Peer Victimization and Dating Violence Victimization: The Mediating Role of Loneliness,Depressed Mood,and Life Satisfaction

Abstract

Peer victimization and dating violence victimization have serious negative effects on adolescents’ health, and they seem to be related. However, the mediating processes in this relationship have not been sufficiently analyzed. The purpose of this study was to analyze the direct and indirect relationships between peer victimization and dating violence victimization, considering the possible mediator role of loneliness, depressed mood, and life satisfaction. These relationships are analyzed in boys and girls, and in early and middle adolescence. From an initial sample of 1,038 Spanish adolescents, those who had or had had in the past 12 months a dating relationship (647 adolescents; 49.1% boys, M = 14.38, SD = 1.43) were included in this study. Multigroup structural equation modeling was used to test a double mediation model simultaneously for boys and girls, testing the invariance of the relationships among variables across genders. The same technique was used to test the model simultaneously for early and middle adolescence, testing the invariance of the relationships among variables across age groups. Results revealed a positive direct relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization, as well as the partial mediating role of loneliness and life satisfaction in this relationship. The mediator role of depressed mood was not supported. The same mediational model was confirmed in boys and girls, and in early and middle adolescence. These results highlight the important role of loneliness and life satisfaction to explain the link between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in adolescence. These findings may be useful for developing intervention programs aimed at preventing situations of multiple victimization during adolescence.

Keywords

peer victimization dating violence victimization adolescence loneliness life satisfaction

In recent decades, numerous studies have been carried out on peer victimization in adolescence (Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Wu, Zhang, Su, & Hu, 2015). Peer victimization involves receiving any acts of aggression from similar-age peers (Wu et al., 2015). This victimization can occur directly through verbal or physical aggressions, or indirectly using more subtle forms of attack through actions that include social exclusion, spreading rumors, and threats to withdraw friendship (Mehari & Farrell, 2015). These situations negatively affect the health of the victims, who show a higher frequency of depressive symptoms, anxiety, loneliness, low self-esteem, somatic complaints, and low life satisfaction (Guhn, Schonert-Reichl, Gadermann, Hymel, & Hertzman, 2013; Kerr, Valois, Huebner, & Drane, 2011; Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Reijntjes, Kamphuis, Prinzie, & Telch, 2010; Wu et al., 2015).

Although many aspects of peer victimization have been explored, further research is necessary to analyze victims who also experience aggression in other contexts, such as the family or with a partner (Ostrov & Kamper, 2015). Research on victimization in different contexts is essential to better understand victimization processes and prevent situations of multiple victimization that can have serious consequences for the victim (Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2007; Turner, Shattuck, Finkelhor, & Hamby, 2017). The victimization experienced in one context can be extended to future victimization in other contexts and increase the negative consequences for the victim. The connection between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in adolescents has been pointed out in previous studies (Brooks-Russell, Foshee, & Ennett, 2013; Cuevas, Sabina, & Bell, 2014; Debnam, Waasdorp, & Bradshaw, 2016; Sabina, Cuevas, & Cotignola-Pickens, 2016).

Teen dating violence is defined as physical, sexual, psychological, or emotional violence within dating relationships, including stalking (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016). Dating violence in adolescence is characterized by its high prevalence, especially psychological/emotional violence (Exner-Cortens, Eckenrode, & Rohtman, 2013; Fernández-Fuertes & Fuertes, 2010; Foshee et al., 2013; Leen et al., 2013; Viejo, Monks, Sánchez, & Ortega-Ruiz, 2016). The two most common forms of teen dating violence are psychological/emotional and physical abuse (Debnam, Johnson, & Bradshaw, 2014; Leen et al., 2013; Viejo et al., 2016). Psychological/emotional violence involves trauma caused by acts or threats of acts, such as humiliating the victim, controlling what the victim can and cannot do, withholding information from the victim, or isolating the victim from friends and family. Physical violence involves the intentional use of physical force that can cause death, disability, injury, or harm (e.g., hitting, pushing, slapping). Dating violence victimization has been related to stress, anxiety, low life satisfaction, poor academic achievement, low self-esteem, substance abuse, and eating disorders in adolescent boys and girls (Exner-Cortens et al., 2013; Fernández-Fuertes & Fuertes, 2010; Leen et al., 2013; Shorey et al., 2012). Moreover, having experienced prior dating violence victimization is a strong predictor of subsequent dating violence victimization (Foshee, Benefield, Ennett, Bauman, & Suchindran, 2004; Sabina et al., 2016).

Peer victimization and dating violence victimization have serious negative effects on adolescents’ health, and they seem to be related (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2013; Sabina et al., 2016). Brooks-Russell et al. (2013) pointed out that peer victimization is an important risk factor for dating violence victimization in both boys and girls. The link between peer victimization and dating violence victimization has also been demonstrated in studies of cooccurring victimizations, which have indicated that being victimized by peers was highly associated with being a victim of physical dating violence in adolescence (Miller et al., 2013). However, although the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization has been observed, the mediating processes in this relationship have not been sufficiently analyzed. A better understanding of the variables that mediate this relationship could help prevent future situations of dating violence victimization and may be useful in developing prevention programs.

Loneliness, Depressed Mood, and Life Satisfaction as Possible Mediating Variables

Numerous studies have linked peer victimization to loneliness (Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Povedano, Cava, Monreal, Varela, & Musitu, 2015; Reijntjes et al., 2010; Vanhalst, Luyckx, & Goossens, 2014). Loneliness is defined as the negative emotional response to a discrepancy between the desired and achieved quality of one’s social network (Vanhalst et al., 2014). Adolescents who are peer victimized show high levels of loneliness and a more negative perception of their social network (Povedano et al., 2015). However, as Reijntjes et al. (2010) pointed out in their review, these feelings of loneliness may not only be a consequence of peer victimization but also a risk factor of this victimization. Lonely adolescents who have few friends and receive limited peer support are more vulnerable to being victimized by their peers (Cava, Musitu, & Murgui, 2007; Reijntjes et al., 2010). In a similar way, loneliness and other internalizing symptoms such as depressed mood may mean that peer-victimized adolescents are also perceived as easy targets for attacks in the context of their first romantic relationships.

Moreover, adolescence is a stage when the first romantic relationships begin, and the maintenance of close social relationships is fundamental (Connolly, Nguyen, Pepler, Craig, & Jiang, 2013). Adolescents victimized by their peers, with stronger feelings of loneliness, could have a greater need to become affectively linked to other peers and initiate dating relationships, even though they may include certain aggressive behaviors, thus increasing their vulnerability. These adolescents could stay in unsatisfactory dating relationships for a longer time. This link between loneliness and dating violence victimization could be mediated by adolescents’ life satisfaction.

Life satisfaction is a person’s subjective evaluation of his or her overall quality of life (Diener & Diener, 1995). Peer relationships are important to adolescents, and difficulties in social contexts have been linked to lower satisfaction with life (Kerr et al., 2011; Kong & You, 2013; Mehari & Farrell, 2015; Proctor, Linley, & Maltby, 2009). The associations of loneliness and depressed mood with low life satisfaction in adolescents have been pointed out by Proctor et al. (2009). In their review, Proctor et al. (2009) also included previous studies that consider the mediating role of life satisfaction in the relationship between stressful life events and problem behavior (McKnight, Huebner, & Suldo, 2002), and they suggested that life satisfaction should be considered as a significant intervening cognitive variable that can be useful to clarify the link between environmental experiences and adolescent behavioral responses. Because peer victimization is a stressful event for adolescents, it would be interesting to analyze the possible mediating role of life satisfaction in the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization.

Another variable consistently related to peer victimization is depressed mood (Baker & Bugay, 2011; Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Reijntjes et al., 2010; Thompson & Leadbeater, 2013). Children and adolescents victimized by peers show more depressive symptoms, although it has been suggested that this relationship could be mediated by their feelings of loneliness (Baker & Bugay, 2011). Peer victimization seems to have a direct effect on adolescents’ depressive symptoms and a mediated effect through their feelings of loneliness (Baker & Bugay, 2011; Reijntjes et al., 2010; Troop-Gordon, Rudolph, Sugimura, & Little, 2015). Nevertheless, some studies have suggested that depressive symptoms may not only be a consequence but also an antecedent of peer victimization, with these adolescents being more vulnerable (Reijntjes et al., 2010; Tran, Cole, & Weiss, 2012; Troop-Gordon et al., 2015). These depressive symptoms could also be a risk factor for dating violence victimization in the first romantic relationships.

Thus, previous research suggests possible ways to explain the associations between peer victimization and dating violence victimization through loneliness, depressed mood, and life satisfaction; however, the possible mediating role of these variables has not been analyzed to date.

The Role of Gender and Age

Previous studies have found differences between girls and boys in peer victimization, with physical and verbal victimization being more frequent in boys and relational victimization in girls (Carbone-Lopez, Esbensen, & Brick, 2010; Sinclair et al., 2012). In addition, peer-victimized adolescent females report higher levels of depressive symptoms than victimized adolescent males (Sinclair et al., 2012; Thompson & Leadbeater, 2013; Wu et al., 2015). In relation to dating violence victimization, most research shows that female and male adolescents experience similar rates of dating violence victimization and perpetration (Schnurr & Lohman, 2008; Sears, Byers, & Price, 2007). However, some authors have suggested the importance of analyzing possible gender differences in the variables that could affect dating violence victimization (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Earnest & Brady, 2016; Miller et al., 2013).

Regarding age, peer victimization is more frequent in early adolescence than in middle adolescence (Sinclair et al., 2012), and some differences in romantic relationships and dating violence victimization have been found between early and middle adolescence (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Leen et al., 2013; Taylor & Mumford, 2016). Teen romantic relationships emerge from mixed-sex peer group activities in early adolescence and develop into exclusive dyadic activities during adolescence (Connolly et al., 2013; Sabina et al., 2016). In early adolescence, the romantic experience is low, and the influence of the peer group is more relevant (Connolly et al., 2013; Leen et al., 2013). At the age of 15, in middle adolescence, there is a significant increase in the number of adolescents who have had a romantic relationship. Moreover, at the same age, an increase in dating violence victimization has been observed (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Taylor & Mumford, 2016).

The Current Study

The aim of the current study was to analyze the direct and indirect relationships between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in adolescents, considering the possible mediator role of loneliness, depressed mood, and life satisfaction. The proposed model hypothesizes a direct and positive relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization, and positive indirect relationships through feelings of loneliness, depressed mood, and life satisfaction. In addition, indirect relationships are hypothesized between loneliness and dating violence victimization through life satisfaction; and between depressed mood and dating violence victimization through life satisfaction. Figure 1 shows the hypothesized direct and indirect relationships. This model is hypothesized for boys and girls, and for early and middle adolescence.

Figure 1.

Hypothesized model of direct and indirect relationships between peer victimization and dating violence victimization.

Method

Participants

This study is included in broader research on psychosocial adjustment in adolescence. The reference population was male and female adolescents (250,773 in total) studying secondary education in the Valencian region (this region is located in eastern Spain). The selection of the participants was carried out through stratified cluster sampling, with the sampling units being secondary schools. Initially, four secondary schools with different sizes and located in different areas of this region were selected. One of these secondary schools declined to participate, and it was replaced by another secondary school of similar characteristics. Three of these secondary schools are public, and one is private. Prior to encoding the data, 2% of the cases were eliminated because of errors or omissions in their responses. The initial sample in this study was composed of 1,038 adolescents (51.6% boys) from 12- to 17 years old (M = 14.28; SD = 1.45). Most of the adolescents (77.6%) were living with both parents, 9.7% only with their mothers, 1% only with their fathers, 3.7% in shared custody situations, 5.2% with their mothers and other relatives, and 2.8% with their relatives. Most of the parents had only compulsory education (63% mothers, 64.5% fathers), and the percentage of parents with University studies was low (11.5% mothers, 10.9% fathers).

From this initial sample, only adolescents who had a dating relationship at that time or had had one in the past 12 months were considered. These adolescents were asked to fill out the scale about their partner, referring to the latest relationship they had or had had. They were asked to think about their last romantic relationship that lasted longer than a single date/a single encounter. This final sample was composed of 647 adolescents, 318 boys (49.1%) and 329 girls (50.9%), between 12 and 17 years old. The mean age of the boys (M = 14.27; SD = 1.39) and girls (M = 14.49; SD = 1.45) was similar. The highest percentages of adolescents were 13 (21.6%), 14 (21.7%), and 15 (22.9%) years old, with lower percentages being 12- (9.6%), 16- (16.6%), and 17-year-olds (7.6%). In this sample, 76.2% of the adolescents were living with both parents, 10.4% only with their mothers, 1.1% only with their fathers, 3% in shared custody situations, 6.7% with their mothers and other relatives, and 2.6% with their relatives. Most of the parents had only compulsory education (67% mothers, 64.4% fathers), and a low percentage had University studies (9.9% mothers, 9.2% fathers).

Procedure

After contacting the schools, the teachers received information about the study objectives, and their collaboration was requested. The parents of the adolescents were informed about the research proposal and its duration by letter and in a meeting, and they were also informed about the confidentiality of the data. After receiving this information, they were asked to give their consent for their children to participate. Less than 1% of parents stated that they did not want their children to participate in this study. Following the American Psychological Association (2010) ethical principles and code of conduct, the participating institutions were informed about and authorized the development of this study. Previously trained researchers were present in the adolescents’ usual classrooms while the scales were being completed, and they told the students that their participation in the study was voluntary and anonymous, that their data were confidential, and that they could drop out of the study any time. None of them refused to participate in this research. All the adolescents in the initial sample (N = 1,038) completed several scales on psychosocial adjustment in adolescence, and only those who had a partner at that time or had had one in the past 12 months (N = 647) completed the scales related to dating violence. This study was approved by The Ethics Committee of the University of Valencia (Protocol Number: H1456762885511).

Measures

Peer victimization

Peer victimization was assessed with the Peer Victimization Scale (Spanish adaptation, Cava et al., 2007). This scale evaluates with 20 items how often adolescents have experienced situations of peer victimization at school in the past year. The scale is composed of three factors: relational victimization, 10 items describing situations such as being a victim of malicious rumors or being socially isolated (e.g., “A classmate told others not to have anything to do with me”), physical victimization, four items describing situations such as being hit or pushed (e.g., “A classmate hit or slapped me”), and verbal victimization, six items describing situations such as being insulted or called a nickname (e.g., “A classmate insulted me”). The response range of the items is from 1 (never) to 4 (a lot). The internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of these factors in this sample was .90, .66, and .85, respectively. The internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of the total scale was .91.

Dating violence victimization

Dating violence victimization was assessed with the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory (CADRI; Wolfe et al., 2001) adapted to Spanish (Fernández-Fuertes, Fuertes, & Pulido, 2006). This scale evaluates different forms of violence perpetration and victimization in adolescent couples. In this study, only three subscales were used: Relational Victimization, composed of three items describing situations where the adolescent’s social relationships have been negatively affected by his or her partner, for example, being isolated from family or friends or spreading false rumors (e.g., “My partner said things to my friends about me to turn them against me”); Physical Victimization, composed of four items describing situations where the adolescent has experienced physical abuse from his or her partner, such as being pushed or hit (e.g., “My partner slapped me or pulled my hair”); and Verbal-Emotional Victimization, 10 items describing situations where the adolescent has experienced emotional/psychological abuse from his or her partner, such as being insulted, threatened, or humiliated (e.g., “My partner insulted me with put-downs”). Adolescents responded to these items with four options: never (has never happened), seldom (1-2 times), sometimes (3-5 times), and often (6 times or more). The reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) of these subscales in this sample was .65, .85, and .86, respectively. The reliability of the total scale was .91.

Loneliness

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale (Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980), adapted to Spanish (Borges, Prieto, Ricchetti, Hernández-Jorge, & Rodríguez-Naveiras, 2008), was used to evaluate adolescents’ feelings of loneliness. This scale consists of 20 items with four response options from 1 (never) to 4 (always). The Spanish adaptation of this scale (Borges et al., 2008) is composed of two factors: emotional loneliness, composed of 11 items about perceived loneliness (e.g., “How often do you feel that you lack companionship?”) and subjective social network assessment, composed of nine items related to the subjective evaluation of the social support available in the person’s social network (e.g., “How often do you feel that there are people you can turn to?”). The reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) values of these factors in this sample were .84 and .86, respectively.

Depressed mood

Depressed mood was assessed by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale (Radloff, 1977), adapted to Spanish (Herrero & Meneses, 2006). This adaptation consists of seven items (e.g., “I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing”) that evaluate different characteristics of depressive symptomatology (depressed mood, loss of appetite, sleep problems, concentration difficulties) and provide a general index of depressed mood. Adolescents respond to these items on a scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (always). Cronbach’s alpha of this scale in this study was .80.

Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction was assessed with the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), adapted to Spanish (Atienza, Pons, Balaguer, & García-Merita, 2000). This scale consists of five items that evaluate the degree of general life satisfaction of the adolescents (e.g.: “I am satisfied with my life”) using five response options from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for this scale in this study was .76.

Analysis

First, we obtained the descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) of the variables separately for boys and girls, analyzing their differences using Student’s t test for independent samples. In addition, we obtained the descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) of the variables separately for early (12-14 years old) and middle (15-17 years old) adolescence, and possible differences were analyzed using Student’s t test for independent samples. Considering previous studies about changes in romantic relationships at the age of 15 (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Connolly et al., 2013; Taylor & Mumford, 2016), we established this age as the cutoff point for early versus middle adolescence. Pearson’s correlations were calculated between all the variables.

The model of hypothesized relationships among the variables was then tested using the MPlus program (Muthén & Muthén, 2007). Multigroup structural equation modeling (SEM) was carried out to test the model simultaneously for boys and girls, testing the invariance of the relationships among variables across genders. The same technique was used to test the model simultaneously for early and middle adolescence, testing the invariance of the relationships among variables across age groups. For multigroup SEM, the rule of thumb about the minimum required sample size is 100 observations per group (Kline, 2015). In our data, all the groups (boys, girls, early adolescence, and middle adolescence) included more than 300 observations. Taking into account the sample sizes and the number of parameters to be estimated, we ran multigroup models with observed variables using the maximum-likelihood estimator. Only for loneliness, a latent variable was created that included two indicators: emotional loneliness and subjective social network assessment. To estimate the latent factor, the indicator of emotional loneliness was set to 1. The following goodness-of-fit indices were reported: chi-square test of model fit (χ²), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker–Lewis index (TLI). For the CFI and TLI, values above .90 or higher are acceptable, whereas for RMSEA values of .08 or less indicate an acceptable fit.

To analyze the possible mediator role of loneliness, depressed mood, and life satisfaction in the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization, confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for the indirect paths involved in the model, using the bias-corrected (BC) bootstrap CI method, with replication in 1,000 samples (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). This method involves calculating the product of the regression coefficients that estimate the indirect paths and their corresponding confidence interval. If this confidence interval does not include the value 0, the indirect path is empirically confirmed.

Results

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Among Variables

Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables in boys and girls. Student’s t tests indicated significantly higher means in girls on peer relational victimization (t = −2.839; p < .01) and depressed mood (t = −5.551; p < .001), and higher means in boys on peer physical victimization (t = 5.418; p < .001), dating relational victimization (t = 3.651; p < .001), and dating physical victimization (t = 3.661; p < .001). Regarding the correlations among variables, significant correlations are observed, in both boys and girls, between verbal, physical, and relational peer victimization, and between verbal, physical, and relational dating violence victimization. The correlations between peer victimization and dating violence victimization are significant for boys and girls, although they are higher in boys. In girls, there is also a lack of significance of the relationship between peer relational victimization and dating physical violence victimization. Loneliness (emotional loneliness and subjective social network assessment), depressed mood, and life satisfaction are related in the expected direction to both forms of victimization in girls and boys.

Table 1.

Bivariate Correlations (Boys Above the Diagonal), Means, and Standard Deviations of Variables.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Relational peer victimization		.74**	.81**	.38**	–.15*	.33**	–.14*	.32**	.33**	.34**
2. Physical peer victimization	.42**		.76**	.32**	–.14*	.31**	–.11*	.28**	.31**	.31**
3. Verbal peer victimization	.77**	.52**		.32**	–.10	.32**	–.13*	.22**	.19**	.29**
4. Emotional loneliness	.28**	.19**	.26**		–.49**	.39**	–.32**	.19**	.22**	.18**
5. Social network assessment	–.19**	–.12*	–.14*	–.61**		–.23**	.41**	–.13*	–.23**	–.13*
6. Depressed mood	.30**	.16**	.28**	.48**	–.32**		–.23**	.10	.13*	.22**
7. Life satisfaction	–.21**	–.23**	–.24**	–.46**	.47**	–.44**		–.12*	–.21**	–.21**
8. Relational dating violence victimization	.19**	.17**	.21**	.18**	–.20**	.13*	–.21**		.65**	.70**
9. Physical dating violence victimization	.08	.18**	.13*	.16**	–.15*	.12*	–.10	.45**		.63**
10. Verbal dating violence victimization	.14*	.19**	.21**	.18**	–.08	.23**	–.22**	.53**	.44**
M Boys	1.55**	1.36***	1.74	1.95	3.13	1.91***	3.56	1.24***	1.16***	1.40
M Girls	1.66**	1.20***	1.77	1.95	3.18	2.19***	3.48	1.13***	1.06***	1.39
SD Boys	0.50	0.43	0.52	0.50	0.52	0.57	0.78	0.46	0.42	0.50
SD Girls	0.53	0.29	0.50	0.49	0.53	0.67	0.83	0.30	0.19	0.41

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables in early and middle adolescence. Student’s t tests indicated significantly higher means in early adolescence on peer relational victimization (t = 2.510; p < .05), peer verbal victimization (t = 2.170; p < .05), peer physical victimization (t = 2.806; p < .01), and relational dating violence victimization (t = 2.477; p < .05). In middle adolescence, the mean was significantly higher on verbal dating violence victimization (t = −2.351; p < .05). Significant correlations are observed in both early and middle adolescence between physical, verbal, and relational peer victimization, and between physical, verbal, and relational dating violence victimization. The correlations between peer victimization and dating violence victimization are also significant in early and middle adolescence. Loneliness (emotional loneliness and subjective social network assessment) and life satisfaction show significant correlations in the expected direction with both forms of victimization in early adolescence. However, depressed mood is not significantly related to physical and verbal dating violence victimization in this stage of adolescence. In middle adolescence, life satisfaction and depressed mood are significantly related to relational peer victimization, verbal peer victimization, and physical dating violence victimization.

Table 2.

Bivariate Correlations (Early Adolescence Above the Diagonal), Means, and Standard Deviations of Variables.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Relational peer victimization		.55**	.81**	.38**	–.18**	.33**	–.19**	.21**	.18**	.23**
2. Physical peer victimization	.54**		.63**	.29**	–.17**	.24**	–.20**	.26**	.29**	.34**
3. Verbal peer victimization	.76**	.63**		.33**	–.14*	.32**	–.21**	.19**	.11*	.25**
4. Emotional loneliness	.25**	.20**	.24**		–.54**	.47**	–.38**	.22**	.21**	.25**
5. Social network assessment	–.15*	–.08	–.09	–.58**		–.27**	.41**	–.19**	–.23**	–.17**
6. Depressed mood	.33**	.11	.28**	.35**	–.24**		–.35**	.08	.09	.27**
7. Life satisfaction	–.18**	–.06	–.16**	–.41**	.47**	–.36**		–.19*	–.22**	–.31**
8. Relational dating violence victimization	.27**	.24**	.22**	.11*	–.10	.10	–.09		.62**	.68**
9. Physical dating violence victimization	28**	.20**	.27**	.09	–.04	.15**	–.12*	.61**		.62**
10. Verbal dating violence victimization	.25**	.29**	.21**	.15*	–.13*	.08	–.06	.58**	.50**
M Early adolescence	1.65*	1.32**	1.79*	1.94	3.16	2.03	3.53	1.22*	1.13	1.35*
M Middle adolescence	1.55*	1.23**	1.71*	1.95	3.16	2.08	3.51	1.14*	1.09	1.43*
SD Early adolescence	0.55	0.39	0.52	0.54	0.55	0.70	0.81	0.44	0.37	0.11
SD Middle adolescence	0.49	0.35	0.49	0.44	0.50	0.56	0.79	0.32	0.28	0.47

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Analysis of the Hypothesized Model

Two different multigroup SEM analyses were carried out to test the fit of the hypothesized model (see Figure 1) by gender group (boys and girls; first multigroup analysis) and by age group (early and middle adolescence; second multigroup analysis). The model showed an adequate fit to the data in the multigroup analysis by gender (χ² = 64.12, df = 18, p < .01, CFI = .93, TLI = .89 and RMSEA = 0.09 [0.07, 0.11]), but the relations between peer victimization and life satisfaction, loneliness and dating violence victimization, and depressed mood and dating violence victimization were not statistically significant. This model explained 6.9% of the variance in dating violence victimization in boys and 14.2% in girls. In the second multigroup analysis (by age group), the hypothesized model also showed an adequate fit to the data (χ² = 62.71, df = 18, p < .01, CFI = .94, TLI = .89 and RMSEA = 0.09 [0.07, 0.11]). However, relations between peer victimization and life satisfaction, life satisfaction and dating violence victimization, loneliness and dating violence victimization, and depressed mood and dating violence victimization were not statistically significant. This model explained 10.3% of the variance in dating violence victimization in early adolescence and 13.1% in middle adolescence. Figure 2 shows the nonstandardized coefficients and their associated statistical significance levels in these two multigroup analyses.

Figure 2.

Multigroup SEM analysis by gender (girls and boys; coefficients inside the box) and by age group (early and middle adolescence; coefficients outside the box) for the hypothesized model.

Considering the results of the previous model, we analyzed an alternative mediational model (see Figure 3), removing the direct relations between peer victimization and life satisfaction, loneliness and dating violence victimization, and depressed mood and dating violence victimization. These relationships were removed because they were not statistically significant in the initial proposed model. Again, two separate multigroup SEM analyses were carried out to test the fit of the alternative model by gender (boys and girls; first multigroup analysis) and by age group (early and middle adolescence; second multigroup analysis). This model showed a satisfactory fit to the data in the multigroup analysis by gender (χ² = 69.72, df = 21, p < .01, CFI = .93, TLI = .90, and RMSEA = 0.08 [0.06, 0.11]), and all the hypothesized relationships between variables were statistically significant. This model explained 6.6% of the variance in dating violence victimization in boys and 12.6% in girls. In the second multigroup analysis by age group (early and middle adolescence), the model also showed a satisfactory fit to the data (χ² = 62.40, df = 21, p < .01, CFI = .93, TLI = .91, and RMSEA = 0.08 [0.06, 0.11]), and all the hypothesized relationships between variables were statistically significant. This model explains 9.8% of the variance in dating violence victimization in early adolescence and 12.2% in middle adolescence. Figure 3 shows the nonstandardized coefficients and their associated statistical significance levels in these two multigroup analyses.

Figure 3.

Multigroup SEM analysis by gender (girls and boys; coefficients inside the box) and by age group (early and middle adolescence; coefficients outside the box) for the alternative model.

The results of these nonstandardized coefficients (see Figure 3) indicate a significant positive direct relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in girls and boys (β = .17, p < .001), and in early and middle adolescence (β = .21, p < .001), as well as some indirect relationships between these variables. The results of the multigroup analysis for boys and girls indicate that peer victimization is directly and positively related to loneliness (β = .30, p < .001) and depressed mood (β = .24, p < .01), and that loneliness is significant and positively related to depressed mood (β = .68, p < .001). Both loneliness (β = −.89, p < .001) and depressed mood (β = −.16, p < .05) are negatively related to life satisfaction, a variable that is directly related to dating violence victimization (β = −.06, p < .001). Results of the multigroup SEM analysis in early and middle adolescence indicate that peer victimization is directly and positively related to loneliness (β = .30, p < .001) and depressed mood (β = .25, p < .01), and that loneliness is also positively related to depressed mood (β = .65, p < .001). Both loneliness (β = −.91, p < .001) and depressed mood (β = −.17, p < .01) are negatively related to life satisfaction. In turn, the latter variable is negatively related to dating violence victimization (β = −.06, p < .001). Finally, Table 3 shows the estimated 95% BC bootstrap CIs for the indirect paths involved in the model, considering three possible mediation paths.

Table 3.

Indirect Paths and Their Estimated BC Bootstrap CIs.

Indirect Paths	Estimate	SE	CI 95%
Indirect Paths	Estimate	SE	LL	UL
1. Peer victimization—Loneliness—Life satisfaction—Dating violence victimization
Girls/boys	.016	0.005	0.008	0.029
Early/middle adolescence	.015	0.005	0.007	0.027
2. Peer victimization—Depressed mood—Life satisfaction—Dating violence victimization
Girls/boys	.002	0.001	0.000	0.006
Early/middle adolescence	.002	0.001	0.000	0.006
3. Peer victimization—Loneliness—Depressed mood—Life satisfaction—Dating violence victimization
Girls/boys	.002	0.001	0.000	0.005
Early/middle adolescence	.002	0.001	0.000	0.004

Note. BC = bias corrected; CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.

The results of these analyses offer empirical evidence about the indirect path between peer victimization and dating violence victimization through loneliness and life satisfaction in both boys and girls, a₁b₁c = .016; CI 95% = [0.008, 0.029], and in early and middle adolescence (a₁b₁c = .015; BC-CI 95% = [0.007, 0.027]). Given that there was also a direct relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in boys and girls, and in early and middle adolescence, the mediation of these variables in this relationship is partial in all these subsamples. For the other two indirect paths explored, their mediation is not confirmed in the model by gender or by age group.

Discussion

The results of this study confirm the existence of relationships between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in adolescents. Previous research has shown the relationship between these two forms of victimization (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Cuevas et al., 2014; Debnam et al., 2016; Ellis & Wolfe, 2015; Sabina et al., 2016), and this study confirms this link in boys and girls during early and middle adolescence. The data obtained not only confirm the existence of high correlations among the different types of victimization, physical, verbal, and relational, that can occur in peer and dating relationships (Leen et al., 2013; Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Wu et al., 2015), but they also highlight the connection between the experience of being victimized in these two contexts. These data highlight the relevance of continuing to analyze the links between these two forms of victimization.

Although the results confirm more physical peer victimization in boys, and more relational peer victimization in girls (Carbone-Lopez et al., 2010; Sinclair et al., 2012), and boys report more relational and physical dating violence victimization, the same mediational model is obtained for boys and girls. These results show that peer victimization, physical or relational, is linked to dating violence victimization in both boys and girls through a greater feeling of loneliness and lower life satisfaction. Therefore, although some differences are observed between boys and girls in some specific forms of victimization, this model confirms the existing relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in boys and girls, and the mediational role of loneliness and life satisfaction in this relationship. Both physical and relational victimization have a negative impact on the loneliness and life satisfaction of adolescents, and seem to increase their vulnerability to dating violence victimization.

Regarding differences between early and middle adolescence, results show more verbal, physical, and relational peer victimization in early adolescence than in middle adolescence, as observed in previous research (Pellegrini & Long, 2002; Sinclair et al., 2012). In the case of dating violence victimization, some differences are found. Relational dating violence victimization seems to be more frequent in early adolescence. This greater control of the partner’s social relations during early adolescence may be linked to initial desires for disengagement from the peer group in dating relationships in this stage of adolescence, although these aspects must be more widely explored in future research. In addition, the results show that verbal-emotional dating violence victimization is more frequent in middle adolescence. Previous studies have indicated an increase in dating violence victimization during middle adolescence (Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Taylor & Mumford, 2016), and these results confirm this increase in verbal-emotional dating violence victimization. However, despite these differences between early and middle adolescence, the mediational model analyzed shows a similar pattern for both age groups. Thus, although peer victimization is more frequent in early adolescence, and there are some differences in the more frequent forms of dating violence victimization in early and middle adolescence, in both stages of adolescence peer victimization is significantly related to dating violence victimization through the feelings of loneliness and low life satisfaction of these adolescents.

Therefore, this study provides interesting data about mediator variables in the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization, highlighting the importance of some characteristics of peer-victimized adolescents, such as their greater feelings of loneliness or their low life satisfaction (Guhn et al., 2013; Kerr et al., 2011; Ostrov & Kamper, 2015; Povedano et al., 2015; Reijntjes et al., 2010), which could increase their vulnerability to dating violence victimization. Although the mediator role of depressed mood was not confirmed, the results on the mediating role of loneliness and life satisfaction improve our understanding of the variables that link these two forms of victimization. During adolescence, the first romantic relationships are important (Connolly et al., 2013), and adolescents with feelings of loneliness and low life satisfaction could be trying to reduce their loneliness and increase their life satisfaction by initiating romantic relationships, even though they include some aggressive behaviors. However, the role of depressed mood may be different. Adolescent depressed mood is associated with social disengagement and withdrawal (Kelly et al., 2016) and, probably, less interest in romantic relationships. This possible lack of interest in romantic relationships in adolescents with depressive mood might explain the lack of mediation of this variable.

Loneliness and low life satisfaction are interesting variables to understand the links between peer victimization and dating violence victimization. Loneliness is a variable that is closely linked to interpersonal difficulties (Povedano et al., 2015; Vanhalst et al., 2014). Adolescents who are peer victimized have stronger feelings of loneliness and seem to be more vulnerable. Their low life satisfaction could be a relevant variable in explaining the link between their feelings of loneliness and their higher level of vulnerability to dating violence victimization. Certainly, life satisfaction has been suggested as an important mediator variable between stressful life events and problem behavior in adolescents (McKnight et al., 2002; Suldo & Huebner, 2004). McKnight et al. (2002) indicated that adolescents’ perceptions of positive aspects of their lives in general may operate as a significant intervening variable, clarifying the link between environmental experiences and adolescent behavioral responses. In a similar way, Proctor et al. (2009) suggested that life satisfaction is more than just an epiphenomenon, and they highlighted its role as a mediator and moderator variable between the environment and problem behavior in adolescents.

Life satisfaction could be a relevant variable in explaining different ways to cope with social and personal difficulties. Although peer victimization increases feelings of loneliness in adolescents (Reijntjes et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2015) and reduces their life satisfaction (Guhn et al., 2013; Kerr et al., 2011; Mehari & Farrell, 2015), some peer-victimized adolescents might maintain a certain level of life satisfaction that could help them to cope with this situation and reduce their vulnerability to being victimized in another social context, such as dating relationships.

Some variables related to life satisfaction in adolescents, such as the quality of the relationships with their parents, social support from friends, a healthy lifestyle, and feelings of hope and self-efficacy (Cava, Buelga, & Musitu, 2014; Proctor et al., 2009), could help them to maintain an adequate level of life satisfaction and reduce their vulnerability to dating violence victimization. Thompson and Leadbeater (2013) showed the importance of emotional support from the father, mother, and friends in reducing internalizing symptoms in adolescents victimized by peers. This emotional support could also be essential in decreasing feelings of loneliness and maintaining life satisfaction in peer-victimized adolescents, helping them to cope adequately with this negative experience and have less risk of being victimized in other contexts. Future research should further examine the role of these variables to better understand the link between peer victimization and dating violence victimization.

Limitations and Future Perspectives

An important limitation of the present study is its cross-sectional nature, which does not allow us to establish causal relationships between variables involved in the model. Moreover, the relationships between these variables could be bidirectional. The cross-sectional nature of this study (all the variables were assessed during a single survey administration, and adolescents reported on the same time period) means that caution should be exercised in drawing conclusions about causality among the variables. Longitudinal studies are needed to further examine the relationships among these variables in greater depth. In addition, some characteristics of the dating relationship have not been explored in this study, such as the duration or possible differences between current and past dating relationships. Other limitations of this study are the sample size, which is not very large, and possible cultural characteristics that may affect to dating violence. Regarding this question, Viejo et al. (2016) compared the prevalence and characteristics of physical teen dating violence in the United Kingdom and Spain, and found similar prevalence and forms of physical dating violence in both countries. However, research about cultural differences in teen dating violence should continue to examine possible differences or similitudes in variables linked to this violence.

Furthermore, in future studies it would be interesting to include other variables related to family and peer relations that could also mediate in the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization. Previous studies have pointed out that violence in the family context, contact with other adolescents with violent behavior, insecure attachment styles, destructive conflict-resolution strategies, or substance use increase the vulnerability to dating violence and victimization (Bonache, Gonzalez-Mendez, & Krahé, 2019; Brooks-Russell et al., 2013; Exner-Cortens et al., 2013; Foshee et al., 2004; Leen et al., 2013). Consequently, it would be suitable to find out to what degree these variables are relevant in explaining the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization.

Certainly, future research is needed to overcome the limitations of the present study. However, and in spite of these limitations, this study provides interesting data about the relationship between peer victimization and dating violence victimization in adolescents, especially about the mediator role of loneliness and life satisfaction. Given the high prevalence of violence in adolescent couples (Exner-Cortens et al., 2013; Leen et al., 2013; Shorey et al., 2012), it is important to develop interventions to prevent it. In these interventions, it would be advisable to take into account the relationships found between peer victimization and dating violence victimization. Thus, some intervention programs designed to prevent peer violence could also help prevent dating violence.

These programs should pay greater attention to reducing feelings of loneliness and promoting life satisfaction in adolescents to prevent their victimization in different contexts. Prevention programs should include not only strategies aimed at increasing adolescents’ awareness of all forms of violence (physical, verbal, and relational) and improving their interpersonal skills (De Koker, Mathews, Zuch, Bastien, & Mason-Jones, 2014) but also specific activities to reduce possible feelings of loneliness and improve adolescents’ life satisfaction. Previous prevention programs, such as Fourth R (Wolfe, Crooks, & Hughes, 2011), have included activities to develop skills for healthy relationships in adolescents, but it would also be interesting to explore with adolescents what they expect from a relationship, when they feel loneliness and why, or what aspects of their lives they consider more important. Therefore, some activities could be included in these programs to decrease adolescents’ feelings of loneliness, helping them to analyze which people are part of their social network and how they can help them. Moreover, interventions with bystanders to get them to support peer-victimized adolescents could reduce the victims’ feelings of loneliness and prevent subsequent victimization in other contexts. The availability of teachers and their involvement in the implementation of these programs may also help reduce feelings of loneliness in the victims and increase their life satisfaction. Therefore, interventions should be carried out in the school context, and the collaboration of parents, teachers, and community members would be advisable. It would also be interesting for the evaluation of these programs to analyze changes in adolescents’ loneliness and life satisfaction, especially in adolescents with greater vulnerability to victimization resulting from difficulties in their relationships with their peers. Although these prevention programs should be conducted with all students, peer-victimized adolescents could particularly benefit from them due to their increased risk of dating violence victimization.

Footnotes

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.

ORCID iDs

María-Jesús Cava

Sofía Buelga

Author Biographies

María-Jesús Cava, PhD, is an associate professor in social psychology at the University of Valencia, Spain. Her research interests include peer relationships, bullying, teen dating violence, and prevention of violence among adolescents. She has developed some intervention programs in school contexts to prevent violence among adolescents.

Sofía Buelga, PhD, is an associate professor in social psychology at the University of Valencia, Spain. Her research focus is on bullying and cyberbullying with a particular interest in prevention of cyberbullying among adolescents. She is currently developing an intervention program to prevent teenage violence through social networks.

Inés Tomás, PhD, is an associate professor in methodology of behavioral sciences at the University of Valencia, Spain. Her research interests include validation of scales and the application of structural equation modeling in the study of different topics such as dating violence, demographic diversity, safety behavior, leadership, team climate, employability, and overqualification.

References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: Author.

Atienza

F. L.

Pons

Balaguer

García-Merita

(2000). Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in adolescents. Psicothema, 12, 314-320.

Baker

O. E.

Bugay

(2011). Mediator and moderator role of loneliness in the relationship between peer victimization and depressive symptoms. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 21, 175-185.

Bonache

Gonzalez-Mendez

Krahé

(2019). Adult attachment styles, destructive conflict resolution, and the experience of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(2), 287-309.

Borges

Prieto

Ricchetti

Hernández-Jorge

Rodriguez-Naveiras

(2008). Cross validity of the UCLA Loneliness Scale factorization. Psicothema, 20, 924-927.

Brooks-Russell

Foshee

Ennett

(2013). Predictors of latent trajectory classes of dating violence victimization. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 566-580. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9876-2

Carbone-Lopez

Esbensen

Brick

B. T.

(2010). Correlates and consequences of peer victimization: Gender differences in direct and indirect forms of bullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 8, 332-350. doi:10.1177/1541204010362954

Cava

M. J.

Buelga

Musitu

(2014). Parental communication and life satisfaction in adolescence. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, E98. doi:10.1017/sjp.2014.107

Cava

M. J.

Musitu

Murgui

(2007). Individual and social risk factors related to victimization in a sample of Spanish adolescents. Psychological Reports, 101, 275-290. doi:10.2466/pr0.101.1.275-290

10.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Understanding teen dating violence. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/teen_dating_violence.html

11.

Connolly

Nguyen

H. N. T.

Pepler

Craig

Jiang

(2013). Developmental trajectories of romantic stages and associations with problem behaviours during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 1013-1024. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.08.006

12.

Cuevas

C. A.

Sabina

Bell

K. A.

(2014). Dating violence and interpersonal victimization among national simple of Latino youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55, 564-570. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.04.007

13.

Debnam

K. J.

Johnson

S. L.

Bradshaw

C. P.

(2014). Examining the association between bullying and adolescent concerns about teen dating violence. Journal of School Health, 84, 421-428. doi:10.1111/josh.12170

14.

Debnam

K. J.

Waasdorp

T. E.

Bradshaw

C. P.

(2016). Examining the contemporaneous occurrence of bullying and teen dating violence victimization. School Psychology Quarterly, 31, 76-90. doi:10.1037/spq0000124

15.

De Koker

Mathews

Zuch

Bastien

Mason-Jones

A. J

. (2014). A systematic review of interventions for preventing adolescent intimate partner violence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54, 3-13. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.08.008

16.

Diener

(1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653-663. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.653

17.

Diener

Emmons

Larsen

R. J.

Griffin

(1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

18.

Earnest

A. A.

Brady

S. S.

(2016). Dating violence victimization among high school students in Minnesota: Associations with family violence, unsafe schools, and resources for support. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 383-406. doi:10.1177/0886260514555863

19.

Ellis

W. E.

Wolfe

D. A.

(2015). Bullying predicts reported dating violence and observed qualities in adolescent dating relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 3043-3064. doi:10.1177/0886260514554428

20.

Exner-Cortens

Eckenrode

Rothman

(2013). Longitudinal associations between teen dating violence victimization and adverse health outcomes. Pediatrics, 131, 71-78. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1029

21.

Fernández-Fuertes

A. A.

Fuertes

(2010). Physical and psychological aggression in dating relationships of Spanish adolescents: Motives and consequences. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 183-191. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.01.002

22.

Fernández-Fuertes

A. A.

Fuertes

Pulido

R. F.

(2006). Assessment of violence in adolescent couples: Validation of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory (CADRI)-Spanish version. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 339-358.

23.

Finkelhor

Ormrod

R. K.

Turner

H. A.

(2007). Poly-victimization: A neglected component in child victimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 7-26. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.008

24.

Foshee

V. A.

Benefield

T. S.

Ennett

S. T.

Bauman

K. E.

Suchindran

(2004). Longitudinal predictors of serious physical and sexual dating violence victimization during adolescence. Preventive Medicine, 39, 1007-1016. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.04.014

25.

Foshee

V. A.

Benefield

T. S.

Reyes

H. L. M.

Ennett

S. T.

Faris

Chang

. . . Suchindran

C. M.

(2013). The peer context and the development of the perpetration of adolescent dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 471-486. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9915-7

26.

Guhn

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

Gadermann

A. M.

Hymel

Hertzman

(2013). A population study of victimization, relationships, and well-being in middle childhood. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 1529-1541. doi:10.1007/s10902-012-9393-8

27.

Herrero

Meneses

(2006). Short Web-based versions of the perceived stress (PSS) and Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CESD) Scales: A comparison to pencil and paper responses among Internet users. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 830-848.

28.

Kelly

A. B.

Mason

W. A.

Chmelka

M. B.

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Kim

M. J.

Patton

G. C.

. . . Catalano

R. F.

(2016). Depressed mood during early to middle adolescence: A bi-national longitudinal study of the unique impact of family conflict. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 1604-1613. doi:10.1007/s10964-016-0433-2

29.

Kerr

J. C.

Valois

R. F.

Huebner

E. S.

Drane

J. W.

(2011). Life satisfaction and peer victimization among USA public high school adolescents. Child Indicators Research, 4, 127-144. doi:10.1007/s12187-010-9078-y

30.

Kline

R. B.

(2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.

31.

Kong

You

(2013). Loneliness and self-esteem as mediators between social support and life satisfaction in late adolescence. Social Indicators Research, 110, 271-279. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9930-6

32.

Leen

Sorbring

Mawer

Holdsworth

Helsing

Bowen

(2013). Prevalence, dynamic risk factors and the efficacy of primary interventions for adolescent dating violence: An international review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 159-174. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.015

33.

McKnight

C. G.

Huebner

E. S.

Suldo

(2002). Relationships among stressful life events, temperament, problem behavior, and global life satisfaction in adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 677-687. doi:10.1002/pits.10062

34.

Mehari

K. R.

Farrell

A. D.

(2015). The relation between peer victimization and adolescents’ well-being: The moderating role of ethnicity within context. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 25, 118-134. doi:10.1111/jora.12095

35.

Miller

Williams

Cutbush

Gibbs

Clinton-Sherrod

Jones

(2013). Dating violence, bullying, and sexual harassment: Longitudinal profiles and transitions over time. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 607-618. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9914-8

36.

Muthén

B. O.

Muthén

L. K.

(2007). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

37.

Ostrov

J. M.

Kamper

K. E.

(2015). Future directions for research on the development of relational and physical peer victimization. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44, 509-519. doi:10.1080/15374416.2015.1012723

38.

Pellegrini

A. D.

Long

J. D.

(2002). Longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259-280. doi:10.1348/026151002166442

39.

Povedano

Cava

M. J.

Monreal

M. C.

Varela

Musitu

(2015). Victimization, loneliness, overt and relational violence at the school from a gender perspective. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 15, 44-51. doi:10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.09.001

40.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

41.

Proctor

C. L.

Linley

P. A.

Maltby

(2009). Youth life satisfaction: A review of the literature. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 583-630. doi:10.1007/s10902-008-9110-9

42.

Radloff

L. S.

(1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401. doi:10.1177/014662167700100306

43.

Reijntjes

Kamphuis

J. H.

Prinzie

Telch

M. J.

(2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 244-252. doi:10.1016/j.chiabus.2009.07.009

44.

Russell

Peplau

L. A.

Cutrona

C. E.

(1980). The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 472-480.

45.

Sabina

Cuevas

C. A.

Cotignola-Pickens

H. M.

(2016). Longitudinal dating violence victimization among Latino teens: Rates, risk factors, and cultural influences. Journal of Adolescence, 47, 5-15. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.11.003

46.

Schnurr

Lohman

(2008). How much does school matter? An examination of adolescents dating violence perpetration. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 266-283. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9246-7

47.

Sears

H. A.

Byers

E. S.

Price

E. L.

(2007). The co-occurrence of adolescent boys’ and girls’ use of psychologically, physically, and sexually abusive behaviours in their dating relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 487-504. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.05.002

48.

Shorey

R. C.

Temple

J. R.

Febres

Brasfield

Sherman

A. E.

Stuart

G. L.

(2012). The consequences of perpetrating psychological aggression in dating relationships a descriptive investigation. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 2980-2998. doi:10.1177/0886260512441079

49.

Sinclair

K. R.

Cole

D. A.

Dukewich

Felton

Weitlauf

A. S.

Maxwell

M. M.

. . . Jacky

(2012). Impact of physical and relational peer victimization on depressive cognitions in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 41, 570-583. doi:10.1080/15374416.2012.704841

50.

Suldo

S. M.

Huebner

E. S.

(2004). Does life satisfaction moderate the effects of stressful events on psychopathological behaviour during adolescence? School Psychology Quarterly, 19, 93-105.

51.

Taylor

B. G.

Mumford

E. A.

(2016). A national descriptive portrait of adolescent relationship abuse: Results from the National Survey on Teen Relationships and Intimate Violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 963-988. doi:10.1177/0886260514564070

52.

Thompson

R. S. Y.

Leadbeater

B. J.

(2013). Peer victimization and internalizing symptoms from adolescence into young adulthood: Building strength through emotional support. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 290-303. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2012.00827.x

53.

Tran

C. V.

Cole

D. A.

Weiss

(2012). Testing reciprocal longitudinal relations between peer victimization and depressive symptoms in young adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 41, 353-360. doi:10.1080/15374416.2012.662674

54.

Troop-Gordon

Rudolph

K. D.

Sugimura

Little

T. D.

(2015). Peer victimization in middle childhood impedes adaptive responses to stress: A pathway to depressive symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44, 432-445. doi:10.1080/15374416.2014.891225

55.

Turner

H. A.

Shattuck

Finkelhor

Hamby

(2017). Effects of poly-victimization on adolescent social support, self-concept, and psychological distress. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32, 755-780. doi:10.1177/0886260515586376

56.

Vanhalst

Luyckx

Goossens

(2014). Experiencing loneliness in adolescence: A matter of individual characteristics, negative peer experiences, or both? Social Development, 23, 100-118. doi:10.1111/sode.12019

57.

Viejo

Monks

C. P.

Sánchez

Ortega-Ruiz

(2016). Physical dating violence in Spain and the United Kingdom and the importance of relationship quality. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 1453-1475. doi:10.1177/0886260514567963

58.

Wolfe

D. A.

Crooks

C. V.

Hughes

(2011). The Fourth R: A school-based adolescent dating violence prevention program. Psychosocial Intervention, 20, 193-200. doi:10.5093/in2011v20n2a7

59.

Wolfe

D. A.

Scott

Reitzel-Jaffe

Wekerle

Grasley

Pittman

A. L.

(2001). Development and validation of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 13, 277-293.

60.

Zhang

(2015). Peer victimization among children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review of links to emotional maladjustment. Clinical Pediatrics, 54, 941-955. doi:10.1177/0009922814567873