Heterogeneous effects of adolescent violent victimization on problematic outcomes in early adulthood*

• Published date: 01 February 2019
• Date: 01 February 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12198
• Author: Jillian J. Turanovic

Received: 31 January 2018 Revised: 23 August 2018 Accepted: 27 August 2018

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12198

ARTICLE

Heterogeneous effects of adolescent violent

victimization on problematic outcomes in early

adulthood*

Jillian J. Turanovic

College of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida State University

Correspondence

Jillian J. Turanovic, College of Criminology

andCr iminal Justice, Florida State University,

EppesHall, 112 S. Copeland Street, Tallahas-

see,FL 32306-1273.

Email:jturanovic@fsu.edu

∗Additionalsupporting information

canbe found in the listing for this arti-

clein t he WileyOnline Library at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/

crim.2019.57.issue-1/issuetoc.

Abstract

Violent victimization—particularly when it happens to

young people—can inflict a wide array of negative con-

sequences across the life course. Nevertheless, some vic-

tims are more likely to suffer these consequences than oth-

ers, and we do not have a very good understanding of

why that is. One promising avenue of research is to exam-

ine how individuals’ differential risks of being victimized

affect the extent to which they experience negative out-

comes. By using propensity score matching and data from

the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult

Health (N =8,323), in this study I estimate the heteroge-

neous effects of adolescent violent victimization on several

problematic outcomes in early adulthood (violent and prop-

erty offending, subsequent violent victimization, depres-

sive symptoms, hard drug use, and low educational attain-

ment). Individuals’ differential risks of adolescent violent

victimization are estimated with a host of personal, social,

and contextual factors, including prior experiences with

crime and violence. The results show that the consequences

of adolescent victimization in early adulthood are more pro-

nounced for youth with the lowest risks of being victim-

ized. These findings have important implications for theory,

research, and practice, and they emphasize that the conse-

quences of victimization cannot be understood separately

from the sources of victimization.

Criminology. 2019;57:105–135. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crim © 2018 American Society of Criminology 105

106 TURANOVIC

KEYWORDS

adolescence, consequences, early adulthood, heterogeneous treatment

effects, violent victimization

1INTRODUCTION

There is no shortage of literature linking violent victimization to negative life outcomes, especially

when it happens during the teen years. Across various academic disciplines, scholars have uncovered

relationships between youth violent victimization and several behavioral, health, and social conse-

quences later in life (Foster& Brooks-Gunn, 2009; Hanson, Sawyer, Begle, & Hubel, 2010; McDougall

& Vaillancourt,2015). Problems such as depression, substance abuse, crime and violence, and low edu-

cational attainment are all disproportionately found among adults who were victimized in adolescence

(Macmillan & Hagan, 2004; Schaefer et al., 2018; Turanovic & Pratt, 2015). Violent victimization is

therefore considered an adverse life eventthat disr upts healthyyouth development across a wide range

of life domains (D'Andrea, Ford, Stolbach, Spinazzola, & van der Kolk, 2012; Margolin, Vickerman,

Oliver, & Gordis, 2010; van der Kolk, Roth, Pelcovitz, Sunday, & Spinazzola, 2005)—it can violate a

youth's sense of safety and control, lead to distressing flashbacks, and can take a toll on brain structure

and function (Anda et al., 2006; Bremner, 2006; Lupien, McEwen, Gunnar, & Heim, 2009). These

issues often result in a number of serious problems that endure over the life course.

Yetnot all victims will ultimately experience negative life outcomes, and we do not have a very good

understanding of why that is. One promising explanation might be rooted in the idea that youth can be

affected differently by victimization according to their varied risks of being victimized in the first place.

Victimization is not distributed randomly throughout the population, and adolescents who are most

at risk for violent victimization tend to lead much different lives than those who are least at risk. For

instance, youth with the highest risks of being violently victimized tend to face many disadvantages:

They live in socially disorganized, high-crime communities; they are exposed to more adversities in

childhood and adolescence; they tend to have less self-control, weaker social ties, and lower levels

of social support; and they are more likely to engage in risky behaviors that put them in harm's way

(Stewart, Schreck, & Simons, 2006; Tillyer & Tillyer, 2016; Turanovic & Pratt, 2014). Alternatively,

youth with low risks of victimization are more likely to live in socially advantaged communities, they

are rarely exposed to crime or violence, they often refrain from participating in risky behaviors, and

they tend to have strong familialbonds and social att achmentsthat protect them from har m (Lauritsen,

Laub, & Sampson, 1992; Posick & Rocque, 2015; Schreck,Wright, & Miller, 2002). These various life

circumstances not only affect the likelihood of victimization, but they can also affect how individuals

cope with and respond to being victimized (Agnew,2006; Fagan, Wright, & Pinchevsky, 2014; Heinze,

Cook, Wood, Dumadag, & Zimmerman, 2018). It is therefore reasonable to expect that victimization

might impact youth differently according to their varied risks of being victimized in adolescence.

The problem, however, ist hat it is unclear as to whether the consequences of victimization over the

life course will be experienced more acutely by those with a high versus a low risk of victimization.

Indeed, two competing hypotheses can be derived from the literature. The first is the cumulative

disadvantage hypothesis, in which it is posited that youth with the highest risks of victimization

should be most likely to suffer from its consequences. Thoits (2010: S46) characterized cumulative

disadvantage as a “version of the ‘Matthew Effect’ (Merton, 1968), in which people who have

advantages accrue more over time, while people who lack advantages increasingly lose what they

have.” As adversities pile up, they lead to an increasing number of problems across the life course