-age aggressive behavior problems played an influential role in stunting prosocial skills development during the early school years. Furthermore, preschool-age IPV exposure was linked to diminished early school-age prosocial skills through its relation with increased preschool-age aggressive behavior problems. One explanation for this cross-domain relation stemming from IPV exposure is that a modeling system emphasizing violent or aggressive reactions to stressful situations may hinder a child’s chance to learn emotion regulation. Although emotion regulation was not measured in this study, it involves skills of recognizing emotions in others and in the self, and understanding complex social roles (Howell, 2011), which are pivotal for the development of prosocial behavior. As children who behave aggressively and have poorer prosocial skills enter school, their aggressive behavior may cause their peers to avoid interacting with them, thus lessening their opportunities to develop and refine prosocial skills.

As for gender differences, some relations were consistent across the genders while others differed. The indirect effect of preschool-age IPV exposure on early school-age aggressive behavior through preschool-age aggressive behavior was the same for both girls and boys. Yet, the effect of preschool-age IPV exposure on decreased early school-age prosocial skills through greater preschool-age aggressive behavior was only significant for boys. Hence, boys may be at greater risk of cross-domain effects from IPV exposure than girls. Nevertheless, girls’ prosocial skills were still affected by IPV exposure; early school-age IPV exposure was related to poorer contemporaneous prosocial skills. This relation was not significant for boys. The findings suggest that school-aged girls, rather than boys, may be at greater risk of prosocial skills deficits if exposed to IPV.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. The results are not generalizable to other populations because the sample consists solely of families reported to CPS for child abuse or neglect. All variables were reported by the mother, which may have produced biased results. The measurement of IPV exposure included only questions regarding physical assault. Although not available in the NSCAW-I data set, the CTS (Straus, 1979) includes measures of psychological abuse between partners that, in other research, has been linked to increased externalizing behavioral problems in children (Levendosky & Graham-Bermann, 1998). While the CTS provides a quantitative report of physical violence experienced by the mother, this scale is also limited by not measuring other forms of abusive behavior such as threatening, humiliating, isolating, and restricting access to people and resources. These forms of abuse likely have consequences that extend to the child’s social and behavioral development. In addition, a mother’s report of her intimate partner experiences may not reflect the amount of violence to which a child was exposed. Although child reports of IPV exposure may have yielded different results, a meta-analysis did not find differences between studies that used child versus parental reports of IPV and its effect on child functioning (Kitzmann et al., 2003).

Clinical Implications and Conclusions

These findings support the growing evidence that behavioral problems later in childhood can stem from earlier adverse environmental influences and consequent maladaptation. To avert this maladaptive process for children living in families experiencing IPV, interventions to decrease family violence and promote developmental competence in children would contribute to diverting children from a maladaptive path. Early aggressive behavior problems and prosocial skills deficits and their contribution to later difficulties indicate that these problems are not transient and that effective early interventions to reduce aggressive behavior and prosocial skills deficits are clearly warranted.

Given the sensitive time period of the preschool to kindergarten transition, the ideal time to intervene may be as the child enters the formal education system. One such intervention could be a more gradual shift from teachers fostering social development in preschool to kindergarten teachers focusing on academic success, particularly for those children who have been exposed to IPV. Further, interventions such as the Social Skills Improvement System Intervention (Gresham & Elliott, 2008) may also provide a useful model for IPV-exposed children. This intervention focuses on identifying students’ prosocial skills deficits and competing behavioral problems, then addressing these difficulties in small groups of four to six students.

Although there are similarities between genders, this study’s findings suggest that gender may be an important factor to consider when designing and implementing interventions. Boys who are exposed to IPV at an early age may require greater attention to reducing aggressive behavior, while girls may require greater attention to increasing prosocial skills if exposed later in childhood. However, through proper assessment of prosocial skills and aggressive behavior, targeted interventions could be tailored toward the child’s needs.

Findings from the present study revealed long-term effects of IPV exposure occurring during the preschool years on children’s later aggressive behavior and prosocial skills. Accordingly, there is a great need for future research to examine further long-term consequences of IPV exposure and its effects on other potential cross-domain relations. With the focus of the kindergarten classroom toward children’s academic progress, future research could examine inter-relationships between IPV exposure, academic outcomes, prosocial skills, and behavioral problems. Such research is needed to understand how to improve early outcomes of children exposed to IPV.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

This document includes data from the National Survey on Child and Adolescent Well-Being, which was developed under contract with the Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (ACYF/DHHS). The data were provided by the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Megan R. Holmes, PhD, MSW, is an assistant professor at the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences at Case Western Reserve University. Using her clinical work with families who have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) to set the foundation for her research, the overarching goal of her work is to contribute to the optimal development of children who have been exposed to IPV by identifying risk and protective factors that can be translated into interventions. Her most recent research has examined a sleeper effect of IPV exposure at an early age and the effect of IPV exposure over time on the development of social behavior trajectories (i.e., prosocial skills and aggressive behavior) in a longitudinal national probability study of children investigated for child abuse and neglect. Building on this research, she is interested in examining additional risk and protective factors for children exposed to IPV: specifically, those related to sibling relationships and maternal parenting quality.

Laura A. Voith, MSW, is a doctoral candidate in the Helen Bader School of Social Welfare at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. She received her MSW from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee as part of a joint MSW-PhD degree. She has experience in counseling adolescents who have experienced abuse and coordinating community-based sexual assault services and a network of community-based advocates. Broadly, her research interests include violence against women and in families, as well as trauma. More specifically, she is interested in understanding risk/resilience factors related to violence against women and in families and developing programs to prevent such violence. Furthermore, she is interested in community-based collaboration for the practical implementation of evidenced-based interventions.

Andrea N. Gromoske, PhD, MSW, is an epidemiologist/evaluator for the Wisconsin Division of Public Health in the Department of Health Services in the areas of maternal and child health, children and youth with special health care needs, injury and violence prevention, newborn screening, and reproductive health/pregnancy planning. She earned her doctorate in social work at the Helen Bader School of Social Welfare, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, where she also earned her MSW. She has supported adults with developmental disabilities in the community, counseled youth and families, conducted educational programming for incarcerated youth, and provided social work services in the school setting. Her research interests include the prevention of child abuse and neglect, risk and protective factors related to low-quality parenting behaviors, the developmental outcomes of children exposed to low-quality parenting behaviors, and the parenting behaviors engaged in by adolescent mothers. She is also interested in applying advanced statistical modeling to large-scale data sets. She was awarded a 2-year doctoral dissertation fellowship through the Quality Improvement Center on Early Childhood to conduct her dissertation on the harsh disciplinary behaviors used by adolescent and adult childbearers.

References

Achenbach

T. M.

Edelbrock

C. S.

(1981). Behavioral problems and competencies reported by parents of normal and disturbed children aged 4 through 16. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46(1), 1-82.

Barth

R. P.

Biemer

Runyan

Webb

M. B.

Berrick

J. D.

Dowd

. . . Wallace

(2002). Methodological lessons from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being: The first three years of the USA’s first national probability study of children and families investigated for abuse and neglect. Children and Youth Services Review, 24, 513-541. doi:10.1016/S0190-7409(02)80002-0

Bauer

N. S.

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Lozano

Rivara

F. P.

Hill

K. G.

Hawkins

J. D.

(2006). Childhood bullying involvement and exposure to IPV. Pediatrics, 118, E235-E242. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2509

Black

M. C.

Basile

K. C.

Breiding

M. J.

Smith

S. G.

Walters

M. L.

Merrick

M. T.

. . . Stevens

M. R.

(2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Bollen

K. A.

(1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley.

Broidy

L. M.

Nagin

D. S.

Tremblay

R. E.

Bates

J. E.

Brame

Dodge

K. A.

. . . Vitaro

(2003). Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency: A six-site, cross-national study. Developmental Psychology, 39, 222-245. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.222

Campbell

Sullivan

C. M.

Davidson

W. S.

(1995). Women who use domestic violence shelters. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 237-255.

Cicchetti

Valentino

(2006). An ecological transactional perspective on child maltreatment: Failure of the average expectable environment and its influence upon child development. In Cicchetti

Cohen

D. J.

(Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 129-201). New York, NY: John Wiley.

Emery

C. R.

(2011). Controlling for selection effects in the relationship between child behavior problems and exposure to intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 1541-1558. doi:10.1177/0886260510370597

10.

Finkelhor

Turner

Ormrod

Hamby

S. L.

(2009). Violence, abuse, and crime exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics, 124, 1411-1423. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-0467

11.

Gresham

F. M.

Elliott

F. M.

(1990). The Social Skills Rating System. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.

12.

Gresham

F. M.

Elliott

S. N.

(2008). Social Skills Improvement System: Rating scales. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.

13.

Holmes

M. R.

(2013). Sleeper effect of intimate partner violence exposure: Long-term consequences on young children’s aggressive behavior. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 986-995. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12071

14.

Howell

K. H.

(2011). Resilience and psychopathology in children exposed to family violence. Aggression and Violence Behavior, 16, 562-569. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2011.09.001

15.

Howell

K. H.

Graham-Bermann

S. A.

Czyz

Lilly

(2010). Assessing resilience in preschool children exposed to intimate partner violence. Violence and Victims, 25, 150-164. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.25.2.150

16.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

17.

Hughes

White

Sharpen

Dunn

(2000). Antisocial, angry, and unsympathetic: “Hard-to-manage” preschoolers’ peer problems and possible cognitive influences. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 169-179. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00558

18.

Ingoldsby

E. M.

Shaw

D. S.

Owens

E. B.

Winslow

E. B.

(1999). A longitudinal study of interparental conflict, emotional and behavioral reactivity, and preschoolers’ adjustment problems among low-income families. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 343-356. doi:10.1023/A:1021971700656

19.

Keane

S. P.

Calkins

S. D.

(2004). Predicting kindergarten peer social status from toddler and preschool problem behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 409-423. doi:10.1023/B:JACP.0000030294.11443.41

20.

Kitzmann

K. M.

Gaylord

N. K.

Holt

A. R.

Kenny

E. D.

(2003). Child witnesses to domestic violence: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 339-352. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.71.2.339

21.

Kouros

C. D.

Cummings

E. M.

Davies

P. T.

(2010). Early trajectories of interparental conflict and externalizing problems as predictors of social competence in preadolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 527-537. doi:10.1017/S0954579410000258

22.

Ladd

G. W.

(1990). Having friends, keeping friends, making friends, and being liked by peers in the classroom: Predictors of children’s early school adjustment? Child Development, 61, 1081-1100.

23.

Ladd

G. W.

Coleman

C. C.

(1997). Children’s classroom peer relationships and early school attitudes: Concurrent and longitudinal associations. Early Education and Development, 8, 51-66. doi:10.1207/s15566935eed0801_5

24.

Ladd

G. W.

Price

J. M.

(1987). Predicting children’s social and school adjustment following the transition from preschool to kindergarten. Child Development, 58, 1168-1189.

25.

Lansford

J. E.

Malone

P. S.

Stevens

K. I.

Dodge

K. A.

Bates

J. E.

Pettit

G. S.

(2006). Developmental trajectories of externalizing and internalizing behaviors: Factors underlying resilience in physically abused children. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 35-55. doi:10.10170S0954579406060032

26.

Levendosky

A. A.

Graham-Bermann

S. A.

(1998). The moderating effects of parenting stress on children’s adjustment in woman-abusing families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 383-397. doi:10.1177/088626098013003005

27.

Litrownik

A. J.

Newton

Hunter

W. M.

English

Everson

M. D.

(2003). Exposure to family violence in young at-risk children: A longitudinal look at the effects of victimization and witnessed physical and psychological aggression. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 59-73. doi:10.1023/A:1021405515323

28.

Lorber

(1994). “Night to his day”: The social construction of gender. In Lorber

(Ed.), Paradoxes of gender (pp. 13-36). Binghamton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press.

29.

Love

J. M.

Logue

M. E.

Trudeau

J. V.

Thayer

(1992). Transitions to kindergarten in American schools (Contract No. LC 88089001). Portsmouth, NH: U.S. Department of Education.

30.

Martin

S. E.

Clements

M. L.

(2002). Young children’s responding to interparental conflict: Associations with marital aggression and child adjustment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 11, 231-244. doi:10.1023/A:1015133827129

31.

McCoy

Cummings

E. M.

Davies

P. T.

(2009). Constructive and destructive marital conflict, emotional security and children’s prosocial behavior. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 270-279. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01945.x

32.

McFarlane

J. M.

Groff

J. Y.

O’Brien

J. A.

Watson

(2003). Behaviors of children who are exposed and not exposed to intimate partner violence: An analysis of 330 black, white, and Hispanic children. Pediatrics, 112(3, Pt 1), e202-e207.

33.

Moylan

C. A.

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Sousa

Tajima

E. A.

Herrenkohl

R. C.

Russo

M. J.

(2010). The effects of child abuse and exposure to domestic violence on adolescent internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 53-63. doi:10.1007/s10896-009-9269-9

34.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

35.

Olson

S. L.

Hoza

(1993). Preschool development antecedents of conduct problems in children beginning school. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 22, 60-67. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2201_6

36.

Pianta

R. C.

Walsh

D. J.

(1996). High-risk children in schools: Constructing sustaining relationships. New York, NY: Routledge.

37.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Pianta

R. C.

(2000). An ecological perspective on the transition to kindergarten: A theoretical framework to guide empirical research. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 491-511. doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(00)00051-4

38.

Sroufe

L. A.

Rutter

(1984). The domain of developmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, 17-29. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1129832

39.

Sternberg

K. J.

Baradaran

L. P.

Abbott

C. B.

Lamb

M. E.

Guterman

(2006). Type of violence, age, and gender differences in the effects of family violence on children’s behavior problems: A mega-analysis. Developmental Review, 26, 89-112. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2005.12.001

40.

Stormshak

E. A.

Webster-Stratton

(1999). The qualitative interactions of children with conduct problems and their peers: Differential correlates with self-report measures, home behavior, and school behavior problems. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 295-317. doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(99)00018-0

41.

Straus

M. A.

(1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics Scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.

42.

Wolfe

D. A.

Crooks

C. V.

Lee

McIntyre-Smith

Jaffe

P. G.

(2003). The effects of children’s exposure to domestic violence: A meta-analysis and critique. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 6, 171-187.

43.

Yates

T. M.

Dodds

M. F.

Sroufe

L. A.

Egeland

(2003). Exposure to partner violence and child behavior problems: A prospective study controlling for child physical abuse and neglect, child cognitive ability, socioeconomic status, and life stress. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 199-218. doi:10.1017.S0954579403000117

44.

Ybarra

G. J.

Wilkens

S. L.

Lieberman

A. F.

(2007). The influence of domestic violence on preschooler behavior and functioning. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 33-42. doi:10.1007/s10896-006-9054-y