The Association Between Polyvictimization in Childhood and Intimate Partner Violence and Child Abuse in Adulthood

Abstract

The main purpose of this study was to examine the association of family polyvictimization in childhood with the victimization or perpetration of spousal abuse and the perpetration of child abuse in adulthood. While associations between maltreatment in childhood and subsequent perpetration or victimization in adulthood are well documented, their association with polyvictimization in childhood (i.e., experiencing multiple types of victimization) has received less attention. This research aims to empirically investigate 1) whether early experiences of family polyvictimization are predictive of subsequent experience or spousal abuse or perpetration of child abuse and 2) whether there are gender differences in those associations. Through conducting Chi-square analysis and logistic regression analysis with South Korea’s National Domestic Violence Survey 2019, the study found significant empirical evidence that polyvictimization is predictive of perpetration or experience of spousal abuse and perpetration of child abuse. Particularly, adults who experienced polyvictimization in childhood were more likely to perpetrate child abuse regardless of the type of abuse (p < .001). Polyvictimization in childhood was also significantly associated with perpetration and victimization of spousal abuse (p < .001). In regard to gender differences, this study found that males were more likely to be polyvictimized by family in childhood (15.11%) than females (10.23%), and polyvictimization was found to increase the likelihood of females being revictimized in adulthood. More attention should be paid to victimization by multiple types of violence within the family and its influence on intergenerational transmission of violence.

Keywords

polyvictimization physical abuse emotional abuse neglect spousal abuse

Introduction

Polyvictimization, an exposure to multiple and varied traumatic violence (Bidarra et al., 2016; Chan et al., 2019; Finkelhor et al., 2007a), has significant long-term effects on children’s developmental outcomes (Finkelhor et al., 2007b; Rapsy, et al., 2019), compared to single victimization (Devries et al., 2017). While prior studies have extensively examined the specific and individual contributions of specific types of victimization (e.g. sexual, physical, and emotional abuse; neglect; bullying; and witnessing domestic violence) on various mental and behavioral health outcomes (Chan et al., 2017; deLara, 2019; Salokangas et al., 2019; Yoon et al., 2018), recent research has increasingly documented children and youth who have experienced multiple types of victimization over the course of their life (Finkelhor et al., 2007b, 2011). Particularly, youth who experience one type of abuse from their parents or main caregiver is more likely to suffer other types of abuse in their family (O’Leary, et al., 2000; Wolfe, 2018) because family members share common risk factors of violence (Finkelhor et al., 2007a). Compared to repeated experience of the same type of abuse, polyvictimization is associated with considerably more severe developmental outcomes (Finkelhor et al., 2007b) including physical and mental health, as well as other psychopathological and psychosomatic symptoms (Chan et al., 2017; Hesketh et al., 2010). In addition, a significant overlap between child abuse and neglect in a family has been found (Gracia et al., 2020), in that approximately 25–40% of children experienced more than one form of abuse (Clément & Bounchard, 2005; Finkelhor et al., 2007b).

Added on to the abuse and neglect, spousal abuse has been increasingly recognized as a distinct form of child abuse and neglect, having an array of negative impact on children’s developmental outcomes (Kimber et al., 2018). While not a direct form of victimization, studies suggest that many children witness spousal abuse between their parents or caregivers (Borrego et al., 2008). Witnessing parent’s spousal abuse between caregivers is a trauma that may have devastating effects on all domains of a child development (Howell et al., 2016). For example, children who witnessed spousal abuse in their family showed immediate negative outcomes such as aggressive behavior to peers and dating partners (McCloskey & Lichter, 2003), post-traumatic distress disorder (PTSD), and depression (Moretti et al., 2006). Long-term adverse outcomes were also reported, including problems in relationships with intimate partners (Rosenbaum & Leisring, 2003) or in substance abuse in adulthood (Caetano et al., 2003). Children who witnessed spousal abuse are known to be at a greater risk of being abused by parents in other forms (Chan, 2011; Devries et al., 2017). Given the detrimental impact of merely witnessing spousal abuse on developmental outcomes (Wood & Sommers, 2011), it is worth regarding it as a type of child maltreatment and examining its cumulative impact on later outcomes.

Research on revictimization (Kimerling et al., 2007) has consistently indicated a link between childhood maltreatment and subsequent perpetration or victimization in adolescence or adulthood. For example, prospective studies have found that being abused or neglected in childhood increases the likelihood of perpetrating child maltreatment later as a parent (Thornberry & Henry, 2013). In particular, those who reported being a victim of physical or psychological abuse in adolescence and spousal abuse in adulthood also reported to have been victims of physical or sexual abuse in childhood (Messing et al., 2012) and witnessed parental violence as children (Franzese et al., 2017). Also, over 60% of survivors of child sexual abuse were sexually revictimized as adults (Classen et al., 2005). Likewise, prior research has documented that experiencing or witnessing parental violence as a child is one of the most consistent predictors of subsequent spousal abuse in adulthood (Aakvaag et al., 2017; Dugal et al., 2018; Godbout et al., 2009). However, these lines of research has paid less attention to polyvictimization, mostly focusing on a single type of child abuse or neglect, often child sexual abuse. The evidence for an association between polyvictimization in childhood and later perpetration is both scant and mixed.

Potential gender differences in the current associations can be considered. For instance, females are usually more likely to suffer sexual abuse (Jung et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2004), while males are more likely to suffer physical abuse (Thompson, et al., 2004). However, gender differences in the link between abuse and neglect in childhood and spousal abuse in adulthood have received less attention, leading to inconclusive results (Jung et al., 2019). While Lackey (2003) found that experiencing child abuse and neglect was a significant cause of spousal abuse in later life only for men, an indirect effect of child abuse and neglect on spousal abuse was found for female (Herrenkohl et al., 2004).

The Current Study

While the co-occurrence of child abuse, neglect, and spousal abuse in a family and its effects on child development have been well documented, the scope of previous studies has been limited in several different ways. First, previous works failed to capture the intersectional characteristics of multiple abuse victimization (Finkelhor et al., 2007a; Wolfe, 2018), including witnessing spousal abuse, and its predictive capacity into their conceptualization of polyvictimization and later experience or perpetration of child abuse. Second, the evidence for an association between polyvictimization in childhood and later perpetration is scant and mixed. Third, previous research has not fully examined polyvictimization and its effects in Asian countries. Fourth, previous studies failed to capture gender differences in the link between polyvictimization in childhood and both the experience and perpetration of spousal abuse in adulthood.

The current study builds on prior work and examines the associations between polyvictimization in childhood and subsequent perpetration of child abuse in the South Korean population. The central research questions are (a) Do early experiences of family polyvictimization have an impact on subsequent experience or perpetration of spousal abuse and child abuse? (b) Are there gender differences in the link between childhood polyvictimization, spousal abuse and child abuse in adulthood? We hypothesized that exposure to more types of family polyvictimization would increase the likelihood of perpetrating child abuse and neglect as well as perpetration and experience of spousal abuse, beyond exposure to individual type of child abuse. In this study, polyvictimization was limited to the experiences gained from families to examine the intergenerational transmission of violence within a family context. Identifying co-occurrences of various types of child abuse and neglect within a family may reveal the cumulative burden of this victimization and provide implications for further prevention and intervention in child abuse and neglect.

Methods

Data and Sampling

Data was taken from the Domestic Violence Survey in 2019, which was conducted by the South Korean Ministry of Gender Equality and Family (MOGEF). According to the Act on the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Protection, etc. of Victims in 1997, MOGEF has conducted a triennial survey of domestic violence in Korean society. The survey specifically focuses on the perpetration and experience of spousal abuse and child abuse (MOGEF, 2019). For the purpose of this study, we used the 2019 survey, which is the most recent survey about domestic violence. The survey data was collected by door-to-door interviews from August 2019 to November 2019, and respondents aged 19 or older were sampled through multi-stage probability proportion sampling and systematic sampling based on 2017 Korea National Population and House Census conducted by Statistics Korea (MOGEF, 2019). Trained interviewers visited 28,310 sampled households and among them, 9060 households were successfully responded to the interview. This survey is aware of the possibility that respondents are reluctant to reveal their experiences of victimization. For this reason, the safety protocol to protect respondents was strictly enforced by keeping survey participation and responses confidential to other family members. The success rates of this survey were 48.8% and it was significantly increased than the response rates in 2016 (44.1%) and 2013(34.2%) (MOGEF, 2019). A total number of 9060 households were sampled and one adult of each household was interviewed by a professionally trained interviewer. Considering the higher risks of spousal abuse victimization of women, the gender ratio was adjusted 2:1, which means women were twice more sampled than men (MOGEF, 2019). Among 9060 subjects in that survey, this study only used the data from 5688 married individuals because the sample of 2019 DVS included other types of households including single households. Due to the purpose of this study to explore the association between polyvictimization in childhood and violence between partners (spousal abuse), this study only utilized the information of married (or cohabitating) couples.

Variables

Polyvictimization in Childhood

The Domestic Violence Survey asked respondents about five types of negative experiences in the family when they were 18 years old or younger: emotional abuse (i.e., blaming and insulting), minor physical abuse (i.e., corporal punishment), severe abuse (i.e., punching and kicking and hitting with an object), neglect (i.e., failure to provide food and medical care and leaving a child unattended), and indirect abuse (i.e., witnessing domestic violence between parents including insulting, punching or kicking severely, and hitting with an object). The nine items asking about these experiences were adopted from the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales (PCCTS) that was suggested by Straus et al. (1998) (MOGEF, 2019). Responses to questions about experiencing each type of abuse were coded as dichotomies (Yoon et al., 2019).

Polyvictimization is defined as experiencing multiple types of victimization (Finkelhor et al., 2007a), but its operational definition varies among researchers (Ford & Delker, 2018). Some studies have conceptualized polyvictimization as cumulative frequency (Andrew et al., 2015; Mustanski et al., 2016) but most others have analyzed it as a dichotomized variable (Finkelhor et al., 2007ab; Finkelhor, et al., 2011; Pereda et al., 2014). Finkelhor et al. (2011), who are distinguished researchers in the field, defined the threshold of polyvictimization as the top 10% of individuals in a sample of victimized children. In other words, the top 10% of individuals who had experienced the highest numbers of types of victimizations were identified polyvictimized group and later studies have also adopted this standard. In the sample in this study, individuals who experienced four or five types of violence in childhood fell within this threshold and were thus categorized as the polyvictimization group.

Perpetration of Child Abuse

Perpetration of child abuse was measured using 14 items in four categories (emotional abuse, minor physical abuse, severe physical abuse, and neglect), and the items were adopted from PCCTS. (1) Emotional abuse was measured with two items asking whether respondents had threatened a child with physical violence or blamed or insulted them. (2) Minor physical abuse was measured with a single item asking whether respondents had slapped a child in the face, head or body. (3) Severe physical abuse was measured with seven items asking whether respondents had hit a child with an object, pushed or shoved them, punched or kicked them severely, beaten them violently, choked or suffocated them, deliberately burned them, or threatened or hurt them with a weapon. (4) Neglect was measured with four items asking whether respondents had failed to provide a child with food, failed to provide medical care, struggled to take care of them because of substance abuse or heavy drinking or left a child unattended (MOGEF, 2019). Perpetration was coded as dichotomous (Yoon et al., 2019), and respondents were regarded as having abused a child in each category if they reported any perpetration in that category.

Perpetration and Experience of Spousal Abuse

The Domestic Violence Survey classifies perpetration and experience of spousal abuse into five major categories: emotional violence, physical violence, sexual violence, financial violence, and control. This study used 18 items in three of these five categories (emotional, physical, and sexual violence), which were adopted and revised from the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale suggested by Straus et al. (1998), to measure the perpetration and experience of spousal abuse. In order to maintain consistency with the measures of child abuse, we divided physical violence into minor and severe physical violence. (1) Emotional violence was measured with six items asking whether the respondent had ever insulted their partner, threatened them with physical violence, destroyed their partner’s personal items, threatened to hurt their pets or loved ones, threatened to hurt or kill themselves, or interrupted their sleep. (2) Minor physical violence was measured with three items asking whether the respondent had ever thrown something at a partner that could cause pain; pushed or shoved them; grabbed their arms, shoulders, or hair; or slapped their face, head, or body. (3) Severe physical violence was measured with four items asking whether the respondent had ever choked or burned their partner, threatened or hurt them with a weapon, hit them with an object, or punched or kicked them severely. (4) Sexual violence was measured with five items asking whether the respondent had ever coerced their partner into unwanted sexual activity, coerced them into unwanted sexual activity using physical force, forced them to submit to unwanted physical touch, taken video or photographs of a partner’s body or sexual acts against their will, or engaged in non-consensual sharing or uploading of such video or photographs (MOGEF, 2019). Since the main objective of this study was to investigate whether or not people have perpetrated or experienced spousal abuse, rather than the frequency of such violence, the categories were condensed into dichotomous questions asking whether respondents had perpetrated or experienced the violence in each category.

Analytic Strategies

This study used the chi-square test to model the association between family polyvictimization and subsequent family violence in Korea. Through analyzing statistical differences between the polyvictimized group and the other groups (namely, those who experienced no victimization and those who experienced 1–3 types of victimization, which means non-polyvictimization, during childhood), we aimed to investigate the hypothesis that early experiences of family polyvictimization are a good predictor of subsequent experience or perpetration of family violence. Furthermore, logistic regression analyses about the association between polyvictimization in childhood and the risk of experiencing or perpetrating family violence in adulthood (i.e., perpetrating child abuse, perpetrating spousal abuse, or experiencing spousal abuse) were conducted to substantially support the findings of the chi-square test. Gender was included in the logistic regression models as the main predictor of experiencing or perpetrating family violence. To account for the influence of sociodemographic differences in victimization or the carryover of victimization from baseline to follow-up, covariates included age, education level (middle school, high school, and college or higher), income level, and employment status.

Results

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the sample. Among the sample of 5688 married individuals, 67.19% of respondents were female. 40.61% reported that they were currently raising children under 18 years old. 72.80% of respondents were employed, and 89.66% had a high school degree or higher. Among the smaller number of respondents aged 20–29, age and income were equally distributed.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics (N = 5688).

		Frequency	Percentage, %
Sex	Male	1866	32.81
Sex	Female	3822	67.19
Age	20–29	120	2.11
	30–39	1030	18.11
	40–49	1498	26.34
	50–59	1562	27.46
	60+	1478	25.98
Household income (10,000 won)*	Less than 200	395	6.94
	200–300	670	11.78
	300–400	1336	23.49
	400–500	1546	27.18
	500–700	1320	23.21
	More than 700	421	7.40
Having children under 18	Yes	2310	40.61
Having children under 18	No	3378	59.39
Employment status	Unemployed	1547	27.20
Employment status	Employed	4141	72.80
Education	Middle school	588	10.34
	High school	2703	47.52
	College or higher	2397	42.14

Note. 1 $ = 1133 Won (exchange rate in 2021, July 1).

Experience of Polyvictimization in Childhood by Gender

Figure 1 presents data about the experience of victimization in childhood by gender. Across all types of abuse, males were more likely to have been victimized than females. Males reported more frequent experience of emotional abuse (29.8%), minor physical abuse (47.8%), severe physical abuse (24.14%), neglect (6.32%), and indirect abuse (39.34%), while females reported less frequent experience of emotional abuse (24.07%), minor physical abuse (39.95%), severe physical abuse (16.98%), neglect (5.00%), and indirect abuse (34.41%). The gender differences in emotional abuse, minor and severe physical abuse, and indirect abuse were statistically significant (p < .001), and the gender difference was also statistically significant in neglect (p < .05).

Figure 1.

Experience of Victimization in Childhood by Gender.

Table 2 shows that the classification of polyvictimized group by the number of types of victimizations in childhood by gender. This study defined the threshold of polyvictimization as the top 10% of individuals with the numbers of types of victimization in a sample according to conceptualization of polyvictimization by Finkelhor et al. (2011). As a result, 673 individuals who experienced more than four types of abuse were identified as a polyvictimized group. The chi-square test indicates that there was a significant association between gender and the number of types of victimization in childhood (p<0.001). 60.13% of males experienced at least one type of victimization in childhood, and 15.11% of males were polyvictimized, meaning that they experienced more than four types of victimization. For females, 53.66% reported experiencing at least one type of victimization in childhood and 10.23% reported being polyvictimized.

Table 2.

The Number of Types of Victimization in Childhood by Gender.

	Total		Male		Female		χ² Value
	N	%	N	%	N	%	χ² Value
No victimization	2514	44.20	743	39.82	1771	46.34	44.141***
Non-polyvictimization
One type of victimization	1162	20.43	373	19.99	789	20.64
Two types of victimization	641	11.27	208	11.15	433	11.33
Three types of victimization	698	12.27	260	13.93	438	11.46
Polyvictimization
Four types of victimization	550	9.67	228	12.22	322	8.42
Five types of victimization	123	2.16	54	2.89	69	1.81
Total	5688	100	1866	100	3822	100

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

Table 3 presents the information about the types of victimization in childhood by polyvitimized group. Among polyvictimized individuals in childhood in the sample, 98.22% of them experienced emotional abuse, 99.26% experienced minor physical abuse, 93.61% experienced severe physical abuse, 30.91% experienced neglect, and 96.29% experience indirect abuse. Among non-polyvictimized individuals, experiencing emotional abuse and minor physical abuse prevailed, yet severe physical abuse and neglect were not common experiences.

Table 3.

The Types of Victimization in Childhood by Polyvictimized Group.

	Non-polyvictimization (1–3 Types of victimization)		Polyvictimization (4+ types)
	No	Yes	No	Yes
Emotional abuse	815	1686	12	661
Emotional abuse	(32.59%)	(67.41%)	(1.78%)	(98.22%)
Minor physical abuse	750	1751	5	668
Minor physical abuse	(29.99%)	(70.01%)	(0.74%)	(99.26%)
Severe physical abuse	2031	470	43	630
Severe physical abuse	(81.21%)	(18.79%)	(6.39%)	(93.61%)
Neglect	2400	101	465	208
Neglect	(95.96%)	(4.04%)	(69.09%)	(30.91%)
Indirect abuse (witnessing spousal abuse)	1100	1401	25	648
Indirect abuse (witnessing spousal abuse)	(43.98%)	(56.02%)	(3.71%)	(96.29%)

The Association Between Family Polyvictimization in Childhood and Subsequent Experience and Perpetration of Family Violence in Adulthood

According to the chi-square test presented in Table 4, the associations between family polyvictimization in childhood and the perpetration of child abuse in adulthood mostly presented statistically significant results. Importantly, those in the polyvictimized group were more likely to perpetrate any form of child abuse across both gender groups (p <.001). However, for males, polyvictimization in childhood did not present a statistically significant association with the perpetration of severe physical abuse and neglect but was significantly associated with the perpetration of other forms of abuse: namely, emotional abuse (p < .001) and minor physical abuse (p < .05). For females, polyvictimization in childhood was significantly associated with perpetration of all types of child abuse at the 99% confidence level. In sum, the results presented in Table 4 indicate that adults who have been exposed to polyvictimization in childhood were more likely to perpetrate child abuse in adulthood.

Table 4.

The Association between Family Polyvictimization in Childhood and Perpetration of Child Abuse.

		No Victimization		Non-polyvictimization (1–3 Types of victimization)			Polyvictimization (4+ types)	χ2 Value
		No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes
Total (N = 2310)	Any child abuse	922	152	629	392	120	95	186.054***
	Any child abuse	(85.85%)	(14.15%)	(61.61%)	(38.39%)	(55.81%)	(44.19%)	186.054***
	Emotional abuse	949	125	674	347	129	86	175.163***
	Emotional abuse	(88.36%)	(11.64%)	(66.01%)	(33.99%)	(60.00%)	(40.00%)	175.163***
	Minor physical abuse	1011	63	874	147	167	48	68.143***
	Minor physical abuse	(94.13%)	(5.87%)	(85.60%)	(14.40%)	(77.67%)	(22.33%)	68.143***
	Severe physical abuse	1062	12	1005	16	206	9	10.718**
	Severe physical abuse	(98.88%)	(1.12%)	(98.43%)	(1.57%)	(95.81%)	(4.19%)	10.718**
	Neglect	1064	10	994	27	208	7	10.539**
	Neglect	(99.07%)	(0.93%)	(97.36%)	(2.64%)	(96.74%)	(3.26%)	10.539**
Male (N = 695)	Any child abuse	249	34	237	83	62	30	25.804***
	Any child abuse	(87.99%)	(12.01%)	(74.06%)	(25.94%)	(67.39%)	(32.61%)	25.804***
	Emotional abuse	255	28	247	73	63	29	27.937***
	Emotional abuse	(90.11%)	(9.89%)	(77.19%)	(22.81%)	(68.48%)	(31.52%)	27.937***
	Minor physical abuse	269	14	293	27	80	12	7.016*
	Minor physical abuse	(95.05%)	(4.95%)	(91.56%)	(8.44%)	(86.96%)	(13.04%)	7.016*
	Severe physical abuse	277	6	318	2	89	3	4.072
	Severe physical abuse	(97.88%)	(2.12%)	(99.38%)	(0.63%)	(96.74%)	(3.26%)	4.072
	Neglect	280	3	317	3	92	0	0.95
	Neglect	(98.94%)	(1.06%)	(99.06%)	(0.94%)	(100.00%)	(0.00%)	0.95
Female (N = 1615)	Any child abuse	673	118	392	309	58	65	180.681***
	Any child abuse	(85.08%)	(14.92%)	(55.92%)	(44.08%)	(47.15%)	(52.85%)	180.681***
	Emotional abuse	694	97	427	247	66	57	164.191***
	Emotional abuse	(87.74%)	(12.26%)	(63.35%)	(36.65%)	(53.66%)	(46.34%)	164.191***
	Minor physical abuse	742	49	581	120	87	36	73.021***
	Minor physical abuse	(93.81%)	(6.19%)	(82.88%)	(17.12%)	(70.73%)	(29.27%)	73.021***
	Severe physical abuse	785	6	687	14	117	6	12.577**
	Severe physical abuse	(99.24%)	(0.76%)	(98.00%)	(2.00%)	(95.12%)	(4.88%)	12.577**
	Neglect	784	7	677	24	116	7	16.882***
	Neglect	(99.12%)	(0.88%)	(96.58%)	(3.42%)	(94.31%)	(5.69%)	16.882***

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

Table 5 shows that the association between family polyvictimization in childhood and the perpetration of spousal abuse in adulthood was statistically significant across all types of violence at a 99% confidence level. However, severe physical abuse did not present a statistically significant association with polyvictimization in childhood when the sample was divided by gender. The results indicate that individuals polyvictimized in childhood were more likely to perpetrate spousal abuse in adulthood.

Table 5.

The Association Between Family Polyvictimization in Childhood and Perpetration of Spousal Abuse.

		No Victimization		Non-polyvictimization (1–3 Types of victimization)		Polyvictimization (4+ types)		χ2 Value
		No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	χ2 Value
Total (N = 5688)	Any abuse	2360	154	1979	522	441	232	398.147***
	Any abuse	(93.87%)	(6.13%)	(79.13%)	(20.87%)	(65.53%)	(34.47%)	398.147***
	Emotional abuse	2377	137	2035	466	460	213	363.310***
	Emotional abuse	(94.55%)	(5.45%)	(81.37%)	(18.63%)	(68.35%)	(31.65%)	363.310***
	Minor physical abuse	2471	43	2394	107	599	74	122.351***
	Minor physical abuse	(98.29%)	(1.71%)	(95.72%)	(4.28%)	(89.00%)	(11.00%)	122.351***
	Severe physical abuse	2489	25	2467	34	657	16	7.861**
	Severe physical abuse	(99.01%)	(0.99%)	(98.64%)	(1.36%)	(97.62%)	(2.38%)	7.861**
	Sexual abuse	2471	43	2393	108	621	52	63.115***
	Sexual abuse	(98.29%)	(1.71%)	(95.68%)	(4.32%)	(92.27%)	(7.73%)	63.115***
Male (N = 1866)	Any abuse	702	41	644	197	180	102	156.714***
	Any abuse	(94.48%)	(5.52%)	(76.58%)	(23.42%)	(63.83%)	(36.17%)	156.714***
	Emotional abuse	705	38	682	159	190	92	131.858***
	Emotional abuse	(94.89%)	(5.11%)	(81.09%)	(18.91%)	(67.38%)	(32.62%)	131.858***
	Minor physical abuse	731	12	803	38	248	34	51.844***
	Minor physical abuse	(98.38%)	(1.62%)	(95.48%)	(4.52%)	(87.94%)	(12.06%)	51.844***
	Severe physical abuse	736	7	828	13	274	8	4.986
	Severe physical abuse	(99.06%)	(0.94%)	(98.45%)	(1.55%)	(97.16%)	(2.84%)	4.986
	Sexual abuse	728	15	769	72	255	27	36.391***
	Sexual abuse	(97.98%)	(2.02%)	(91.44%)	(8.56%)	(90.43%)	(9.57%)	36.391***
Female (N = 3822)	Any abuse	1658	113	1335	325	261	130	234.335***
	Any abuse	(93.62%)	(6.38%)	(80.42%)	(19.58%)	(66.75%)	(33.25%)	234.335***
	Emotional abuse	1672	99	1353	307	270	121	227.888***
	Emotional abuse	(94.41%)	(5.59%)	(81.51%)	(18.49%)	(69.05%)	(30.95%)	227.888***
	Minor physical abuse	1740	31	1591	69	351	40	67.291***
	Minor physical abuse	(98.25%)	(1.75%)	(95.84%)	(4.16%)	(89.77%)	(10.23%)	67.291***
	Severe physical abuse	1753	18	1639	21	383	8	2.826
	Severe physical abuse	(98.98%)	(1.02%)	(98.73%)	(1.27%)	(97.95%)	(2.05%)	2.826
	Sexual abuse	1743	28	1624	36	366	25	32.949***
	Sexual abuse	(98.42%)	(1.58%)	(97.83%)	(2.17%)	(93.61%)	(6.39%)	32.949***

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

Table 6 shows a significant association between family polyvictimization in childhood and the experience of spousal abuse in adulthood. Overall, the experience of each type of spousal abuse in adulthood (except for severe physical abuse) was significantly associated with polyvictimization in childhood (p < .001). However, gender differences were found. For males, polyvictimization in childhood showed a statistically significant association with emotional abuse and minor physical abuse (p < .001), but not severe physical abuse or sexual abuse. But for females, polyvictimization in childhood was significantly associated with the experience of each type of spousal abuse in adulthood; the significance level of emotional abuse, minor physical abuse, and sexual abuse was 99.9%, and the significance level of severe physical abuse was 95%.

Table 6.

The Association between Family Polyvictimization in Childhood and Victimization from Spousal Abuse.

		No Victimization		Non-polyvictimization (1–3 Types of victimization)		Polyvictimization (4+ Types)		χ2 Value
		No	Yes	No	Yes		Yes	χ2 Value
Total (N = 5688)	Any abuse	2322	192	1963	538	No	246	371.753***
	Any abuse	(92.36%)	(7.64%)	(78.49%)	(21.51%)	(63.45%)	(36.55%)	371.753***
	Emotional abuse	1611	160	1261	399	223	168	287.325***
	Emotional abuse	(90.97%)	(9.03%)	(75.96%)	(24.04%)	(57.03%)	(42.97%)	287.325***
	Minor physical abuse	2474	40	2383	118	593	80	143.545***
	Minor physical abuse	(98.41%)	(1.59%)	(95.28%)	(4.72%)	(88.11%)	(11.89%)	143.545***
	Severe physical abuse	2494	20	2474	27	661	12	5.121
	Severe physical abuse	(99.20%)	(0.80%)	(98.92%)	(1.08%)	(98.22%)	(1.78%)	5.121
	Sexual abuse	2437	77	2365	136	599	74	71.160***
	Sexual abuse	(96.94%)	(3.06%)	(94.56%)	(5.44%)	(89.00%)	(11.00%)	71.160***
Male (N = 1866)	Any abuse	711	32	702	139	204	78	109.8283***
	Any abuse	(95.69%)	(4.31%)	(83.47%)	(16.53%)	(72.34%)	(27.66%)	109.8283***
	Emotional abuse	714	29	712	129	207	75	107.729***
	Emotional abuse	(96.10%)	(3.90%)	(84.66%)	(15.34%)	(73.40%)	(26.60%)	107.729***
	Minor physical abuse	737	6	815	26	268	14	17.190***
	Minor physical abuse	(99.19%)	(0.81%)	(96.91%)	(3.09%)	(95.04%)	(4.96%)	17.190***
	Severe physical abuse	740	3	833	8	280	2	1.71
	Severe physical abuse	(99.60%)	(0.40%)	(99.05%)	(0.95%)	(99.29%)	(0.71%)	1.71
	Sexual abuse	738	5	826	15	275	7	5.91
	Sexual abuse	(99.33%)	(0.67%)	(98.22%)	(1.78%)	(97.52%)	(2.48%)	5.91
Female (N = 3822)	Any abuse	1611	160	1261	399	223	168	287.325***
	Any abuse	(90.97%)	(9.03%)	(75.96%)	(24.04%)	(57.03%)	(42.97%)	287.325***
	Emotional abuse	1655	116	1313	347	240	151	295.235***
	Emotional abuse	(93.45%)	(6.55%)	(79.10%)	(20.90%)	(61.38%)	(38.62%)	295.235***
	Minor physical abuse	1737	34	1568	92	325	66	151.891***
	Minor physical abuse	(98.08%)	(1.92%)	(94.46%)	(5.54%)	(83.12%)	(16.88%)	151.891***
	Severe physical abuse	1754	17	1641	19	381	10	6.961*
	Severe physical abuse	(99.04%)	(0.96%)	(98.86%)	(1.14%)	(97.44%)	(2.56%)	6.961*
	Sexual abuse	1699	72	1539	121	324	67	87.395***
	Sexual abuse	(95.93%)	(4.07%)	(92.71%)	(7.29%)	(82.86%)	(17.14%)	87.395***

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

Lastly, Table 7 presents the results of a logistic regression analysis that seeks to predict the risk of experiencing or perpetrating family violence in adulthood (i.e., perpetrating child abuse, perpetrating spousal abuse, or experiencing spousal abuse) according to family polyvictimization in childhood. Importantly, the analysis found that those in the polyvictimized group were more likely to perpetrate child abuse (odds ratio [OR] = 5.433, 95% confidence interval [CI = 3.904, 7.560]), to perpetrate spousal abuse (OR = 7.590, 95% CI = [6.025, 9.561]), and to experience spousal abuse (OR = 7.171, 95% CI = [5.751, 8.942]); the results were significant at a 99.9% confidence level. This provides strong support for the findings in Tables 4, 5, and 6 that there is a significant association between polyvictimization in childhood and subsequent family violence in adulthood, while controlling for other important variables. In addition, Table 7 provides significant information about gender. According to the results, females were more likely to perpetrate child abuse (OR = 1.881, 95% CI = [1.468, 2.409]) and experience spousal abuse (OR = 1.745, 95% CI = [1.464, 2.080]) at a 99.9% significance level, while they were less likely to perpetrate spousal abuse (OR = 0.837, 95% CI = [0.707, 0.991]) at a 95% significance level.

Table 7.

Logistic Regression Analysis for Predicting the Risk of Experiencing or Perpetrating Family Violence in Adulthood.

	Perpetration of Child abuse		Victimization of Spousal abuse		Perpetration of Spousal abuse
	Odds ratio	[95% CI]	Odds ratio	[95% CI]	Odds ratio	[95% CI]
Polyvictimization
Non-polyvictimization (1–3 types of victimization)	3.952***	[3.181, 4.910]	3.35***	[2.813, 4.008]	3.977***	[3.288, 4.810]
Polyvictimization (4+ types)	5.433***	[3.904, 7.560]	7.171***	[5.751, 8.942]	7.590***	[6.025, 9.561]
Gender	1.881***	[1.468, 2.409]	1.745***	[1.464, 2.080]	0.837*	[0.707, 0.991]
Age	1.018*	[1.002, 1.035]	1.009*	[1.000, 1.017]	1.006	[0.997, 1.014]
Education
Junior college	3.666*	[1.146, 11.727]	0.802	[0.614, 1.049]	0.826	[0.626, 1.091]
College	3.166	[0.981, 10.216]	0.575**	[0.416, 0.794]	0.614**	[0.441, 0.855]
Income (10,000 won)
200–300	0.339*	[0.118, 0.971]	1.525*	[1.058, 2.198]	1.667**	[1.141, 2.434]
300–400	0.538	[0.199, 1.459]	1.508*	[1.048, 2.170]	1.504*	[1.028, 2.200]
400–500	0.673	[0.249, 1.822]	2.139***	[1.480, 3.091]	2.174***	[1.481, 3.191]
500–700	0.699	[0.257, 1.905]	1.805**	[1.230, 2.649]	1.913**	[1.285, 2.849]
More than 700	0.557	[0.194, 1.599]	1.656*	[1.060, 2.588]	1.781*	[1.124, 2.820]
Employed	0.837	[0.652, 1.074]	0.949	[0.793, 1.135]	0.922	[0.762, 1.117]
Constant	0.014***	[0.003, 0.080]	0.017***	[0.008, 0.038]	0.054***	[0.024, 0.120]
Log likelihood	−1233.4706		−2370.6504		−2273.0873
Observations	2310		5688		5688

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

Discussion

Confirming prior studies in Korean context, the current study suggests the possibility of intergenerational transmission of violence within the family context. Findings indicate that polyvictimization in childhood was significantly associated with spousal abuse and child abuse in adulthood. In addition, gender differences in the same associations were found. Experiencing polyvictimization in childhood had an impact on abuse perpetration towards their child in adulthood, regardless of the type of abuse. While there were partial associations between polyvictimization and perpetration of child abuse among male, perpetration of every type of child abuse was associated with polyvictimization for female.

In current study, males were more likely to experience polyvictimization in childhood and gender differences were found in the association between polyvictimization in childhood and abuse perpetration in adulthood. Previous studies showed inconsistent results in gender differences in the experience of child abuse and neglect. Some studies found that females were more likely to be maltreated within a family (Pereda et al., 2014), while others found that males were more likely to be physically abused (Thompson et al., 2004). Other studies also no gender differences were found in the child maltreatment experiences. In other case, no gender differences were found in any type of child maltreatment, except sexual abuse (Kerig & Modrowski, 2018). Although it is not conclusive whether males are more easily victimized by child abuse in previous studies yet, some argued that there are gender differences in the responses and the effects of child abuse victimization. For example, Jung et al. (2019) found that childhood victimization experiences (physical–emotional abuse and the exposure to domestic violence in childhood) led negative consequences like perpetrating more violence. In Gómez (2011)’s study, child abuse experience predicted spousal abuse victimization and perpetration and it was found in both men and women but the magnitude were different by showing a greater association in men. This study is one of the early attempts to deepen understanding of polyvictimization experiences in childhood and how this is associated with later lives. It is premature to conclude that the findings in this study particularly focused on the population in South Korea are consistent in other contexts. More research is needed to expand our knowledge of gender differences in polyvictimization and its impact on later outcomes.

Strengths and Limitations

This study contributes to the relevant literature in several important ways. First, it strives to adapt family polyvictimization to the context of South Korea, where the prevalence of child maltreatment is noticeably high (MOGEF, 2019). Second, the current conceptualized polyvictimization by considering witnessing spousal abuse in childhood as an important type of child maltreatment has not been fully considered in previous research. Third, the study tested the potential gender differences. Fourth, the study leveraged the data from the nationally representative samples of Korean population.

Despite these strengths, there are limitations that should be considered when interpreting our findings. First, polyvictimization measure was depended on retrospective report of child abuse and neglect. Although retrospective reports accounts offer the benefit of capturing data about experiences across childhood, they have several limitations, including recall bias. Second, the study limited polyvictimization experiences within the family, omitting violence exposure outside of the family. Follow-up studies should examine more detailed possibilities of abuse, neglect, and witnessing spousal abuse within and outside of family context and its long-term effect. Third, the study dichotomized PCCTS. This may create some issues of disregarding the contextual severity of polyvictimization in childhood. The current study intended to measure any experience of childhood exposure to multiple types of victimization before the age of 18, thus created the dichotomous items of nine type abuse, neglect, and witnessing spousal abuse. This needs to be more carefully handled in the future work. At last, this study mainly focused on the population in South Korea where child abuse prevalence rates are remarkably high. Due to this limitation, it is not appropriate to generalize the results of this study, ignoring these cultural contexts. However, the findings of intergenerational transmission of maltreatment of South Korean population can be meaningful, to other countries where they have similar cultural contexts with high prevalence rates in child maltreatment.

Conclusion and Implications

There are several implications of our findings. First, practitioners should work to assess family polyvictimization experiences to understand the background of their violent behavior in adulthood. This information can be used to tailor interventions for children who have experienced child maltreatment and witnessing spousal abuse within family and to break the cycle of intergenerational transmission of violence. Second, prevention remains a top priority in the area of childhood maltreatment and spousal abuse research. Attempts need to be made to identify children who may be at higher risk of child maltreatment. Third, assessing polyvictimization would help practitioners to intervene more effectively by planning intensive strategies to mitigate the cumulative effects of polyvictimization.

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

Ahyoung Song

Yusun Cho

Author Biographies

Ahyoung Song has participated in multiple projects addressing interpersonal violence and risky health behaviors among women. Her current research interests are poly-violence victimization and its consequences in life-span and Community-Based Participatory Research to prevent risky health behaviors and housing policies among vulnerable population including homeless people. She received her PhD at the University of Southern California and is now affiliated with the Gachon University, South Korea.

Yoewon Yoon received her PhD at the University of Southern California, Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work. Her research focuses on children, youth, and families, particularly Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), intergenerational continuity of ACEs, and mental- and behavioral health outcomes among vulnerable children and adolescents. She recently joined Department of Social Welfare, Dongguk University-Seoul as an assistant professor.

Yusun Cho received her PhD at the University of Southern California in Public Policy and Management. Her research interests include gender and social policy, nonprofit and public management, social service delivery, collaborative governance and social network analysis.

References

Aakvaag

H. F.

Thoresen

Wentzel-Larsen

Dyb

(2017). Adult victimization in female survivors of childhood violence and abuse: The contribution of multiple types of violence. Violence Against Women, 23(13), 1601–1619. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216664427

Andrews

A. R.

Jobe-Shields

López

C. M.

Metzger

I. W.

De Arellano

M. A.

Saunders

Kilpatrick

D. G.

(2015). Polyvictimization, income, and ethnic differences in trauma-related mental health during adolescence. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 50(8), 1223–1234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1077-3

Bidarra

Z. S.

Lessard

Dumont

(2016). Co-occurrence of intimate partner violence and child sexual abuse: Prevalence, risk factors and related issues. Child Abuse & Neglect, 55(4), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.03.007

Borrego

Gutow

M. R.

Reicher

Barker

C. H.

(2008). Parent–child interaction therapy with domestic violence populations. Journal of Family Violence, 23(6), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-008-9177-4

Caetano

Field

C. A.

Nelson

(2003). Association between childhood physical abuse, exposure to parental violence, and alcohol problems in adulthood. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(3), 240–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260502250074

Chan

K. L.

(2011). Co-occurrence of intimate partner violence and child abuse in Hong Kong Chinese families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(7), 1322–1342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260510369136

Chan

K. L.

Chen

(2017). Can family structure and social support reduce the impact of child victimization on health-related quality of life? Child Abuse & Neglect, 72(3), 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.07.014

Chan

K. L.

Chen

(2019). Prevalence and correlates of the co-occurrence of family violence: A meta-analysis on family polyvictimization. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 22(2), 289–305 https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019841601

Classen

C. C.

Palesh

O. G.

Aggarwal

(2005). Sexual revictimization: A review of the empirical literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6(2), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838005275087

10.

Clément

M. È.

Bouchard

(2005). Predicting the use of single versus multiple types of violence towards children in a representative sample of Quebec families. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29(10), 1121–1139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.04.006

11.

deLara

E. W.

(2019). Consequences of childhood bullying on mental health and relationships for young adults. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2379–2389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1197-y

12.

Devries

K. M.

Knight

Child

J. C.

Kyegombe

Hossain

Lees

Watts

Naker

(2017). Witnessing intimate partner violence and child maltreatment in Ugandan children: A cross-sectional survey. BMJ open, 7(2), Article e013583. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013583

13.

Dugal

Godbout

Bélanger

Hébert

Goulet

(2018). Cumulative childhood maltreatment and subsequent psychological violence in intimate relationships: The role of emotion dysregulation. Partner Abuse, 9(1), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.9.1.18

14.

Finkelhor

Ormrod

R. K.

Turner

H. A.

(2007a). Poly-victimization: A neglected component in child victimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.008

15.

Finkelhor

Ormrod

R. K.

Turner

H. A.

(2007b). Re-victimization patterns in a national longitudinal sample of children and youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(5), 479–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.03.012

16.

Finkelhor

Turner

Hamby

S. L.

Ormrod

(2011). Polyvictimization: Children’s exposure to multiple types of violence, crime, and abuse. OJJDP juvenile justice bulletin - NCJ235504 (p. 1–12). US Government Printing Office.

17.

Ford

J. D.

Delker

B. C.

(2018). Polyvictimization in childhood and its adverse impacts across the lifespan: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 19(3), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2018.1440479

18.

Franzese

R. J.

Menard

Weiss

A. J.

Covey

H. C.

(2017). Adolescent exposure to violence and adult violent victimization and offending. Criminal Justice Review, 42(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016816679228

19.

Godbout

Dutton

D. G.

Lussier

Sabourin

(2009). Early exposure to violence, domestic violence, attachment representations, and marital adjustment. Personal Relationships, 16(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2009.01228.x

20.

Gómez

A. M.

(2011). Testing the cycle of violence hypothesis: Child abuse and adolescent dating violence as predictors of intimate partner violence in young adulthood. Youth & Society, 43(1), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X09358313.

21.

Gracia

Rodriguez

C. M.

Martín-Fernández

Lila

(2020). Acceptability of family violence: Underlying ties between intimate partner violence and child abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(17–18), 3217–3236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517707310

22.

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Mason

W. A.

Kosterman

Lengua

L. J.

Hawkins

J. D.

Abbott

R. D.

(2004). Pathways from physical childhood abuse to partner violence in young adulthood. Violence and Victims, 19(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.1891/vivi.19.2.123.64099

23.

Hesketh

Zhen

Dong

Z. X.

Jun

Y. X.

Xing

Z. W.

(2010). Stress and psychosomatic symptoms in Chinese school children: Cross-sectional survey. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 95(2), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2009.171660

24.

Howell

K. H.

Barnes

S. E.

Miller

L. E.

Graham-Bermann

S. A.

(2016). Developmental variations in the impact of intimate partner violence exposure during childhood. Journal of Injury & Violence Research, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v8i1.663

25.

Jung

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Skinner

M. L.

Lee

J. O.

Klika

J. B.

Rousson

A. N.

(2019). Gender differences in intimate partner violence: A predictive analysis of IPV by child abuse and domestic violence exposure during early childhood. Violence Against Women, 25(8), 903–924. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801218796329

26.

Kerig

P. K.

Modrowski

C. A.

(2018). Testing gender-differentiated models of the mechanisms linking polyvictimization and youth offending: Numbing and callousness versus dissociation and borderline traits. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 19(3), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2018.1441355

27.

Kimber

Adham

Gill

McTavish

MacMillan

H. L.

(2018). The association between child exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) and perpetration of IPV in adulthood—A systematic review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 76, 273-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.11.007.

28.

Kimerling

Alvarez

Pavao

Kaminski

Baumrind

(2007). Epidemiology and consequences of women’s revictimization. Women's Health Issues, 17(2), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2006.12.002

29.

Lackey

(2003). Violent family heritage, the transition to adulthood, and later partner violence. Journal of Family Issues, 24(1), 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x02238521

30.

Martin

Bergen

H. A.

Richardson

A. S.

Roeger

Allison

(2004). Sexual abuse and suicidality: Gender differences in a large community sample of adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(5), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2003.08.006

31.

McCloskey

L. A.

Lichter

E. L.

(2003). The contribution of marital violence to adolescent aggression across different relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260503251179

32.

Messing

J. T.

La Flair

Cavanaugh

C. E.

Kanga

M. R.

Campbell

J. C.

(2012). Testing posttraumatic stress as a mediator of childhood trauma and adult intimate partner violence victimization. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 21(7), 792–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2012.686963

33.

Ministry of Gender Equality and Family . (2019). The domestic violence survey in 2019. MOGEF Women’s and Youth Rights Protection Division.

34.

Moretti

M. M.

Obsuth

Odgers

C. L.

Reebye

(2006). Exposure to maternal vs. paternal partner violence, PTSD, and aggression in adolescent girls and boys. Aggressive Behavior, 32(4), 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20137

35.

Mustanski

Andrews

Puckett

J. A.

(2016). The effects of cumulative victimization on mental health among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adolescents and young adults. American Journal of Public Health, 106(3), 527–533. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302976

36.

O’Leary

K. D.

Smith Slep

A. M.

O’Leary

S. G.

(2000). Co-occurrence of partner and parent aggression: Research and treatment implications. Behavior Therapy, 31(4), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(00)80035-0

37.

Pedera

Guilera

Abad

(2014). Victimization and polyvictimization of Spanish children and youth: Results from a community sample. Child Abuse and Neglect, 38(11), 640–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.01.019

38.

Rapsy

C. M.

Scott

K. M.

Patterson

(2019). Childhood sexual abuse, poly-victimization and internalizing disorders across adulthood and older age: Findings from a 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Affective Disorder, 244, 171-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.10.095.

39.

Rosenbaum

Leisring

P. A.

(2003). Beyond power and control: Towards an understanding of partner abusive men. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.34.1.7

40.

Salokangas

R. K.

Schultze-Lutter

Schmidt

S. J.

Pesonen

Luutonen

Patterson

Reventlow

H. G. V.

Heinimaa

From

Hietala

(2019). Childhood physical abuse and emotional neglect are specifically associated with adult mental disorders. Journal of Mental Health, 29(4), 376–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2018.1521940

41.

Straus

M. A.

Hamby

S. L.

Finkelhor

Moore

D. W.

Runyan

(1998). Identification of child maltreatment with the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales: Development and psychometric data for a national sample of American parents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 22(4), 249–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0145-2134(97)00174-9

42.

Thompson

M. P.

Kingree

J. B.

Desai

(2004). Gender differences in long-term health consequences of physical abuse of children: data from a nationally representative survey. American Journal of Public Health, 94(4), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.94.4.599

43.

Thornberry

T. P.

Henry

K. L.

(2013). Intergenerational continuity in maltreatment. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(4), 555–569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9697-5

44.

Wolfe

D. A.

(2018). Why polyvictimization matters? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(5), 832–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517752215

45.

Wood

S.L.

Sommers

M.S.

(2011). Consequences of Intimate partner violence on child witnesses: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 24(4), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6171.2011.00302.x

46.

Yoon

Cederbaum

J. A.

Mennen

F. E.

Traube

D. E.

Chou

C. P.

Lee

J. O.

(2019). Linkage between teen mother’s childhood adversity and externalizing behaviors in their children at age 11: Three aspects of parenting. Child Abuse & Neglect, 88(8), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.12.005

47.

Yoon

Cederbaum

J. A.

Schwartz

(2018). Childhood sexual abuse and current suicidal ideation among adolescents: Problem-focused and emotion-focused coping skills. Journal of Adolescence, 67, 120-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.06.009.