Preventing Revictimization in Teen Dating Relationships, 2010-2013, Denver, Colorado (ICPSR 34599)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

This project addressed two major goals in a sample of adolescent girls in the child welfare system in the Denver, Colorado metro area. First, researchers compared the effectiveness of two interventions for revictimization among adolescent girls in the child welfare system using a randomized, longitudinal design. Second, researchers examined process variables targeted by the respective interventions longitudinally.

Study Design View help for Study Design

Adolescents received a flyer about the Healthy Adolescent Relationship Project (HARP) via their caseworker, foster parents, or service providers. For adolescents under age 18 interested in participating in the project, parental or child welfare administrative consent was secured (depending on the custody status of the young woman) prior to contacting the adolescents to invite them to the Time 1 assessment. Adolescents aged 18 and 19 either contacted the research team director or gave permission for their contact information to be given to the research team. Upon receiving referrals, research staff initiated phone calls to invite potential participants. During the initial phone call, adolescents were told that the project involved four interviews as well as participation in a 12-week healthy relationship class. If adolescents were interested, they were invited to attend the Time 1 (3-hour) assessment.

Participants were greeted by a graduate-level interviewer or the project manager. During the assent/consent process, adolescents were informed in both written and verbal formats about the scope of the study (including that they would be asked about exposure to interpersonal trauma). The interviewer administered an "assent/consent quiz" designed to assess understanding of the assent/consent information during the assent/consent process. Adolescents were considered assented/consented into the study if they answered the quiz questions correctly and provided written assent/consent (depending on their age). Following assent/consent procedures, participants completed the interview. At the end of the session, participants were asked to complete questions to monitor responses to study procedures.

Prevention groups were started on a rolling base, once approximately sixteen teens had completed the Time 1 assessment. Each intervention session lasted approximately one and a half hours; 12 sessions were implemented weekly. Teens received $10 after each group session to help cover transportation costs. To encourage attendance, teens were also entered into a raffle drawing once they had attended 9 sessions. For each additional session after 9 sessions they received one additional raffle entry. After the cohort completed the 12-week prevention group protocol, a drawing was conducted for one winner of a $50 gift card or an iPod shuffle.

After the 12-week curriculum was implemented, participants were invited back for three additional 2-hour assessments: immediately post-intervention group, 2- and 6-months after the intervention group. Notably, adolescents who did not attend the intervention were also invited back to the three follow-up interviews. The post-group assessment occurred as close to the last intervention meeting as possible. Pre-, post-, 2-month, and 6-month assessments were all administered one-on-one by graduate level research staff who were blind to randomization condition. At the end of each interview, teens were compensated $40 for their time and $10 to help cover transportation costs. At the end of the Time 1 interview, teens were offered a newsletter that provided referrals to community agencies dealing with health and violence issues.

Sample View help for Sample

Adolescent females between the ages of 12 and 19 who were currently or previously involved with the child welfare system were referred by their case workers, service providers, or legal guardians based on their child welfare involvement and history of maltreatment exposure. The research team worked with multiple counties as well as community agencies that serve child welfare youth in Denver and surrounding areas to recruit participants into the study. Additional inclusion criteria were: 1) no current suicidal ideation; 2) current treatment services if teens reported suicide attempts or psychiatric hospitalizations in the last three to six months; and 3) current treatment services if teens reported current self-harm behavior or psychosis. Based on these criteria, 214 referrals were received, of whom 180 completed an interview at Time 1. Of these 180, 4 did not meet the inclusion criteria (e.g., due to current psychotic symptoms) and were excluded from the intervention and Time 2-4 assessments.

At the end of the pre-treatment assessment, all adolescents were randomly assigned to two groups: one social learning/feminist (SL/F) and one risk detection/executive function (EF/RD). Group start dates were set on a rolling basis as researchers completed enough pre-assessments to populate the groups. Fifteen adolescents never confirmed to attend a group; thus, these participants were never randomized.

Time Method View help for Time Method

Universe View help for Universe

Adolescent females between the ages of 12 and 19 involved with the child welfare system in the Denver, Colorado, metro area.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection

Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables

The study contains one data file with 180 cases and 545 variables.

• Information on trauma exposure, dating violence, and revictimization was collected using the Traumatic Events Screening Inventory-Child version (TESI).
• Dating violence was assessed using the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory (CADRI), a 70-item measure that assessed the frequency with which conflict tactics are used with dating partners.
• The presence or absence of revictimization at follow-up interviews (Time 2, 3, and 4) was calculated using a combination of data from the TESI and CADRI.
• Information on acceptability of dating violence was collected from an adapted vignette task created by Cauffman, Feldman, Jensen, and Arnett to assess teens' understanding of dating violence.
• Knowledge about gender roles and sexism were collected using The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), a 22-item self-report measure that assessed two types of sexism: hostile and benevolent.
• A lexical decision making task was administered to assess relationship expectancies.
• To collect information regarding knowledge about potential responses to danger, teens read vignettes adapted from the Salt Lake City Teen Dating Violence Toolbox.
• Belief in capacity for social action was measured with The Sociopolitical Control Scale (SPCS) which measures the capacity for individuals to act in their communities.
• The Adolescent Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire (AICQ) was used to assess healthy relationship skills and attitudes across four competence domains: 1) dating relationships; 2) providing emotional support to friends; 3) management of conflicts; and 4) assertion.
• Researchers administered a modified version of the Assertion Inventory (AI) that assessed the likelihood of engaging in assertive behaviors across three domains: substance use, general, and social situations.
• The Communication Skills Test (CST) described both negative and positive communication patterns.
• Risk detection was assessed using a Wason Selection Task (WST) in which participants were asked to detect violations of social and safety rules in dating situations.
• Emotion awareness was assessed using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), a 36-item measure designed to assess multiple aspects of emotion regulation, including: non-acceptance of emotional responses; difficulties engaging in goal directed behaviors; impulse control difficulties; lack of emotional awareness; limited access to emotion regulation strategies; lack of emotional clarity.
• Several domains of executive function were assessed using behavioral measures, such as set shifting; interference control; and working memory.
• To assess for inattention symptoms participants completed 11 of the 18 items of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS), a self-report measure based on DSM-IV criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
• At each time point, researchers assessed the frequency and quantity of teens' drug and alcohol use in dating situations over the previous month.
• The Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (TSCC) assessed symptoms commonly associated with the experience of traumatic events across various domains.
• Depression symptoms were assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory 2 (BDI-II).
• The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale was administered at the second interview to control for social desirability tendencies.
• To assess adolescent alliance with clinicians, researchers administered the Therapeutic Alliance Scale for Adolescents (TASA), a 12-item self-report measure, at the end of Meetings 2, 6, 10, and 12.
• To assess group processes, researchers administered the Intervention Group Environment Scale (IGES) at Meetings 2, 6, 10, and 12. This 25-item measure comprised three subscales: 1) implementation and preparedness; 2) counterproductive activity; and 3) cohesion.

Response Rates View help for Response Rates

Based on sampling criteria, researchers received 214 referrals, of whom 180 completed an interview at Time 1 for a response rate of 84 percent.

Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales

This study used the following:

• Acceptability of dating violence (ADV)
• Adolescent Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire (AICQ)
• Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS)
• Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI)
• Assertion Inventory (AI)
• Beck Depression Inventory 2 (BDI-II)
• Communication Skills Test (CST)
• Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory (CADRI)
• Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS)
• Intervention Group Environment Scale (IGES)
• Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale
• Sentence Span Task (SST)
• Sociopolitical Control Scale (SPCS)
• Therapeutic Alliance Scale for Adolescents (TASA)
• Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (TSCC)
• Traumatic Events Screening Inventory-Child version (TESI)
• Wason Selection Task (WST)

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2016-10-28

Version History View help for Version History