461121

712461121Crime & DelinquencyTillyer

© 2011 SAGE Publications
CADXXX10.1177/0011128

Article
Crime & Delinquency

The Relationship Between

2015, V
  ol. 61(7) 973­–995
© The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permissions:
Childhood Maltreatment sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0011128712461121
and Adolescent Violent cad.sagepub.com

Victimization

Marie Skubak Tillyer1

Abstract
Research has identified numerous negative consequences of childhood mal-
treatment, including poor academic performance, psychological distress, and
delinquency. To date, studies examining childhood maltreatment and subse-
quent victimization have largely focused on the relationship between child-
hood sexual abuse and intimate partner abuse in adulthood. It is unclear,
however, if maltreatment during childhood is related to subsequent violent
victimization during adolescence. Theories of victimization, in combina-
tion with the existing literature on the causes and consequences of child-
hood maltreatment, suggest that these experiences would be correlated.
This study used longitudinal data from a nationally representative sample
of adolescents to examine whether childhood maltreatment is empirically
related to subsequent adolescent violent victimization, and if so, whether
this relationship can be explained by existing victimization theories. Findings
indicate that a significant relationship exists between childhood maltreat-
ment and adolescent violent victimization, and that a risky lifestyle appears
to mediate the relationship.

Keywords
victimization, childhood maltreatment, violence

1
University of Texas at San Antonio, USA

Corresponding Author:
Marie Skubak Tillyer, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Texas at San Antonio, 501
W. César E. Chávez Blvd., San Antonio, TX 78207, USA.
Email: Marie.Tillyer@utsa.edu
974 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

Research in recent decades has begun to examine the long-term consequences

of child abuse and neglect. Maltreatment during childhood has been linked to
numerous negative outcomes, including substance abuse, poor academic per-
formance, psychological distress, and delinquency (Huizinga, Loeber, &
Thornberry, 1995; Ireland, Smith, & Thornberry, 2002; Kurtz, Gaudin,
Wodarski, & Howing, 1993; Perez, 2000; Shin, Edwards, & Heeren, 2009;
Thornberry, Ireland, & Smith, 2001; Widom, Schuck, & White, 2006; Wright,
Crawford, & Del Castillo, 2009). To date, studies examining childhood mal-
treatment and subsequent victimization have largely focused on the relation-
ship between childhood sexual abuse and later intimate partner abuse or
sexual revictimization (e.g., Collins, 1998; Tyler, Hoyt, & Whitbeck, 2000).
It is unclear, however, whether maltreatment during childhood is related to
subsequent violent victimization during adolescence.
Research on the victimization of children and adolescents demonstrates that
individuals are particularly vulnerable during these periods of the life-course.
For example, a nationally representative study of children and youths ages 2 to
17 found that more than half had experienced a physical assault in the previous
year (Finkelhor, Omrod, Turner, & Hamby, 2005). There is little research, how-
ever, on the relationship between victimization experiences across develop-
mental stages of the life-course. One exception is a recent study by Widom,
Czaja, and Dutton (2008) which found that childhood victimization in the
forms of physical and sexual abuse and neglect increased the risk for lifetime
revictimization. The explanation for this observed relationship, however,
remains speculative. Scholars have noted the need for this type of research,
stating that the “field of child victimology needs to study, borrow from, and
integrate a variety of fields, including . . . criminology” (Finkelhor, 1995, p. 189)
and “comparatively little work explains why [childhood] victimization has
long-term consequences” (Macmillan, 2001, p. 11). Despite the lack of empiri-
cal research directly examining the relationship between childhood maltreat-
ment and subsequent adolescent violent victimization, victimization theories
(Cohen & Felson, 1979; Cohen, Kluegel, & Land, 1981; Finkelhor & Asdigian,
1996; Hindelang, Gottfredson, & Garofalo, 1978), when considered in combi-
nation with the literature on childhood maltreatment, suggest that these experi-
ences would be correlated. The present study draws on theories of victimization
and the existing research on child abuse and neglect to examine the relationship
between childhood maltreatment and violent victimization during adolescence.
Specifically, this study used longitudinal data from a nationally representative
study of adolescents to examine whether maltreatment during childhood
increases the likelihood of violent victimization during adolescence, and
whether current theories of victimization can account for this relationship.
Tillyer 975

Adolescent Violent Victimization

Theoretically grounded studies of adolescent violent victimization often rely
on an opportunity framework to explain the correlates of violent victimiza-
tion risk. For example, a lifestyles/routine activities approach suggests that
some lifestyles will differentially expose adolescents to risky individuals and
situations that create opportunities for victimization (Hindelang et al., 1978).
Activities that bring suitable targets together with motivated offenders in the
absence of capable guardianship are particularly risky (Cohen et al., 1981;
Cohen & Felson, 1979).
Generally, findings from studies examining the correlates of adolescent
violent victimization are consistent with a lifestyles/routine activities expla-
nation for victimization. Certain lifestyles and routine activities, such as
unstructured activities that lack adult supervision, appear to expose adoles-
cents to risky situations and motivated offenders, thus increasing risk for vic-
timization (Schreck & Fisher, 2004; Schreck, Stewart, & Fisher, 2006;
Schreck, Wright, & Miller, 2002). Similarly, substance use and abuse has
been positively linked to adolescent violent victimization (Lauritsen, Laub,
& Sampson, 1992; Nofziger, 2009; Schreck, Burek, Stewart, & Miller, 2007).
Furthermore, a delinquent lifestyle that includes engaging in delinquency and
associating with delinquent peers appears to be particularly influential in
exposing individuals to motivated offenders (Campbell Augustine, Wilcox,
Ousey, & Clayton, 2002; Lauritsen et al., 1992; Lauritsen & Quinet, 1995;
Nofziger, 2009; Sampson & Lauritsen, 1990; Schreck & Fisher, 2004; Spano
& Nagy, 2005; Taylor, Freng, Esbensen, & Peterson, 2008; Wilcox, Tillyer, &
Fisher, 2009). Conversely, social bonds—such as parental, school, or peer
attachments—that have the potential to provide guardianship and limit expo-
sure to risky situations and motivated offenders tend to be associated with
lower risk for violent victimization (Schreck & Fisher, 2004; Schreck, Fisher,
& Miller, 2004; Wilcox et al., 2009).
Additional theories of victimization identify specific target characteris-
tics which influence victimization risk by contributing to an individual’s
perceived suitability as a target. Finkelhor and Asdigian (1996), for exam-
ple, argued that the lifestyle/routine activities framework only considers the
environmental factors that protect or expose individuals to victimization.
More attention needs to be paid, they argue, to personal characteristics that
correspond with “the needs, motives or reactivities of offenders” (Finkelhor
& Asdigian, 1996, p. 6). Their revised conceptualization considers personal
characteristics of individuals that would increase vulnerability independent
of any specific routine activities. “[B]ecause certain offenders are drawn to
976 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

or react to certain types of victims or certain characteristics in victims, such

victims are more vulnerable” (Finkelhor & Asdigian, 1996, p. 6). Perceived
weaknesses—such as small size, physical weakness, emotional problems,
or psychological issues—increase target vulnerability because they limit
the victim’s ability to resist or deter victimization. In addition, characteris-
tics that evoke hostility or resentment from potential offenders increase
victimization risk by contributing to target antagonism (Finkelhor &
Asdigian, 1996). In short, this approach suggests it is not only important to
consider opportunities that expose individuals to victimization risk but also
the personal characteristics that correspond with the motives, needs, and
reactivities of offenders, thus making some adolescents particularly suit-
able targets.
Some studies have found that specific target characteristics—such as
impulsivity, low self-control, and psychological distress—increase the prob-
ability of violent victimization (Campbell Augustine et al., 2002; Finkelhor
& Asdigian, 1996; Schreck, 1999; Schreck et al., 2002; Wilcox et al., 2009;
but see Tillyer, Rob, Holly, & Rebekah, 2011). In addition, the limited
research on victims with disabilities indicates that individuals with mental
and physical disabilities are at greater risk of violent victimization (Petersilia,
2001; Tillyer et al., 2011; Wilson & Brewer, 1992), suggesting that perceived
weakness might contribute to the target suitability of some individuals. The
following section examines the extent to which the correlates of adolescent
violent victimization risk may also be causes or consequences of childhood
maltreatment, thus suggesting a relationship—either causal or spurious—
between the two experiences.

Linking Childhood Maltreatment

to Adolescent Violent Victimization
There are two broad sets of explanations for an observed relationship
between childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent victimization—
risk heterogeneity and state dependency. The first, risk heterogeneity,
essentially assumes that the relationship between childhood maltreatment
and adolescent violent victimization is spurious: The two experiences have
a common cause, thus accounting for their joint occurrence. The second set
of explanations—state dependency—suggests that the observed relation-
ship between childhood maltreatment and subsequent violent victimization
during adolescence is causal. That is, the experience of childhood maltreat-
ment impacts an adolescent’s risk for subsequent violent victimization. The
research on child abuse and neglect has identified several possible causes
Tillyer 977

and consequences of maltreatment, many of which also serve as risk fac-

tors for adolescent violent victimization.

Target Characteristics
There are a number of potential causes and consequences of childhood mal-
treatment that might contribute to the perceived target suitability of an ado-
lescent. For example, Brown, Cohen, Johnson, and Salzinger (1998)
identified having a difficult temperament as a risk factor for child abuse and
neglect. Similarly, parents of children who were physically abused reported
their children as having more externalizing and internalizing behaviors rela-
tive to parents of children who were not abused (Black, Heyman, & Slep,
2001), though it is unclear whether these differences were real and whether
they were the cause or consequence of physical abuse. In fact, results from a
nationally representative twin study indicate that although “difficult” chil-
dren might provoke corporal punishment, child abuse does not appear to be
the result of coercive child behavior (Jaffee et al., 2004). Setting aside the
question of whether these problems are the cause or consequence of abuse,
they could potentially contribute to the perceived target suitability of an
adolescent by producing antagonistic behaviors.
Beyond behavioral characteristics, physical and mental risk factors for
childhood maltreatment may also contribute to the target suitability of an
adolescent by increasing his or her perceived vulnerability. For example,
Brown et al. (1998), in their 17-year longitudinal prospective study on the
risk factors of child abuse and neglect, identified being handicapped as a risk
factor that increased the probability of child sexual abuse. In addition, low
child verbal IQ increased the probability of physical abuse.
Finally, the experience of childhood maltreatment might also change the
perceived vulnerability of an adolescent by creating low self-esteem. A lon-
gitudinal study comparing maltreated children to nonmaltreated children
found that sexual abuse, early onset of maltreatment, and frequent physical
abuse were significantly related to difficulties with self-esteem (Bolger,
Patterson, & Kupersmidt, 1998). Hutchinson and Mueller (2008), in a study
examining the effects of parental emotional and verbal abuse on peer victim-
ization, argued that victims of abuse adapt to their experience through the use
of passive acceptance of their status as a victim, which is accompanied by
low self-esteem. As a result, they become targets for additional victimization
by their peers. Their findings suggest that parental verbal and emotional
abuse was associated with lower self-esteem, which in turn increased victim-
ization by one’s peers.
978 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

Opportunities
Childhood maltreatment might also influence violent victimization during
adolescence through risky lifestyles and activities with weak guardianship
that create opportunities for victimization. For example, the research on the
consequences of childhood abuse and neglect has linked various forms of
maltreatment to substance use and abuse during adolescence, including
binge drinking (Shin et al., 2009), illicit drug use (Perez, 2000), marijuana
use (Dembo et al., 1992), and problematic alcohol use (Widom et al., 2006).
These findings, however, are somewhat tempered by research by Thornberry
and colleagues which illustrate the importance of considering the develop-
mental stages during which the maltreatment occurs (Ireland et al., 2002;
Thornberry et al., 2001). For example, Ireland et al. (2002) reported that
childhood maltreatment is only significantly related to adolescent drug use if
the maltreatment persisted into adolescence. Similarly, Thornberry et al.
(2001) found that experiencing childhood-only maltreatment (but not mal-
treatment during adolescence) was unrelated to alcohol-related problems
during early and late adolescence, whereas experiencing any adolescent
maltreatment was significantly related to alcohol-related problems during
both early and late adolescence.
Beyond substance use and abuse, childhood maltreatment has been linked
to involvement in a delinquent lifestyle which may expose one to delinquent
peers and risks for victimization. Child abuse and neglect has been found to
be correlated with delinquency (Huizinga et al., 1995). For example, Smith
and Thornberry (1995) reported that childhood maltreatment is significantly
related to self-reported and official measures of delinquency. Lemmon (1999)
found that childhood maltreatment significantly influenced the initiation and
continuation of delinquency among a sample of low income urban youth
males. Swanston et al. (2003), in a longitudinal study comparing sexual abuse
victims to nonvictims, found that child sexual abuse was significantly related
to self-reported criminal behavior and parental rating of the adolescent’s
aggression. Zingraff, Leiter, Myers, and Johnson (1993), however, cautioned
that the maltreatment–delinquency relationship might be overstated. Their
findings indicate that the maltreatment–delinquency association only exists
for status offenses once other variables are controlled. Furthermore, similar
to the findings related to substance use, several studies suggest that the devel-
opmental stage in which the maltreatment occurs is important for understand-
ing the impact on delinquency. That is, it appears that the significant
relationship between maltreatment and delinquency only holds when the
maltreatment began or persisted into adolescence (Ireland et al., 2002;
Stewart, Livingston, & Dennison, 2008; Thornberry et al., 2001).
Tillyer 979

Finally, adolescents who experienced childhood maltreatment may be

at an increased risk of violent victimization because of insufficient guard-
ianship, as the weak parent–child bond limits the guardianship potential of
the relationship. Brown et al. (1998), in their longitudinal analysis of risk
factors for child maltreatment, identified low mother involvement, low
father involvement, and low father warmth as risk factors for child abuse
and neglect. In a study comparing families of runaway youths to nonrun-
away families, Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Ackley (1997) found that both run-
away adolescents and their parents/caretakers are more likely to report
lower levels of parental monitoring, warmth, and supportiveness relative
to the nonrunaway families. The runaway families also report higher levels
of parental rejection, family violence, and sexual abuse. A study on the
effects of adolescent maltreatment found that maltreatment is associated
with lower parental attachment and commitment to school (Brezina, 1998).
Whether poor attachments are a cause or consequence of maltreatment,
they have the potential to weaken the guardianship typically provided by
such relationships.

The Present Study

The present study draws on the theoretical and empirical work reviewed
above to examine the relationship between childhood maltreatment and
subsequent adolescent violent victimization risk. Little is known about the
relationship between victimization experiences across developmental stages
of the life-course. Victimization theories, when considered in combination
with the existing research on childhood maltreatment, suggest that child-
hood maltreatment would be significantly related to subsequent adolescent
violent victimization. The present study examines whether such a relation-
ship does in fact exist, and if so, whether it can be explained using measures
derived from theories of victimization. In doing so, the following hypothe-
ses are tested:

Hypothesis 1: Childhood maltreatment is positively and significantly

related to the likelihood of experiencing violent victimization dur-
ing adolescence.
Hypothesis 2: Target characteristics can account for the relationship
between childhood maltreatment and violent victimization during
adolescence.
Hypothesis 3: Indicators of opportunity can account for the relationship
between childhood maltreatment and violent victimization during
adolescence.
980 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

Hypothesis 2 reflects the idea that adolescents who were maltreated dur-
ing childhood might be perceived as particularly suitable targets by moti-
vated offenders, due to their personal characteristics that make them appear
vulnerable or antagonize offenders. Therefore, the “target characteristics”
measure various types of perceived vulnerabilities and antagonistic traits that
might be seen as an indicator of target suitability by offenders. Hypothesis 3
reflects the idea that adolescents who were maltreated during childhood
might have different opportunities for victimization, via risky lifestyle and a
lack of guardianship. Therefore, the “indicators of opportunity” measure
various lifestyle risks and guardianship that may differentially expose adoles-
cents to opportunities for violent victimization.

Data
The above hypotheses were tested using public-use data from the National
Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which were col-
lected from a sample of adolescents enrolled in American middle and high
schools (Harris et al., 2009). Systematic sampling and stratification tech-
niques resulted in a sample of 80 high schools and 52 middle schools. During
the 1994-1995 school year, students in Grades 7 through 12 completed the
Wave 1 in-school self-report survey that included items related to demo-
graphic characteristics, education, household structure, risk behaviors, self-
esteem, friendships, and extracurricular activities. A stratified random
sample of these students was selected for an in-home interview during
Wave 1, which included questions related to decision-making processes,
family composition, substance use, and criminal activities. Their primary
caregiver (usually the mother) was also interviewed. For the purposes of the
present study, all independent variables, with the exception of childhood
maltreatment, were created using items from Wave 1. Wave 2 data were
collected in April through August of 1996 during follow-up in-home inter-
views with the adolescents. The dependent variable, adolescent violent vic-
timization, is measured using data collected during Wave 2. Finally, Wave 3
data were collected between August 2001 and April 2002. During Wave 3,
respondents were asked about mistreatment by adults prior to entering the
sixth grade (Harris et al., 2009).
Wave 1 of the public-use Add Health data includes 6,504 cases. Of these
cases, 3,843 participants were interviewed during Waves 2 and 3. The analy-
ses presented below used normalized weights to account for the Add Health
sampling design. Listwise deletion of cases based on missing data for study
variables and sampling weights resulted in 2,762 cases for analysis.
Tillyer 981

Measures
Consistent with previous victimization research using the Add Health data
(Schreck et al., 2007; Schreck & Fisher, 2004; Tillyer et al., 2011), violent
victimization is a dichotomous dependent variable constructed from four
items. Respondents were asked how often in the past 12 months (a) they had
a knife/gun pulled on them, (b) someone shot them, (c) someone stabbed
them, and (d) they were jumped. If respondents reported experiencing any of
these victimizations, they received a code of 1. All others (i.e., those who
experienced none of the aforementioned victimizations) were coded as a 0.
Four survey items were used to create the childhood maltreatment vari-
able. Respondents were asked about the frequency with which they experi-
enced various mistreatments by adults prior to beginning the sixth grade.
Specifically, the items asked how often their parents or other adult caregivers
had not taken care of their basic needs, such as keeping them clean or provid-
ing food or clothing; slapped, hit, or kicked them; and touched them in a
sexual way; forced them to touch him or her in a sexual way; or forced them
to have sexual relations. In addition, they were asked how often social ser-
vices investigated how they were taken care of or tried to take them out of
their living situation. Responses ranged from “this never happened to me” to
“more than 10 times.” Factor scores were created using principal components
factor analysis with varimax rotation. All items loaded on a single factor, with
factor loadings ranging from 0.56 to 0.70.
Five target characteristics were operationalized which theory and previous
research suggest increase an adolescent’s perceived target suitability or
attractiveness as a victim. Furthermore, each of these variables has been iden-
tified as a potential cause or consequence of childhood maltreatment and may
help explain an observed relationship between childhood maltreatment and
violent victimization during adolescence. Psychological vulnerability is a
dichotomous variable that measured whether the adolescent is mentally
retarded or has a learning disability (based on the caregiver’s report). Physical
vulnerability is a dichotomous variable that measures whether the adolescent
uses a brace, has difficulty using his or her limbs, or uses a cane or crutches.
Target antagonism was created by taking the mean of two items which mea-
sured the extent to which the respondent agreed or disagreed with two state-
ments—“you never argue with anyone” and “you never criticize people.”
Responses ranged from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree, with
higher values indicating higher levels of antagonism. Self-esteem was created
by taking the mean of six items which measured the degree to which the
respondent agreed or disagreed with the following statements: “You have a
982 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

lot of good qualities,” “You have a lot to be proud of,” “You like yourself just
the way you are,” “You feel like you are doing everything just about right,”
“You feel socially accepted,” and “You feel loved and wanted.” Responses
ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Finally, poor groom-
ing was created to tap the extent to which the respondent’s physical appear-
ance may contribute to his or her target suitability from an offender’s
perspective. Poor grooming is a dichotomous variable based on the inter-
viewer’s assessment of the respondent. A value of 1 indicates that the inter-
viewer identified the respondent as being poorly or very poorly groomed.
In addition to the target characteristics, eight “opportunity” variables were
operationalized which may increase victimization through risky lifestyles
and activities without capable guardianship. Skip school measured whether
the respondent skipped school for a full day without an excuse during the past
year. Sneak out is a dichotomous measure of whether the respondent snuck
out of his or her home at night without permission in the past year. Drunk
measured whether the respondent drank enough alcohol to get drunk in the
past year. Delinquent peers was measured by taking the mean of three items:
how many friends smoked cigarettes at least once a day, how many friends
drank alcohol at least once a month, and how many friends smoked marijuana
at least once a month. Violent criminal behavior is a dichotomous variable
that measured whether the respondent pulled a knife or gun on someone, shot
someone, or stabbed someone in the past 12 months. Nonviolent criminal
behavior was created by computing the mean of four items which asked
respondents how many times they had stolen from a store, stolen something
worth more than US$50, stolen something worth less than US$50, and stolen
something from a house or building. Parental attachment was created by tak-
ing the mean of four items which asked respondents how close they felt to
their mother, how close they felt to their father, how much their mother cared
about them, and how much their father cared about them. Responses ranged
from 1 = not at all to 5 = very much. Parental supervision was created by
taking the mean of seven items that asked respondents whether their parents
allowed them to make their own decisions regarding the time they must be
home on weekend nights, the people they hang around with, what they wear,
how much television they watch, which television programs they watch,
what time they go to bed on weeknights, and what they eat.
Finally, the respondents’ demographic characteristics were measured
using a series of dummy variables. Prior studies have demonstrated that race/
ethnicity, gender, age, and socioeconomic status (SES) are related to adoles-
cent violent victimization (see, for example, Nofziger, 2009; Schreck &
Fisher, 2004; Tillyer et al., 2011; Wilcox et al., 2009). Race/ethnicity was
Tillyer 983

measured as Black non-Hispanic, Hispanic, and Other non-Hispanic, with

White non-Hispanic as the reference category. Variables were also con-
structed to measure respondents’ gender (1 = male) and age (1 = 15 years of
age or younger). A measure of SES was included that indicates whether the
respondent’s family was receiving public assistance, such as welfare, based
on the parental report (0 = no, 1 = yes). Descriptive statistics for all study
variables are presented in Table 1.

Analytic Strategy
A series of logistic regression models were estimated to examine the rela-
tionship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent victimiza-
tion risk. The initial model explored whether childhood maltreatment was
associated with an increased risk of violent victimization during adoles-
cence, controlling for demographic characteristics. The subsequent models
included additional variables which prior research and theory suggest influ-
ence an adolescent’s violent victimization risk. Specifically, Model 2
included measures of “target characteristics” to examine whether specific
characteristics of the individual could account for a relationship between
childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent victimization risk. Physical
vulnerability, mental vulnerability, target antagonism, self-esteem, and poor
grooming were included in Model 2 in addition to the demographic charac-
teristics and the measure of childhood maltreatment. Model 3 examined
whether an association between childhood maltreatment and the likelihood
of adolescent violent victimization could be explained by variation in oppor-
tunities for victimization. This model included the measures which tap the
adolescent’s lifestyle and potential guardianship, including skipping school,
sneaking out, getting drunk, delinquent peers, violent and nonviolent crimi-
nal behavior, parental attachment, and parental supervision. Finally, a series
of supplementary models (described below) were estimated in light of the
results to further explore the nature of the relationship between childhood
maltreatment and subsequent adolescent violent victimization.

Results
Table 2 presents the results from the logistic regression analyses. Consistent
with Hypothesis 1, Model 1 reveals that childhood maltreatment maintained
a positive and statistically significant relationship with adolescent violent
victimization risk, controlling for race, gender, age, and SES. With respect
to the demographic characteristics, Black non-Hispanics, Hispanics, and
984 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics (N = 2,762).

Variables Minimum Maximum M SD

Dependent variable
  Violent victimization 0.00 1.00 0.14 0.35
Demographics
 Black 0.00 1.00 0.12 0.33
 Hispanic 0.00 1.00 0.11 0.31
 Other 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.25
 Male 0.00 1.00 0.49 0.50
 Young 0.00 1.00 0.54 0.50
  Public assistance 0.00 1.00 0.08 0.27
  Childhood maltreatment −0.48 8.90 0.00 1.00
Target characteristics
  Psychological vulnerability 0.00 1.00 0.12 0.33
  Physical vulnerability 0.00 1.00 0.03 0.18
  Target antagonism 1.00 5.00 3.51 0.81
 Self-esteem 1.00 5.00 4.14 0.58
  Poor grooming 0.00 1.00 0.04 0.19
Lifestyle/opportunity
  Skip school 0.00 1.00 0.21 0.41
  Sneak out 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.29
 Drunk 0.00 1.00 0.13 0.34
  Delinquent peers 0.00 3.00 0.76 0.85
  Violent criminal behavior 0.00 1.00 0.04 0.19
  Nonviolent criminal behavior 0.00 3.00 0.20 0.44
  Parental attachment 1.00 5.00 4.65 0.55
  Parental supervision 0.00 1.00 0.29 0.22

Other non-Hispanics were more likely to be violently victimized relative to

White non-Hispanics, and males were more likely to be victimized relative
to females.
Model 2 examined whether the association between childhood maltreat-
ment and subsequent violent victimization during adolescence can be attrib-
uted to specific target characteristics. Of the five target characteristics, only
two maintained a significant relationship with violent victimization risk.
Psychological vulnerability was significantly related to violent victimization,
indicating that those adolescents whose parents reported they were mentally
retarded and/or had a learning disability were at increased risk of violent
victimization. Conversely, adolescents with higher levels of self-esteem were
 Table 2. Logistic Regression for Adolescent Violent Victimization (N = 2,762).
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

  B SE OR B SE OR B SE OR

Demographics
 Black 0.74*** (0.16) 2.09 0.83*** (0.16) 2.29 0.81*** (0.17) 2.25
 Hispanic 0.60*** (0.16) 1.82 0.63*** (0.17) 1.88 0.59*** (0.17) 1.81
 Other 0.51* (0.21) 1.66 0.51* (0.21) 1.66 0.44* (0.22) 1.55
 Male 1.23*** (0.12) 3.43 1.27*** (0.13) 3.57 1.18*** (0.13) 3.25
 Young −0.19 (0.11) — −0.14 (0.11) — 0.18 (0.13) —
  Public assistance 0.26 (0.18) — 0.24 (0.19) — 0.03 (0.20) —
Childhood maltreatment 0.17*** (0.05) 1.18 0.15** (0.05) 1.16 0.09 (0.05) —
Target characteristics
  Psychological vulnerability 0.36* (0.15) 1.43  
  Physical vulnerability 0.24 (0.30) —  
  Target antagonism 0.02 (0.07) —  
 Self-esteem −0.34*** (0.10) 0.71  
  Poor grooming −0.01 (0.26) —  
Routine activities
  Skip school 0.28* (0.14) 1.33
  Sneak out 0.48** (0.17) 1.61
 Drunk 0.29 (0.17) —
  Delinquent peers 0.36*** (0.08) 1.44
  Violent criminal behavior 1.02*** (0.23) 2.77
  Nonviolent criminal behavior 0.44*** (0.11) 1.55
  Parental attachment −0.14 (0.11) —
  Parental supervision 0.25 (0.27) —

Constant −2.68*** (0.13) −1.47** (0.53) −2.93*** (0.51)  

Nagelkerke R2 0.11 0.12 0.21  
Model χ2 169.00*** 189.31*** 337.92***

985
Note: OR = odds ratio.
*p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.
986 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

significantly less likely to experience violent victimization. Despite these

two significant findings, there is no empirical support for Hypothesis 2; the
inclusion of target characteristics does not appear to strengthen the model or
elucidate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent
violent victimization. The pseudo R2 increased only slightly (from 0.11 to
0.12) with the addition of the target characteristics. Furthermore, the child-
hood maltreatment factor remained significant in Model 2, indicating that
specific target characteristics which were hypothesized to increase an adoles-
cent’s perceived suitability for violent victimization cannot account for the
association between childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent
victimization.
Model 3 examined whether the association between childhood maltreat-
ment and adolescent violent victimization can be explained by indicators of
lifestyle and guardianship which purportedly influence an adolescent’s
opportunity for violent victimization. The results indicate that skipping
school, sneaking out, associating with delinquent peers, engaging in violent
criminal behavior, and engaging in nonviolent criminal behavior were sig-
nificantly related to an increase in an adolescent’s risk for violent victimiza-
tion. Those who skipped school were 1.33 times more likely to experience
violent victimization. Adolescents who reported sneaking out in the past year
were 1.61 times more likely to be victimized. A one-unit change in the delin-
quent peers measure increased violent victimization by a factor of 1.44.
Respondents who self-reported violent criminal behavior were 2.77 times
more likely to be violently victimized themselves, whereas those who self-
reported nonviolent criminal behavior were 1.55 times more likely to be vio-
lently victimized.
Unlike the target suitability variables, the opportunity variables (particu-
larly those measuring a delinquent lifestyle) do improve the model and begin
to shed some light on the association between childhood maltreatment and
subsequent violent victimization during adolescence. First, the pseudo R2
increased substantially (from 0.11 in Model 1 to 0.21 in Model 3). Second,
the inclusion of the opportunity variables in the model rendered the child-
hood maltreatment factor nonsignificant, suggesting that risky lifestyles dur-
ing adolescence might explain why the experience of childhood maltreatment
is associated with an increase in the likelihood of subsequent violent victim-
ization during adolescence.
Although the primary goals of the study were achieved with Models 1
through 3, a series of supplementary models were estimated in an effort to
further explore the nature of the relationship between childhood maltreat-
ment and adolescent victimization. These analyses were intended to examine
Tillyer 987

whether the opportunity variables that were significant in Model 3 mediated

the relationship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent vic-
timization. Mediation was tested using the Baron and Kenny (1986) proce-
dure and the Sobel Test (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). Three criteria must be met
to infer mediation: (a) Variations in the independent variable should signifi-
cantly account for variations in the mediator, (b) the mediator should vary
significantly with the dependent variable, and (c) the relationship between
the independent variable and dependent variable should no longer be signifi-
cant when the mediator is included (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The second and
third criteria were met with the primary analyses presented above: The oppor-
tunity variables varied significantly with adolescent violent victimization
risk, and they rendered childhood maltreatment nonsignificant. The supple-
mentary analyses were intended to explore whether childhood maltreatment
could significantly account for variations in the presumed mediators.
The five measures of opportunity that were significant in Model 3—
skipping school, sneaking out, delinquent peers, violent criminal behavior,
and nonviolent criminal—were each regressed on childhood maltreatment
and the demographic variables.1 The purpose of estimating these models was
to observe whether maltreatment during childhood significantly predicted the
opportunity variables in adolescence, controlling for demographic character-
istics. Childhood maltreatment was positively and significantly related to
skipping school (p ≤ .001), sneaking out (p ≤ .001), associating with delin-
quent peers (p ≤ .001), and nonviolent criminal behavior (p ≤ .001) in adoles-
cence. Childhood maltreatment was not significantly associated with violent
criminal behavior in adolescence. Sobel’s Test (Preacher & Hayes, 2004),
which tests for the significance of the mediated effects, confirms the findings.
Skipping school (z = 1.81, p < .10), sneaking out (z = 2.34, p < .05), associat-
ing with delinquent peers (z = 3.47, p < .01), and nonviolent criminal behav-
ior (z = 2.81, p < .01) were statistically significant as mediators of the
relationship between childhood maltreatment and violent victimization in
adolescence.

Discussion
Research on childhood maltreatment has documented several negative
consequences associated with abuse and neglect, including substance
abuse, poor academic performance, psychological distress, and delin-
quency (Huizinga et al., 1995; Ireland et al., 2002; Kurtz et al., 1993;
Perez, 2000; Shin et al., 2009; Thornberry et al., 2001; Widom et al., 2006;
Wright et al., 2009). Studies that have examined the relationship between
988 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

childhood maltreatment and subsequent victimization tend to focus on

intimate partner abuse or sexual revictimization. Few empirical studies,
however, have examined whether experiencing maltreatment during child-
hood is associated with an increased risk for violent victimization during
adolescence. The research on adolescent violent victimization generally
supports theories that point to opportunity (Cohen & Felson, 1979; Cohen
et al., 1981; Hindelang et al., 1978) and specific target characteristics
(Finkelhor & Asdigian, 1996) as risk factors for victimization. When con-
sidered in conjunction with the research on childhood maltreatment, it
seems likely these two victimization experiences would be correlated. The
present study used a longitudinal design and data from a nationally repre-
sentative sample of adolescents to examine whether childhood maltreat-
ment was associated with an increased risk for violent victimization during
adolescence, and whether such a relationship could be explained by exist-
ing theories of victimization.
Results from the initial logistic regression model demonstrate that child-
hood maltreatment is associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent
violent victimization during adolescence, controlling for demographic vari-
ables. Models 2 and 3 were intended to help explain the significant relation-
ship childhood maltreatment and adolescent violent victimization by
introducing theoretically relevant variables that previous studies have found
to be associated with adolescent violent victimization. These additional anal-
yses suggest that a risky lifestyle, rather than specific target characteristics,
explains the relationship. Although two of the target characteristics were sig-
nificantly related to violent victimization, childhood maltreatment remained
statistically significant in the model. Childhood maltreatment, however, was
rendered nonsignificant in Model 3. Skipping school, sneaking out, associat-
ing with delinquent peers, and engaging in violent and nonviolent criminal
behavior all increased the likelihood of subsequent violent victimization. A
series of additional models intended to further explore the potential mediat-
ing effects of the opportunity variables revealed that maltreatment during
childhood was positively and significantly associated with skipping school,
sneaking out, delinquent peers, and nonviolent criminal behavior during ado-
lescence. Collectively, the analyses suggest that a delinquent lifestyle which
likely exposes one to motivated offenders without capable guardianship
appears to mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and ado-
lescent violent victimization.
The findings from the present study suggest that victimization, like
offending, has causes and consequences that span developmental stages of
the life-course, a finding which has both theoretical and policy implications.
Tillyer 989

In his 2010 Sutherland Address to the American Society of Criminology,

Cullen (2010) argued that the discipline must move beyond what he calls
“adolescence-limited criminology,” stating that “it is obvious that we need
to study what happens not only during but also before and after adolescence”
(p. 310). The study of victimization within criminology has largely been
grounded in an opportunity perspective that identifies the more proximate
causes of criminal events; thus, studies tend to examine the immediate
opportunity structures that facilitate or prevent criminal victimizations,
including the lifestyles and routine activity patterns which presumably cre-
ate such opportunities. Yet the present study suggests that for some people,
victimization early in life by one’s caregivers might set into motion events
and patterns (including the structure of one’s lifestyle and routine activities)
that continue to unfold across developmental stages and contexts. The expe-
rience of maltreatment during childhood, for instance, may lead some ado-
lescents to respond with a delinquent lifestyle, which in turn can increase the
risk of violent victimization. It is clear, however, that not all children respond
to maltreatment in the same manner. Research by Caspi et al. (2002), for
example, suggests that genetics may play a role in how individuals adapt to
experiences of maltreatment during childhood. Their study of a large sample
of male children from birth to adulthood and found a genetic protective fac-
tor which moderated the effect of maltreatment on the development of anti-
social problems (Caspi et al., 2002). Future research should continue to
examine genetic and nongenetic factors that explain the differential adapta-
tions of children to maltreatment.
The findings from the present study should be interpreted in light of poten-
tial limitations associated with measurement of key variables. The measure-
ment of childhood maltreatment warrants further discussion, as the factor
used here has strengths and weaknesses. It is an inclusive measure that cap-
tures several types mistreatment by one’s caregiver(s), it captures the fre-
quency of maltreatment, and it does not rely on official reports, which likely
underestimate instances of childhood maltreatment. Despite these advan-
tages, two specific limitations of the measure should be noted. First, although
the variable measures maltreatment that occurred prior to Grade 6, the data
were collected during Wave 3 of study. The average age of study participants
at Wave 3 was 21.3 years. Given that participants were asked to recall events
that happened a decade or more prior, recall errors are a potential limitation
of the measure. Second, the present study cannot ascertain when the maltreat-
ment began and whether it continued into adolescence. Research by
Thornberry et al. (2001) demonstrates that the timing of the maltreatment
(i.e., whether it occurred in childhood only, in adolescence only, or persisted
990 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

across these developmental stages) is important to consider when examining

the influence of childhood maltreatment on subsequent problem outcomes.
Thornberry et al. found that maltreatment that persisted across childhood and
adolescence and that which occurred only during adolescence were associ-
ated with stronger and more negative consequences than maltreatment that
occurred only during childhood. Unfortunately, the Add Health data do not
measure maltreatment experiences across developmental stages. Future
research should use additional data sources to examine the relationship
between maltreatment experienced during various developmental stages and
subsequent violent victimization risk.
The measurement of the dependent variable—adolescent violent
victimization—should also be noted when interpreting the findings. Recall
that respondents were coded as being victimized in the present study if (a) they
had a knife/gun pulled on them, (b) someone shot them, (c) someone
stabbed them, and/or (d) they were jumped. This variable does not include
all forms of violent victimization, such as bullying or simple assault. Target
characteristics that may contribute to the real or perceived weakness of the
adolescent (e.g., physical or mental disability, low self-esteem, and poor
grooming) may prove to be more important in explaining these other types
of violent victimization.
Despite these noted limitations, the present study offers an examination
of how maltreatment during childhood by one’s caregiver(s) can influence
the likelihood of future violent victimization during adolescence, and that
this relationship is likely explained by a delinquent lifestyle that places the
adolescent in risky situations with motivated offenders and a lack of guard-
ianship. In many ways, however, this study is exploratory; additional
research is needed to fully understand how victimization risk evolves over
the life-course. The next steps in this area of research include identifying the
protective and risk factors which explain differential adaptations to mal-
treatment in childhood, examining the relationship between childhood mal-
treatment and additional measures of violent victimization (which may have
different mediators), and developing more refined measures of childhood
maltreatment which consider the development stages in which the maltreat-
ment begins and ends.

Acknowledgment
Special acknowledgment is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assis-
tance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health data files
is available on the Add Health website (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth).
Tillyer 991

Author’s Note

This research uses data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen
Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen
Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by Grant
P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies
and foundations. No direct support was received from Grant P01-HD31921 for this
analysis.

Note
1. The supplementary models are available from the author on request. Ordinary
least squares (OLS) regression was used to estimate the delinquent peers and
nonviolent criminal behavior models. The other three supplementary models
(skipping school, sneaking out, and violent criminal behavior) were estimated
using logistic regression due to the dichotomous nature of the dependent vari-
ables in each of these models.

References
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction
in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consider-
ations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Black, D. A., Heyman, R. E., & Slep, A. M. S. (2001). Risk factors for child physical
abuse. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 121-181.
Bolger, K. E., Patterson, C. J., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1998). Peer relationships and
self-esteem among children who have been maltreated. Child Development, 69,
1171-1197.
Brezina, T. (1998). Adolescent maltreatment and delinquency: The question of inter-
vening processes. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 35, 71-99.
Brown, J., Cohen, P., Johnson, J. G., & Salzinger, S. (1998). A longitudinal analysis
of risk factors for child maltreatment: Findings of a 17-year prospective study
992 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

of officially recorded and self-reported child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 22, 1065-1078.
Campbell Augustine, M., Wilcox, P., Ousey, G. C., & Clayton, R. R. (2002). Oppor-
tunity theory and adolescent school-based victimization. Violence and Victims,
17, 233-253.
Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Judy, M., Craig, I. W., & Poulton, R.
(2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science,
297, 851-854.
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine
activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608.
Cohen, L. E., Kluegel, J. R., & Land, K. C. (1981). Social inequality and predatory
criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Socio-
logical Review, 46, 505-524.
Collins, M. E. (1998). Factors influencing sexual victimization and revictimization
in a sample of adolescent mothers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 3-24.
Cullen, F. T. (2010). Beyond adolescence-limited criminology: Choosing our future—
The American Society of Criminology 2010 Sutherland Address. Criminology,
49, 287-330.
Dembo, R., Williams, L., Schmeidler, J., Estrellita, B., Werner, W., Alan, G., &
Christensen, C. (1992). A structural model examining the relationship between
physical child abuse, sexual victimization, and marijuana/hashish use in delin-
quent youth: A longitudinal study. Violence and Victims, 7, 41-62.
Finkelhor, D. (1995). The victimization of children: A developmental perspective.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 177-193.
Finkelhor, D., & Asdigian, N. L. (1996). Risk factors for youth victimization: Beyond
a lifestyles theoretical approach. Violence and Victims, 11, 3-20.
Finkelhor, D., Omrod, R., Turner, H., & Hamby, S. L. (2005). The victimization of
children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child Maltreatment, 10,
5-25.
Harris, K. M., Halpern, C. T., Whitsel, E., Hussey, J., Tabor, J., Entzel, P., & Udry, J. R.
(2009). The national longitudinal study of adolescent health: Research design.
Retrieved from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design
Hindelang, M. J., Gottfredson, M. R., & Garofalo, J. (1978). Victims of personal
crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Cam-
bridge, MA: Ballinger.
Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). Urban delinquency and sub-
stance abuse: Initial findings. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Hutchinson, L., & Mueller, D. (2008). Sticks and stones and broken bones: The influ-
ence of parental verbal abuse on peer related victimization. Western Criminology
Review, 9, 17-30.
Tillyer 993

Ireland, T. O., Smith, C. A., & Thornberry, T. P. (2002). Developmental issues in the
impact of child maltreatment on later delinquency and drug use. Criminology, 40,
359-400.
Jaffee, S. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Polo-Tomas, M., Price, T. S., & Taylor, A.
(2004). The limits of child effects: Evidence for genetically mediated child effects
on corporal punishment but not on physical maltreatment. Developmental Psy-
chology, 40, 1047-1058.
Kurtz, P. D., Gaudin, J. M., Jr., Wodarski, J. S., & Howing, P. T. (1993). Maltreat-
ment and the school-aged child: School performance consequences. Child Abuse
& Neglect, 17, 581-589.
Lauritsen, J. L., Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (1992). Conventional and delinquent
activities: Implications for the prevention of violent victimization among adoles-
cents. Violence and Victims, 7, 91-108.
Lauritsen, J. L., & Quinet, F. D. (1995). Repeat victimization among adolescents and
young adults. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11, 143-166.
Lemmon, J. H. (1999). How child maltreatment affects dimensions of juvenile delin-
quency in a cohort of low-income urban youths. Justice Quarterly, 16, 357-376.
Macmillan, R. (2001). Violence and life course: The consequences of victimization
for personal and social development. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 1-22.
Nofziger, S. (2009). Deviant lifestyles and violent victimization at school. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 24, 1494-1517.
Perez, D. M. (2000). The relationship between physical abuse, sexual victimization,
and adolescent illicit drug use. Journal of Drug Issues, 30, 641-662.
Petersilia, J. R. (2001). Crime victims with developmental disabilities: A review
essay. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 655-694.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating
indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instru-
ments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
Sampson, R. J., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1990). Deviant lifestyles, proximity to crime and
the offender-victim link in personal violence. Journal of Research in Crime &
Delinquency, 27, 110-139.
Schreck, C. J. (1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: An extension and
test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633-654.
Schreck, C. J., Burek, M. W., Stewart, E. A., & Miller, J. M. (2007). Distress and vio-
lent victimization among young adolescents: Early puberty and the social inter-
actionist explanation. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 44, 381-405.
Schreck, C. J., & Fisher, B. S. (2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on
violent victimization: Extending routine activities and lifestyle theories. Journal
of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1021-1041.
Schreck, C. J., Fisher, B. S., & Miller, M. J. (2004). The social context of violent
victimization: A study of the delinquent peer effect. Justice Quarterly, 21, 23-47.
994 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)

Schreck, C. J., Stewart, E. A., & Fisher, B. S. (2006). Self-control, victimization, and
their influence on risky lifestyles: A longitudinal analysis using panel data. Jour-
nal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 319-340.
Schreck, C. J., Wright, R. A., & Miller, J. M. (2002). A study of individual and situ-
ational antecedents of violent victimization. Justice Quarterly, 19, 159-180.
Shin, S. H., Edwards, E. M., & Heeren, T. (2009). Child abuse and neglect: Rela-
tions to adolescent binge drinking in the national longitudinal study of Adolescent
Health (Add Health) Study. Addictive Behaviors, 34, 277-280.
Smith, C., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). The relationship between childhood maltreat-
ment and adolescent involvement in delinquency. Criminology, 33, 451-481.
Spano, R., & Nagy, S. (2005). Social guardianship and social isolation: An applica-
tion and extension of lifestyle/routine activities theory to rural adolescents. Rural
Sociology, 70, 414-437.
Stewart, A., Livingston, M., & Dennison, S. (2008). Transitions and turning points:
Examining the links between child maltreatment and juvenile offending. Child
Abuse & Neglect, 32, 51-66.
Swanston, H. Y., Parkinson, P. N., O’Toole, B. I., Plunkett, A. M., Shrimpton, S., &
Kim, O. R. (2003). Juvenile crime, aggression and delinquency after sexual abuse:
A longitudinal study. British Journal of Criminology, 43, 729-749.
Taylor, T. J., Freng, A., Esbensen, F-A., & Peterson, D. (2008). Youth gang member-
ship and serious violent victimization: The importance of lifestyles and routine
activities. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1441-1464.
Thornberry, T. P., Ireland, T. O., & Smith, C. A. (2001). The importance of timing:
The varying impact of childhood adolescent maltreatment on multiple problem
outcomes. Development and Psychopathology, 13, 957-979.
Tillyer, M. S., Rob, T., Holly, V. M., & Rebekah, P. (2011). Reexamining the corre-
lates of adolescent violent victimization: The importance of exposure, guardian-
ship, and target characteristics. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2908-2928.
Tyler, K. A., Hoyt, D. R., & Whitbeck, L. B. (2000). The effects of early sexual abuse
on later sexual victimization among female homeless and runaway adolescents.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 235-250.
Whitbeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., & Ackley, K. A. (1997). Families of homeless and run-
away adolescents: A comparison of parent/caretaker and adolescent perspectives
on parenting, family violence, and adolescent conduct. Child Abuse & Neglect,
21, 517-528.
Widom, C. S., Czaja, S. J., & Dutton, M. A. (2008). Childhood victimization and
lifetime revictimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32, 785-796.
Widom, C. S., Schuck, A. M., & White, H. R. (2006). An examination of pathways
from childhood victimization to violence: The role of early aggression and prob-
lematic alcohol use. Violence and Victims, 21, 675-690.
Tillyer 995

Wilcox, P., Tillyer, M. S., & Fisher, B. S. (2009). Gendered opportunity? School-
based adolescent victimization. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency,
46, 245-269.
Wilson, C., & Brewer, N. (1992). The incidence of criminal victimisation of individu-
als with an intellectual disability. Australian Psychologist, 27, 114-117.
Wright, M. O., Crawford, E., & Del Castillo, D. (2009). Childhood emotional mal-
treatment and later psychological distress among college students: The mediating
role of maladaptive schemas. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33, 59-68.
Zingraff, M. T., Leiter, J., Myers, K. A., & Johnson, M. C. (1993). Child maltreatment
and youthful problem behavior. Criminology, 31, 173-202.

Author Biography
Marie Skubak Tillyer is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminal Justice
at the University of Texas at San Antonio. Her research interests include violence,
victimization, and crime prevention. Previous research has appeared in Criminology,
Crime & Delinquency, Criminal Justice and Behavior, Journal of Research in Crime
& Delinquency, Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, and
Justice Quarterly.