Systematic review and meta-analysis of the violence in dating relationships in adolescents and young adults

Headnote

ARTICLE INFO

Received: January 27, 2022

Accepted: May 16, 2022

Keywords:

Dating violence

Teenagers

Gender

Perpetration

Victimization

Objective: The objective was to analyze the different types of violence perpetrated and experienced as a function of gender in adolescents and young adults. Method: Systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies. The search was carried out in the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, SCOPUS, PsycInfo, and Gender Studies, in addition to a reverse search of relevant references. Publications published from 1st January 2015 to 23rd January 2021 were indexed. The search for articles was carried out by two independent investigators. A risk of bias analysis was then performed by two investigators using the STROBE reporting guidelines for observational studies. Results: Twelve studies were indexed involving a total of 21,924 men and 25,180 women. There were significant differences between men and women for the types of violence perpetrated and experienced. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity between studies, a sensitivity analysis was performed. Conclusions: Violence in dating relationships is bidirectional. Men and women perpetrate and experience different types of violence on the basis of their sex.

ABSTRACT

Palabras clave:

Violencia de pareja

Adolescentes

Género

Perpetración

Victimización

RESUMEN

Objetivo: El objetivo fue analizar los diferentes tipos de violencia perpetrada y sufrida en función del sexo en adolescentes y adultos jóvenes. Método: Revisión sistemática con meta-análisis de estudios observacionales. La búsqueda se realizó en las bases de datos: Web of Science, PubMed, SCOPUS, PsycInfo y Gender Studies, además de una búsqueda inversa de referencias relevantes. Se incluyeron artículos publicados desde el 1 de enero de 2015 hasta el 23 de enero de 2021. La búsqueda fue realizada por dos investigadores independientes. A continuación, dos investigadores realizaron un análisis de riesgo de sesgo utilizando las directrices de información de STROBE para estudios observacionales. Resultados: Se incluyeron doce estudios con 21.924 hombres y 25.180 mujeres. Hubo diferencias significativas entre hombres y mujeres en cuanto a los tipos de violencia perpetrada y experimentada. Debido al alto grado de heterogeneidad entre los estudios, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad. Conclusiones: La violencia en las relaciones de pareja es bidireccional. Los hombres y las mujeres perpetran y experimentan diferentes tipos de violencia en función de su sexo.

Introduction

Dating violence (DV) has become a worldwide focus of political activity and demonstrations. This type of violence, whether among the young or adult population, exists in different parts of the world, being pervasive and independent of social class, country of origin, language, and culture (Smith et al., 2022). Recent research has highlighted the need to invest in developing further evidence on relationship violence, not only by analysing the types and levels of violence, but also by considering the complexities of this phenomenon, which is influenced by different variables, such as gender, age, nationality, culture, or individual characteristics (Joly & Connolly, 2016). Gender inequality is the greatest risk factor for violence.

Exposure to such violence is a major risk factor directly associated with serious health problems such as anxiety, drug use, depression, or suicide (Datta et al., 2020).

In recent years, the number of publications on DV has increased considerably (Paíno et al., 2020). The rise of observational research on this issue has led to an increase in the number of different tools capable of measuring violence in relationships, with each of these tools defining and identifying different types of violence. This range of different tools has had an impact on the published evidence, leading to an increase in the degree of heterogeneity among recent publications (Muñoz & Bandera, 2014; Yakubovich et al., 2019).

DV has reached alarming levels among the adolescent population and may be an important predictor of this type of violence in young adulthood and adulthood, as well as being associated with serious population health problems (Taquette, 2019). Previous research has already identified high rates of different types of violence experienced and perpetrated among the young population (Kliem et al., 2018). These figures range from 12% to 55% for the different types of violence experienced. Violence in relationships continues this trend, where a prevalence of between 8% and 48% can be found (Fernández-Fuertes et al., 2019). Other publications have found that the prevalence of this type of violence is even higher, with relationship violence victimisation rates of 94% for men and 88% for women (Pérez et al., 2020).

Some of the research focusing on DV addresses only unidirectional violence, thereby missing the broader perspective that would lead to a holistic understanding of this type of violence. It is therefore considered necessary to develop research that takes into account the dual nature of violence between young couples.

Different types of abuse are manifested in relationship violence, including physical, sexual, emotional, spiritual, and social violence (Wincentak et al., 2017). Although in the young adult and adolescent population there appears to be a particular trend in the perpetration and victimisation of DV It has been identified that the most serious acts, such as sexual or serious physical violence, are experienced to a greater extent by women, while men are identified as the main victims of forms of violence deemed to be less serious, such as verbal-emotional or psychological violence (Fernández-Fuertes et al., 2019; Paíno et al., 2020). However, there are published studies that have found the opposite, suggesting that women perpetrate more physical violence than men (Taylor & Xia, 2022). There are also publications that found no significant differences between the types of violence perpetrated by men and women (Courtain & Glowacz, 2019).Some hypotheses to explain the differences point to self-administered tests and the underestimation of violence received by women and perpetrated by men.

Publications focusing on the analysis of this type of violence have grown considerably in recent years (Martínez et al., 2016). It has also been noted that in the last five years new instruments or improved revisions of previously published instruments have been presented (Taquette, 2019; Yanez-Peñúñuri et al., 2019). It is therefore considered interesting and necessary to develop a systematic review with meta-analysis that integrates the latest evidence on this issue. The heterogeneity of the results illustrates the need to continue generating evidence that helps to clarify the types of violence that are perpetrated or experienced in young people's relationships. However, contradictory results persist, leading to gaps that limit the possibility of developing interventions which will adequately address this issue.

Having in mind the revised state of the literature a question following to be unsolved: ¿Are there gender differences in the violence perpetrated and experienced in dating relationships among adolescents and young adults? Thus, a research was planned to get the following objective: to analyse the different types of violence perpetrated and experienced in dating relationship as a function of gender in adolescents and young adults.

Method

Study design

A systematic review with meta-analysis was designed. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews (Page et al., 2021). Before carrying out the study, a protocol was drawn up and registered in PROSPERO with registration code CRD42021170806, which can be consulted at the following link: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.

Search of studies

The systematic search was carried out in the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, SCOPUS, PsycInfo, and Gender Studies. A reverse search was also undertaken by analysing the bibliographic lists of the shortlisted articles and contacting the authors of articles of interest. Articles published after 1st January 2015 were indexed. The Gender Studies database was last searched on 23rd January 2021. The descriptors used were: interpersonal relationships, intimate partner violence, dating violence, adolescent, young adult, prevalence, epidemiology, incidence, occurrence, frequency, and gender difference. Annex 1.

Two independent researchers reviewed the title and abstract of all potentially references and established a list of eligible studies initially selected on the basis of a checklist previously drawn up around the research question and objective. In the second stage, both authors cross-checked their references and discrepancies were resolved by a third researcher. Subsequently, the articles that passed the previous stage were read in full text. The researchers independently created two lists of articles matching the inclusion criteria and analysed the references of articles read in full text to identify possible references of interest. Finally, the results were pooled and the studies to be included in the risk of bias analysis were identified (see the flow diagram in Figure 1 , see search strings in annexe 1).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusions criteria: The studies had to have adolescents and young adults as the study population. DeCS descriptors were used to define an adolescent as a person aged 13-18 years old and a young adult as a person aged 19-24 years old (DeCS - Descriptores en Ciencias de la Salud, 2017).

Research would provide data on the prevalence or incidence of perpetration and victimisation for men and women in different types of violence perpetrated and experienced. Such information should have been identified through transparent and validated tools that can be consulted in the research literature.

Due to the observational nature of the research question, studies with a descriptive observational design were identified and selected.

Exclusions criteria: Studies that did not provide prevalence or incidence data for the study population were excluded. Secondary studies such as systematic or literature reviews, as well as experimental studies, were also excluded.

Coding of primary studies

The following study data were coded for meta-analysis: main study reference; title; number and characteristics of the participants (N); number of events of the total number of men and women who suffered and exercised dating violence for each of the types of violence analyzed (events and total); mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) for each type of violence perpetrated and suffered for men and women. Additionally, for the definition of the coding categories of the relevant moderators for dating violence in adolescents and young adults, men and women, a successive approach procedure was used (Vilariño et al., 2013). This consists of two researchers with scientific expertise in dating violence scanning all selected articles for moderators. The identified variables were discussed and the researchers reached a consensus on the moderators. No moderators found.

Two experienced and trained raters analysed independently the studies in these categories. After a week of the original analysis, each rater reanalysed 50% of the studies. The betweenand within-rater concordance were estimated with true kappa (Fariña et al., 2002). This corrects the Cohen's kappa controlling a systematic source of error: the correspondence between coding (true kappa). Succinctly, if the exact correspondence was not verified, the two errors are encoded as an agreement. This correction is called true kappa. The results showed a total concordance. Additionally, codings were consistent with other studies i.e., in other contexts (Wincentak et al., 2017). Thus, between- and within-raters and inter-contexts true concordance was verified, and the coding accurately reflected the content of the categories i.e., the coding was reliable. Thus, another trained rater would find the same data set.

Quality appraisal

Following the full-text reading of the identified articles, a risk of bias analysis was conducted independently by two researchers. Due to the observational nature of the studies indexed in the review, the STROBE scale was chosen to analyse the methodological quality of the research (von Elm et al., 2008). The cut-off point was set at 16 out of a possible 22 points in order to include the highest quality studies. A score of 1 was awarded if the study fully complied with the item, 0.5 points if it partially complied with the item and 0 points if it did not comply with any of the sections of the corresponding item. Finally, inter-ratter reliability was assessed using an intra-class correlation analysis of the selected studies.

Data extraction

Once the articles had been selected, the most relevant information was extracted. This process was carried out by two independent researchers who completed a matrix previously prepared by the lead author. The extraction matrix collected the following data for each study: general characteristics, design, study duration, sample characteristics, objectives, instruments used, outcome measures, main results and conclusions, funding sources, and conflicts of interest.

A summary table of all the studies included in the review was then created in which the following sections are identified: title, authors, objectives, sample, instruments used, and outcome variables (see Table 1).

Due to the different methodologies used in the included studies, summary measures were analysed separately for studies of a continuous and categorical nature. For studies using variables of a continuous nature, Means and Standard Deviations were calculated. For studies using categorical variables, the number of events out of the total for each study variable was determined.

Data analysis

Since the included studies were measured with comparable results, it was possible to produce a meta-analysis for each of the study variables. However, this analysis was performed separately for research of a continuous and categorical nature. The metaanalysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.2.

Continuous studies: In order to identify whether there were significant differences between violence experienced and perpetrated in relationships on the basis of gender, the results for men and women were compared. The results of the comparison of both groups were analysed using a random effects model and expressed as the standardised mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval.

Categorical studies: The male and female groups were compared for the different types of violence experienced and perpetrated in dating relationships. The results of the comparison of both groups were analysed using a random effects model and expressed as the Odds Ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval, which analysed the total number of events for each type of violence identified.

To determine the influence of each of the studies on the overall estimate of the effect, a sensitivity analysis was performed repeating the calculations by extracting the studies one at a time. For each comparison, the heterogeneity of the results was calculated using the chi-square test with a significance level of 0.05. Tau2 and the I2 index were also calculated. Finally, we included in the analysis a study of publication bias to determine whether this could be a threat to the validity of the results of the meta-analysis. RevMan 5.3 was used for calculations.

Results

The systematic search for articles initially located 4,627 potentially eligible studies. After reviewing the title and abstract and eliminating duplicates, only 64 studies were selected for full-text reading. After full-text reading and risk of bias analysis, 12 studies were ultimately included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (see Figure 1).

A meta-analysis was conducted for each of the outcome measures identified in the selected articles. Meta-analyses were conducted independently for studies of a continuous and categorical nature due to differing summary measures. The study population included adolescents and young adults aged 1324 years. The sample included 21,924 men and 25,180 women.

For continuous studies, a meta-analysis was conducted for the following outcome measures relating to the experienced violence dimension; physical violence, sexual violence, cyber sexual harassment, threats, and verbal-emotional violence. For the perpetrated violence dimension, it was only possible to conduct a meta-analysis for physical violence.

For categorical studies, a meta-analysis was conducted for each of the types of violence experienced and perpetrated. The outcome measures analysed were physical violence, sexual violence, and verbal-emotional violence (see Figure 3).

For the heterogeneity analysis of each of the variables, Chi2, I2 and Tau2 values were obtained (see Tables 2 and 3).

Meta-analysis for Continuous Studies

Experienced Physical Violence (EPV). Data were analysed from six studies examining this type of violence, involving 4,216 adolescent and young adult participants. No significant differences in EPV were found between men and women, SMB = 0.03[-0.16, 0.23], p = .73. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity in the studies included, x2 = 43.19, p = 88% (see figure 2) a sensitivity analysis was performed in which the results did not change significantly in terms of the direction of violence, SMD = -0.03[-0.14, 0.08], p = .59. Following the sensitivity analysis, the degree of heterogeneity decreased, x2 = 6.85, P = 42% (see Figure 4).

Experienced Sexual Violence (ESV). Data were available from four studies examining this type of violence, involving 3,679 adolescent and young adult participants. No significant differences in ESV were found between men and women, SMD = .05[-0.08, 0.18], p = .48. Heterogeneity among the studies included was high, X = 9.44, P = 68% (see Figure 2). Hence, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The sensitivity analysis identified that women had experienced significantly more sexual violence than men, SMD = 0.13[0.05, 0.20], p < .05. The sensitivity analysis reduced the degree of heterogeneity considerably, %2 = 1.74, I2 = 0% (see Figure 4).

Experienced Cyber Sexual Harassment (ECSH). Data from three studies involving 1,593 adolescent and young adult participants were analysed. No significant differences were found between men and women for ECSH, SMO = -.07[-0.23, 0.09], p = .37. The degree of heterogeneity among the included studies was acceptable, %2 = 4.44, p = 55% (see Figure 2).

Threats Experienced (TE). Data were obtained from three articles identifying the threats experienced for a sample of 3,217 adolescent and young adult participants. No significant differences were identified between men and women, SMD= -0.00[0.22, 0.21], p = .99. The degree of heterogeneity among the articles indexed in the meta-analysis was high, x2 = 14.89, P = 87%. Due to the number of articles included in this meta-analysis no further sensitivity analysis was performed (see Figure 2).

Experienced Verbal-Emotional Violence (EVEV). Data from three articles examining EVEV in a sample of 2,466 adolescent and young adult participants were identified. No significant differences were found between men and women, SMD = -0.42[1.28, 0.45], p = .35. The heterogeneity index was high, x2 = 121.81, I2 = 98%. It was not possible to perform a second sensitivity analysis due to the number of articles indexed in the meta-analysis for this variable (see Figure 2).

Perpetrated Physical Violence (PPV). Data were analysed from three articles examining PPV involving total of 1,000 adolescent and young adult participants. The main results found that physical violence was perpetrated significantly more by men, SMD = -0.13[-0.25, -0.00], p < .05. The degree of heterogeneity in the studies was acceptable, x2 = 0.35, P = 0% (see Figure 2).

Meta-analysis for categorical studies

Experienced Physical Violence (EPV). Data were analysed for 3,896 adolescent and young adult participants in four studies examining EPV. No statistically significant differences were identified between men and women; OR = 1.04[0.71, 1.51], p = .84. The degree of heterogeneity in these studies was acceptable, x2 = 6.36, P = 53% (see Figure 3).

Experienced Sexual Violence (ESV). Data were analysed from four articles examining ESV in a sample of a sample of 6,716 adolescents and young adults. No statistically significant differences were initially identified between men and women; OR = ,73[.48, 1.11], p = .15. The degree of heterogeneity in the indexed studies was high, %2 = 1773, I2 = 83% (see Figure 3). A sensitivity analysis was performed, and an acceptable degree of heterogeneity was obtained, x2 = 3.60, P = 44%. The sensitivity analysis did identify significant differences for sexual violence between men and women, finding that women were at a higher risk of experiencing sexual violence; OR = .62[0.45, 0.84], p < .05. For men, there was a 38% (1-OR = 1- 0.62 = 0.38) decrease in the risk of sexual violence compared to women (see Figure 5).

Experienced Verbal-Emotional Violence (EVEV). Data were analysed from three articles examining this type of violence in a sample of 3,386 adolescent and young adult participants. No statistically significant differences were identified between men and women; OR =1.67[0.34, 8.27], p =.53. The heterogeneity in the studies was very high, x2 = 51.92, P = 96% (see Figure 3). Due to the scarcity of articles analysing EVEV it was not possible to perform a sensitivity analysis.

Perpetrated Physical Violence (PPV). Data were identified for 5,516 adolescent and young adult participants indexed in five articles examining PPV. No statistically significant differences were found between men and women; OR = 0.86[0.33, 2.19], p = .74. The heterogeneity in the studies was high, X2 = 88.47, P = 95% (see Figure 3). A sensitivity analysis was then performed. Neither heterogeneity, x2 = 17.14, P = 82%, nor PPV results differed from baseline, OR = 0.60[0.31, 1.16], p = .13 (see Figure 5).

Perpetrated Sexual Violence (PSV). Data were analysed for 9,336 adolescent and young adult participants indexed in five articles examining PSV. No statistically significant differences were identified between men and women; OR= 1.83[0.82, 4.08], p =.14. The heterogeneity in these studies was high, x2 = 80.57, P = 95% (see Figure 3), therefore a second sensitivity analysis was performed in which the degree of heterogeneity decreased, X2 =2.63, P = 24%. The results did not differ from the above with regard to the direction of violence, OR = 1.03[0.78, 1.36], p = .81 (See figure 5).

Perpetrated Verbal-Emotional Violence (PVEV). Data were analysed for 4,758 adolescent and young adult participants indexed in three articles. Statistically significant differences were identified between men and women for PVEV; OR= 0.66[0.49, 0.88], p< .05. With men there was a 34% (1-OR=1- 0.66= 0.34) decrease in the risk of perpetrating verbal-emotional violence versus not perpetrating verbal-emotional violence compared with women. The heterogeneity index among the studies included in the metaanalysis was high, x2 = 6.47, P = 69% (see Figure 3). Due to the number of articles indexed, a further sensitivity analysis could not be performed.

Analysis of Publication Bias

To assess the bias potential for this study, a funnel plot was performed for each of the meta-analyses (see annexe 2 and 3). For both measures, the distribution was symmetrical, so there could be no publication bias that would compromise the interpretation of effect sizes found.

Discussion

The main objective of the study was to analyse the existence of differences in violence perpetrated and suffered in dating or intimate partner relationships according to gender in a sample of adolescents and young adults.

The meta-analysis is composed of 12 observational studies, involving a total of 21,924 men and 25,180 women.

For the dimension of violence suffered, only significant differences were identified between the group of men and women in the ESV Sexual violence suffered has been generally identified as one of the types of violence with the greatest differences between men and women, with a great deal of homogeneity among the evidence related to the subject, affirming that this type of violence is suffered to a greater extent and with greater severity by women (Courtain & Glowacz, 2021; Daff et al., 2018; Hebert et al., 2016; Kernsmith et al., 2018).

No significant differences were found between men and women with respect to EPV These results may be a consequence of heterogeneity among recent publications, which identify men as the main victims of this type of violence (Courtain & Glowacz, 2019). Other research has found that the most severe acts of physical violence are experienced by women (Hebert et al., 2017). This discrepancy between published articles may be the cause of the difficulty in establishing the direction of EPV if the severity of the acts in prevalence studies is not taken into account (Chen & Chan, 2021; Rubio-Garay et al., 2017).

For ECSH a meta-analysis could only be performed for continuous studies. In this case, no significant differences were identified between men and women for victimisation by this type of violence. Some authors have identified that this type of violence represents a new version of sexual violence in younger generations, with greater victimisation of women (Kernsmith et al., 2018).

No differences were identified between men and women in terms of TE. The results for this type of violence are heterogeneous. Recent research has identified that there are no significant differences between the threats experienced by men and women. However, differences were reported for the perpetration of threats in relationships, with women more likely to report having perpetrated this type of violence (Courtain & Glowacz, 2021; Medina-Maldonado et al., 2021). These results contradict those found by (Hebert et al., 2017), whose results show significant differences for TE in relationships, determining in this case that it is women who had experienced more threats.

In terms of the perpetrated violence dimension, significant differences were identified between men and women for PPV, with men having perpetrated more of this type of violence than women. PPV in relationships is one of the most controversial types of violence in the literature to date. Recent research reports that it is men who perpetrate more of this type of violence (Asscher et al., 2015; Singh et al., 2015). However, a systematic review published in 2017 concluded that women were more likely to perpetrate this type of violence (Wincentak et al., 2017). This heterogeneity appears to be due to a lack of specification in terms of the severity of aggression (Chen & Chan, 2021; GarcíaCarpintero et al., 2018; Rubio-Garay et al., 2017).

For PSV, no significant differences were found in the metaanalysis. These results should be treated with caution, as they are at odds with recent research that identifies men as being the main perpetrators of sexual violence (Courtain & Glowacz, 2021; Kernsmith et al., 2018). This discrepancy for PSV appears to be a consequence of the limitations of solely measuring violence in relationships using self-reported questionnaires which cancan easily be altered. In this case, men tend to mask their responses due to social desirability bias and the fear or rejection that would be generated by claims of having perpetrated sexual violence (Elmquist et al., 2016; Medina-Maldonado et al., 2021; Ybarra et al., 2016).

In PVEV, women were found to be at higher risk of perpetrating verbal-emotional violence. The results presented here are in line with the latest research, recognising that verbal-emotional violence is perpetrated to a greater extent by women in dating relationships (Wincentak et al., 2017).

Violence in intimate partner relationships continues to present heterogeneity in some of its results, but one thing that is manifestly clear is the bidirectionality of this violence and the similarity of the literature in that the most severe forms of violence are carried out to a greater extent by males in dating or intimate partner relationships (Cascardi & Avery-Leaf, 2015; Ybarra et al., 2016).

Violence in intimate partner or dating relationships seems to present a difference in the perpetration, victimisation and severity of the acts suffered and perpetrated depending on the age range. Differentiating which types of violence are perpetrated or suffered depending on the age range is complex, mainly due to the characteristics of each of the samples used by the different authors. However, there is a clear tendency to identify a higher prevalence of the most serious acts of violence perpetrated and suffered by the young adult population (Courtain & Glowacz, 2021; Hebert et al., 2017).

Limitations

Approaching violence in relationships through observational methodologies using only self-administered questionnaires as the main data collection tool limits the possibility of understanding this phenomenon holistically. This generates heterogeneous results mainly due to the different characteristics of each measurement instrument and the limited evidence from the questionnaires as a consequence of the response bias present, especially for the most severe forms of violence. This heterogeneity among the articles included in the review has led to increased heterogeneity indices in the meta-analysis for different types of violence. This limits the possibility of comparing certain studies. Another of the most relevant limitations of the study is its inclusion criteria, as only research published in the last five years was selected. This directly affects the number of articles included and the subsequent meta-analysis performed. However, this is also considered strength as only the most recent publications from the previous few years were indexed.

Conclusions

The research brings together the latest evidence analysing the different types of violence perpetrated and experienced in the adolescent and young adult population. The results show that, in intimate partner relationships, both men and women are involved in perpetration and victimisation depending on the type of violence analysed. In the case of the most serious violence such as sexual violence, women were identified as the main victims. In line with recent publications, women were identified as the main perpetrators of mild forms of violence such as verbal-emotional violence, while men perpetrated the most severe forms of violence such as physical violence.

The prevalence of dating violence among the adolescent and young adult population is alarmingly high. Understanding which types of violence are perpetrated or experienced most and whether there are sex or gender differences in the perpetration and victimisation of this type of violence can help in the development of better interventions and prevention programmes among young people. Based on the results, interventions should target both men and women addressing both the prevention of the phenomenon as well as working to detect active cases of violence in both educational and primary care settings.

Implications for future research

The development of a systematic review using meta-analysis, indexing observational studies that analyse violence in relationships, has succeeded in providing homogeneity for certain types of violence in an area hitherto with heterogeneous results. As future lines of research, there is interest in developing studies with a mixed theoretical-methodological approach in order to increase the understanding of the phenomenon and triangulate the trends observed in the meta-analysis. Experimental research may also be considered, looking at what types of factors may be protective and help develop more effective future interventions to reduce violence among young people.

Sidebar

Cite as: López-Barranco, P J., Jiménez-Ruiz, I., Pérez-Martínez, M. J., Ruiz-Penin, A., & Jiménez-Barbero, J. A. (2022). Systematic review and meta-analysis of the violence in dating relationships in adolescents and young adults. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 13(2), 73-84. https://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2022.02.055

Correspondence author: Ismael Jiménez Ruiz, [email protected]

References

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the metaanalysis

Asscher, J. J., Van der Put, C. E., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2015). Gender differences in the impact of abuse and neglect victimization on adolescent offending behavior. Journal of Family Violence, 30(2), 215225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-014-9668-4

Cascardi, M., & Avery-Leaf, S. (2015). Gender differences in dating aggression and victimization among low-income, urban middle school students. Partner Abuse, 6(4), 383-402. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.6.4.383

Chen, M., & Chan, K. L. (2021). Characteristics of intimate partner violence in China: Gender symmetry, mutuality, and associated factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 56(13-14), NP6867-NP6889. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518822340

*Cortés-Ayala, L., Galaz, M. F., Bringas, C. Rodríguez-Franco, L., LópezCepero, J., & Rodríguez, F. J. (2015). Relación de maltrato en el noviazgo de jóvenes mexicanos. Análisis diferencial por sexo y nivel de estudios [Intimate partner violence in the relationships of Mexican youth. Differential analysis by sex and level of schooling]. Terapia Psicológica, 55(1), 5-12. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48082015000100001

Courtain, A., & Glowacz, F. (2021). Exploration of dating violence and related attitudes among adolescents and emerging adults. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 56(5-6), NP2975-NP2998. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518770185

Courtain, A., & Glowacz, F. (2019). Measuring dating violence: Conflict or non-conflict related instructions? European Review of Applied Psychology-Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 69(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2018.11.001

*Daff, E. S., McEwan, T E., & Luebbers, S. (2018). Australian adolescents' experiences of aggression and abuse by intimate partners. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518801936

Datta, P., Cornell, D., & Konold, T. (2020). Association of teen dating aggression with risk behavior and academic adjustment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 886260520951305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520951305

DeCS - Descriptores en Ciencias de la Salud. (2017). Retrieved from https://decs.bvsalud.org/E/homepagee.htm

*Dosil, M., Jaureguizar, J., & Bermaras, E. (2019). Variables related to victimization and perpetration of dating violence in adolescents in residential care settings. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22-36. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2019.35

*Dosil, María, Jaureguizar, J., Bernaras, E., & Sbicigo, J. B. (2020). Teen dating violence, sexism, and resilience: A multivariate analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8), 2652. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082652

*Drouin, M., Ross, J., & Tobin, E. (2015). Sexting: A new, digital vehicle for intimate partner aggression? Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 197-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.001

Elmquist, J., Hamel, J., Febres, J., Zapor, H., Wolford-Clevenger, C., Brem, M., Shorey, R. C., & Stuart, G. L. (2016). Motivations for psychological aggression among dating college students. Partner Abuse, 7(2), 157168. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.7.2.157

Fariña, F, Arce, R, & Novo, M. (2002). Heurístico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchorage in judicial decision making]. Psicothema, 14(1), 39-46. Obtenido de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/684.pdf

Fernández-Fuertes, A. A., Fuertes, A., Fernández-Rouco, N., & Orgaz, B. (2019). Past aggressive behavior, costs and benefits of aggression, romantic attachment, and teen dating violence perpetration in Spain. Children and Youth Services Review, 100, 376-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.03.020

*Fernández-González, L., Calvete, E., Orue, I., & Echezarraga, A. (2018). The role of emotional intelligence in the maintenance of adolescent dating violence perpetration. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 68-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.038

García-Carpintero, M., Rodriguez-Santero, J., & Porcel-Gálvez, A. M. (2018). Design and validation of the scale for the detection of violence in courtship in young people in the Sevilla University (Spain). Gaceta Sanitaria, 52(2), 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2017.09.006

Hebert, M., Blais, M., & Lavoie, F. (2017). Prevalence of teen dating victimization among a representative sample of high school students in Quebec. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 17(3), 225-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.06.001

Hebert, M., Cenat, J. M., Blais, M., Lavoie, F., & Guerrier, M. (2016). Child sexual abuse, bullying, cyber bullying, and mental health problems among high schools students: A moderated mediated model. Depression and Anxiety, 55(7), 623-629. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22504

Joly, L., & Connolly, J. (2016). Dating violence among high-risk young women: A systematic review using quantitative and qualitative methods. Behavioral Sciences, 6(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs6010007

*Karsberg, S., Bramsen, R. H., Lasgaard, M., & Elklit, A. (2018). Prevalence and characteristics of three subtypes of dating violence among Danish seventhgrade students. Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology, 6(1), 16-27. https://doi.org/10.21307/sjcapp-2018-004

Kernsmith, P D., Victor, B. G., & Smith-Darden, J. P. (2018). Online, offline, and over the line: Coercive sexting among adolescent dating partners. Youth & Society 50(7), 891-904. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X18764040

Kliem, S., Bergmann, M.-C., & Baier, D. (2018). Prevalence of teen dating violence in romantic relationships among teenagers: Results of a representative survey in lower saxony. KindheitundEntwicklung, 27(2), 110-125. https://doi.org/10.1026/0942-5403/a000251

Martínez, J. A., Vargas, R., & Novoa, M. (2016). Relación entre la violencia en el noviazgo y observación de modelos parentales de maltrato [Relation between dating violence and parental maltreatment model observation]. Psychologia, 10(1), 101 112. https://doi.org/10.21500/19002386.2470

Medina-Maldonado, V., Pastor-Bravo, M. M., Vargas, E., Francisco, J., & Jiménez, I. (2021). Adolescent dating violence: Results of a mixed study in Quito, Ecuador. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211001471

Muñoz, J. L. B., & Bandera, J. F. M. (2014). Análisis factorial de las puntuaciones del CADRI en adolescentes universitarios españoles [Factor analysis of scores CADRI in Spanish college teenagers]. Universitas Psychologica, 15(1), 175-186. Retrieved from https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/revPsycho/article/view/ 2001/7074

*Niolon, P H., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Latzman, N. E., Valle, L. A., Kuoh, H., Burton, T., „.Tharp, A. T. (2015). Prevalence of teen dating violence and co-occurring risk factors among middle school youth in high-risk urban communities. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56(2), S5-S13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.07.019

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., „Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. TheBMJ, 572, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Paíno, S. G., Aguilera-Jiménez, N., Rodríguez-Franco, L., Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J., & Alameda-Bailén, J. R. (2020). Adolescent conflict and young adult couple relationships: Directionality of violence. International Journal of Psychological Research, 13(2), 36-48. https://doi.org/10.21500/20U2084.4364

Perez, B., Rosas, D. A. F., & Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J. (2020). Dating victimization among Chilean university students: Gender roles and Christian spirituality. International Journal of Psychological Research, 13(2), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.4844

*Quesada, S., Fernández-González, L., & Calvete, E. (2018). El sexteo (sexting) en la adolescencia: Frecuencia y asociación con la victimización de ciberacoso y violencia en el noviazgo. Behavioral Psychology, 26(2), 225-242. https://www.behavioralpsycho.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/01_Quesada_26-2-1.pdf

*Reyes, H. L. M., Foshee, V. A., Chen, M. S., & Ennett, S. T. (2019). Patterns of Adolescent Aggression and Victimization: Sex Differences and Correlates. Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma, 28(9), 1130-1150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2018.1466843

*Ross, J. M., Drouin, M., & Coupe, A. (2019). Sexting coercion as a component of intimate partner polyvictimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(11), 2269-2291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516660300

Rubio-Garay, F., Lopez-Gonzalez, M.A., Carrasco, M A.., & Amor, P. J. (2017). The prevalence of dating violence: A systematic review. Papeles del Psicólogo, 38(2), 135-147. https://doi.org/10.23923/pap.psicol2017.2831

Singh, V., Epstein-Ngo, Q., Cunningham, R. M., Stoddard, S. A., Chermack, S. T., & Walton, M. A. (2015). Physical dating violence among adolescents and young adults with alcohol misuse. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 153, 364-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.05.003

Smith, L., Jacob, L., Lopez-Sanchez, G. F., Grabovac, I., Yang, L., Pizzol, D., Sigman, A., McDermott, D., & Koyanagi, A. (2022). A multicountry study of the violence-related risk factors for early sexual debut and risky sexual behavior in adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(34), NP1275-NP1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520927502

Taquette, S. R., & Monteiro, D. L. M- (2019). Causes and consequences of adolescent dating violence: A systematic review. Journal of Injury and Violence Research, 11(2), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v11i2.1061

*Taylor, B., & Mumford, E. (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(6), 963-988. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260514564070

Taylor, S., & Xia, Y. (2022). Dating violence among rural adolescents: Perpetration and victimization by gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(9-10), NP7729-NP7750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520971613

Vilariño, M, Arce, R, & Fariña, F. (2013). Forensic-clinical interview: Reliability and validity for the evaluation of psychological injury. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5(1), 1-21. Retrieved from https://journals.copmadrid.org/ejpalc/archivos/articulo201802 19092235.pdf

von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2008). Declaración de la iniciativa STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology): Directrices para la comunicación de estudios observacionales [The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology [STROBE] statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies]. Gaceta Sanitaria, 22(2), 144-150. https://doi.org/10.1157/13119325

Wincentak, K., Connolly, J., & Card, N. (2017). Teen dating violence: A meta-analytic review of prevalence rates. Psychology of Violence, 7(2), 224-241. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040194

Yakubovich, A. R., Heron, J., Feder, G., Fraser, A., & Humphreys, D. K. (2019). Intimate partner violence victimization in early adulthood: Psychometric properties of a new measure and gender differences in the avon longitudinal study of parents and children. BMJ Open, 9(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025621

Yanez-Peñúñuri, L. Y, Hidalgo-Rasmussen, C. A., & Chávez-Flores, Y. V. (2019). Revisión sistemática de instrumentos de violencia en el noviazgo en Iberoamérica y evaluación de sus propiedades de medida. Ciencia & Saúde Coletiva, 24(6), 2249-2262. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232018246.19612017

Ybarra, M. L., Espelage, D. L., Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Korchmaros, J. D., & Boyd, D. (2016). Lifetime prevalence rates and overlap of physical, psychological, and sexual dating abuse perpetration and victimization in a national sample of youth. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(5), 1083-1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0748-9

(ProQuest: Please refer to full text PDF for images of the Appendix)