Running head: CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION 1

Consequences of Victimization and Polyvictimization in Spanish Adolescents

Monica Llobera Ramrez
University of Barcelona

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

Abstract
Nowadays, it is broadly studied child and adolescent victimization and polyvictimization and
their effects short and long term. Our objetive in this study was to determine if specific types
of lifetime victimization from Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ), in Spanish
sample of 1086 adolescents from 12 to 17 years old (M=14.53; SD=1.75), were related with
specific trauma symptoms from the Youth Self-Report (YSR), and if these relationships
remained significant when adding polyvictimization. We also wanted to distinguish
differences between gender and age. Our results show a high percentage of victimization
(82%) and polyvictimization (13%). The results also show that some specific victimizations
are strongly related with some specific trauma symptoms and that some effects are reduced or
dissapear when polyvictimization is taken into account. We also found some statical
significant differences between males and females and by age, and we could see that boys are
more likely to be involved in conventional crimes and girls have more probabilities to suffer
from sexual, maltreatment and electronic victimization and have higher rates of distress in
general. Regarding to age, older adolescents are, in general, more victimized with some
exceptions but there are not many differences with respect to levels of trauma symptoms.

Keywords: victimization, polyvictimization, Spain, psychopathology, externalizing and

internalizing symptoms, adolescence, Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire, Youth self-report

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

Consequences of Victimization and Polyvictimization in Spanish Adolescents

The study of child victimization and poly-victimization has suffered a growth in

theoretical and empirical literature in the last years due to the concern about the effects it can
generate (Hickman, L.J., Jaycox, L.H., Setodji, C.M., Kofner, A., Schultz, D. et al., 2012). It
has been discovered that children are even more victimized than adults because they can
suffer from all the victimizations of adults but also from offenses that are particular to their
status, such as physical neglect, which are not suffered by most adults (Finkelhor, D.,
Ormrod, R. K., Turner, H. A., Avery-Leaf, S., Cascardi, M. et al.; 2007). Many studies have
pointed out the high range of children exposed to at least some kind of victimization, defined
victimization as the harms caused by human agents acting in violation of social norms
(Finkelhor,D., 2011). For example, Hickman et al. (2012) mention a 61% of victimized
children in a sample of years 17 or younger. Dong, F., Cao, F., Cheng, P., Cui, N., & Li, Y.
(2013) found a 66.2% in a Chinese sample of children between 12 and 18 years old. And Cyr,
K., Chamberland,C., Clment,M.E., Lessard,G., Wemmers,J.A. et al. (2013) found a 76% in
a sample of Canadian children between ages 2 -17, similar percentage to the one found by
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2009b) who found a 71% of children living in
the contiguous United States.
Finkelhor et al. (2009b) showed in his study that average of victimizations in a year
increases with age in general terms. But there are some exceptions such as physical bullying
and sibling assaults, which decrease in adolescence. In addition to age, they mention that
gender is also a factor that influences the type of victimization and its evolution. The same
was found by Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., & Fisher, H. L. (2013) in the UK. They
discovered that males experienced more victimization by peers, more physical violence from
non-caregivers, and more exposure to community violence, while females older than 11

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

reported more experiences of sexual victimization than males. Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D.,
& Ormrod, R. (2006) also found a relation between social status and childhood victimization
and adversity. They found that children with low income and education suffered more types
of victimizations than those with a higher social status. In Spain, there are not many
investigations about victimization. However, a study recently carried out by Pereda, N.,
Guilera, G., & Abad, J. (2014) in a Spanish sample of adolescents between 12 and 17 years
old, showed a higher percentage of victimization, which reached the 83%.
Effects of specific trauma exposures. Throughout the years, it has been
demonstrated that certain types of child victimization can cause certain problems of
development and mental health (Hickman et al., 2012). For example, Turner, H. A.,
Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2009) found a clear relationship between sexual abuse and selfesteem issues and depression whereas Luthra, R. Abramowitz, R., Greenberg, R., Schoor, A.,
Newcorn, J. et al. (2009) found a significant relationship between witnessing domestic
violence, physical abuse, sexual abuse and PTSD. In contrast, some studies have
demonstrated that some kinds of victimization can also cause externalizing problems such as
delinquency and substance abuse (Cuevas, C. A., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H. A., & Ormrod, R.
K., 2007). Radford et al. (2013) found in their study that the highest trauma scores were
associated with maltreatment by a caregiver and victimization by peers in children from the
UK.
Effects of Conventional Crimes. A variety of studies have noted a strong association
between juvenile victimization and juvenile delinquency. The most common explanation in
criminology for this association and overlap is the notion that delinquency-prone youth put
themselves at considerable risk for victimization because of their risky activities.
However, this provides only a partial inventory of the relationship between victimization and
delinquent behavior and fails to account for the circumstances

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

of a variety of youth. This indicates that the combination of victimization and delinquency is
clearly a marker for those with greater mental health problems.
who were victimized but not delinquent when they were younger, start to engage in
delinquent behavior as they grow older. Cuevas et al. (2007)
Effects of Child Maltreatment. Parental neglect and abuse are the most prevalent
form of lifetime child maltreatment in the family and the best risk factors. (Radford et al.,
2013; Jafee, S.R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., Polo-Toms, M. & Taylor, A., 2007). In a metaanalisys with data between 1990 and 2006, conducted by Evans, S. E., Davies, C., & DiLillo,
D. (2008), it was found a small to medium relation between exposure to domestic violence
and internalizing and externalizing problems, but a strong association in trauma symptoms.
They found that boys who had a history of exposure to domestic violence exhibited
significantly more externalizing symptoms than did girls with a similar history but did not
find differences in internalizing problems. There were no differences between ages. However,
although Ellonen, N., Piispa, M., Peltonen, K., & Oranen, M. (2013) also found a relation
between externalizing problems like increased risk of delinquency, regular alcohol use, and
smoking, they found no differences by gender. The same authors had found different results
in previous studies (Peltonen, K., Ellonen, N., Larsen, H. B., & Helweg-Larsen, K., 2010),
where they found higher levels of symptoms in boys than girls, relating higher levels of
internalizing symptoms (anxiety and depression) among girls and externalizing among boys.
In this study they also mentioned the relation between severity of the maltreatment and cooccurrence of different kind of maltreatment with the severity of psychological problems.
Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., Fisher, H., Bassett, C. et al. (2011) found a clear
relationship between self-harm and suicidal ideation and severe maltreatment by a parent or
guardian to boys and girls older than 11. They also mention delinquency and poor emotional
wellbeing for all children and adolescents as a common effect of maltreatment. Child

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

maltreatment (physical abuse or neglect) is the form of victimization that has the strongest
independent association with depression and anger/aggression (Peltonen et al., 2010; Turner
et al., 2006).
Effects of Sexual Victimization. Sexual victimization is related to decreases in selfesteem and higher levels of depressive symptoms (Turner et al., 2009). Briere, J.N., & Elliot,
D.M. (1994) estimated that sexual abused children have a four-times-greater lifetime risk for
major depression compared with adults who have not been sexually abused.
The meta-analytic investigation conducted by Oddone Paolucci, E., Genuis, M.L. &
Violato, C. (2001) revealed a very high relationship between child sexual abuse (CSA) and
posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, suicide, sexual promiscuity, poor academic
achievement and engaging in victim-perpetrator cycle, being the PTSD the higher. Gender,
socioeconomic status (SES), type of abuse, age when abused, relationship to perpetrator and
number of incidents of abuse were not found to mediate the effect of CSA on the outcomes.
Andrews, G., Corry, J., Slade, T., Issakidis, C., & Swanston, H. (2004) found significant
relationships between CSA and psychopathology in adulthood. Depression, particularly for
women who experienced more severe forms of abuse; PTSD, particularly for those who have
experienced more severe forms of abuse; Alcohol abuse/dependence and drug dependence
but only for the more severe forms of abuse, significant only for women, and almost
significant in men. Cutajar, M. C., Mullen, P. E., Ogloff, J. R., Thomas, S. D., Wells, D. L.,
& Spataro, J. (2010) confirmed in their study that sexual abuse in childhood increases the risk
for subsequent psychiatric disorders in both childhood and adulthood. The most common
effects of CSA during childhood were PTSD, known drug abuse, and conduct disorder.
Females who had suffered CSA, are more likely to be diagnosed with internalizing problems,
such as depression and anxiety (Turner et al., 2009), affective disorder, PTSD, and borderline
personality disorder in adulthood (Cutajar et al. 2010), whereas males were significantly

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

more likely to be diagnosed with externalizing problems such as conduct disorder, substance
abuse (Turner et al., 2009) and antisocial personality disorder (Cutajar et al. 2010).
Spataro, J., Mullen, P. E., Burgess, P. M., Wells, D. L., & Moss, S. A. (2004) in a
study with people who had been sexually abused in childhood, found a relationship between
sexual victimization and anxiety disorders, personality disorders, organic disorders,
childhood mental disorders and conduct disorders. Major affective disorders were only
significant for females. They did not find any association between child sexual abuse and
psychosis, schizophrenic disorders, alcohol- and drug-related disorders and other affective
and somatoform disorders.
Effects of Peer and Sibling Victimization. Victimization by peers or siblings is the
most prevalent experience according to Radford et al. (2013). To examine mental health,
(Tucker, C. J., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Shattuck, A., (2013); Tucker, C. J., Finkelhor, D.,
Turner, H., & Shattuck, A. M., 2014) found that children and adolescent who were victimized
by both siblings and peers showed the greatest distress when compared with only one, peer or
sibling. Peer victimization significantly predicts increases in externalizing (Reijntjes, A.,
Kamphuis, J.H., Prinzie, P., Boelen, P.A., & Telch, M.J., 2011; Perren, S., Ettekal, I., &
Ladd, G., 2013) and internalizing (Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J.H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M.J.,
2010; Perren et al. 2013) problems over time. Regarding to gender, girls show higher levels
of internalizing symptoms but there are no differences with externalizing symptoms (Perren
et al. 2013). Reijntjes, emphasizes the fact that this relationship between peer victimization
and symptomatology could be a symmetrical bi-directional relationship (Reijntjes, 2010) and
it can contribute to the high stability of peer victimization. (Reijntjes, 2011). Kochel, K. P.,
Ladd, G. W., & Rudolph, K. D. (2012) also mention this relationship with reference to
depressive youth.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

Studies drawn from the meta-analysis by Hawker, D.S., & Boulton, M.J. (2000)
showed a relationship between peer victimization and psychological problems, including
depression, loneliness, and anxiety and social anxiety, as well as global low self-esteem and
negative social self-concept, being depression the most significant.
Effects of Witnessing and Indirect Victimization. It includes both community and
family violence. Boys are more exposed to episodes of violence than girls (Schwab-Stone,
M., Koposov, R., Vermeiren, R., & Ruchkin, V., 2013; Ruchkin, V., Henrich, C. C., Jones, S.
M., Vermeiren, R., & Schwab-Stone, M., 2007). Exposure to community violence has its
greatest association with endorsement of PTSD symptoms in children and adolescents,
followed by externalizing symptoms, more likely to appear in response to cumulative
exposure over time and being internalizing symptoms the lowest, with stronger effects in
recent exposures. (Fowler, P. J., Tompsett, C. J., Braciszewski, J. M., Jacques-Tiura, A. J., &
Baltes, B. B., 2009). These researchers found that adolescents showed higher levels of
externalizing, children higher of internalizing problems, particularly girls (Schwab-Stone et
al., 2013), but no differences in PTSD. Ruchkin et al. (2007) point out that posttraumatic
stress symptoms can mediate in the level of internalizing and psychopathology and
aggressive behavior (in boys), suggesting that greater degree of stress leads to higher levels
of internalizing symptomatology and more violence in boys. Ellonen et al. (2013) compared
children who had witnessed parental physical violence with those who had experienced
parental physical violence or who had no experiences of violence, and they found for the
firsts a higher risk of frequent smoking and drug use than the others. Comparing similar
groups, Radford et al. (2013) found that both adolescents between 11-17s who had been
maltreated by a parent or guardian and adolescents who had witnessed family violence had
higher levels of self-harm and suicidal ideation. Similar results were found by

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

Effects of Electronic Victimization. Electronic victimization is low compared with

victimizations like face-to-face assaults, child maltreatment, and property crimes (Mitchell,
K. J., Finkelhor, D., Wolak, J., Ybarra, M. L., & Turner, H., 2011). It is interesting the results
discovered by Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M., & Finkelhor, D. (2007) and later on by Mitchell et
al. (2011) where they found that the majority of youth who reported at least one online
victimization also reported at least one offline victimization but the percentage in the
oppositte was not so high.
In terms of psychopathology, according to Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., &
Finkelhor, D. (2006), the majority of youth who suffer from electronic victimization are not
upset by the experience. However, to those who report negative effects, depressive
symptomatology, delinquency and substance use are the most frequent (Mitchell et al.,
2007). Female respondents report significantly higher depression and suicidal ideation scores
than male (Turner, M. G., Exum, M. L., Brame, R., & Holt, T. J., 2013). and more negative
social emotional outcomes (Brown, C. F., Demaray, M. K., & Secord, S. M., 2014).
It is not clear wheter young people report depressive symptoms because of the
negative Internet experience, or whether this symptomatology contributes to later negative
online incidents (Ybarra, M. L., 2004; Mitchell et al., 2007). Regarding bidireccional
relationship between electronic victimization and negative outcomes, Van den Eijnden, R.,
Vermulst, A., van Rooij, A. J., Scholte, R., & van de Mheen, D. (2014) could not find a
bidirecctional relationship. They found that psychosocial problems such as social anxiety or
feeling of loneliness, would increase the risk of online victimization but there were not
evidence that online victimization would increase psychosocial problems. In fact, their results
suggest that online victimization may protect against later feelings of loneliness.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

10

Polyvictimization. As Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., & Turner, H.A. (2009) pointed
out, researchers who studied childhood victimization up to now has been focused in a single
victimization such as sexual abuse (Turner et al., 2006), child maltreatment, bullying, and
exposure to community violence, but a few people have tried to integrate all victimizations
and assess their risks. Studies that take into account only a single victimization may
overstimate mental health, both internalizing and externilizing, consequences, to particular
traumatic events when it could be the result of a combination of different victimization
experiences Turner et al. (2006). Many studies have demonstrated that children who
experience one type are also likely to be exposed to other forms of victimization. For
example, Ellonen et al. (2013) found that children who had both witnessed and been a victim
of physical violence at home had higher risk of frequent alcohol use, delinquent behavior and
mental health problems than children who had only suffered witnessing victimization.
Mitchell et al. (2011) say that online victimization does not occur in isolation. Children and
young who had been maltreated by a parent or caregiver in childhood have significantly
higher risks of also experiencing victimization by siblings, peers, or an intimate partner, and
being exposed to domestic violence (Radford et al., 2013). In their study, Mitchell found that
96% of youth who reported a past-year online victimization also reported an offline
victimization in the same period. The same author, in another study (Mitchell et al., 2007)
mentioned that the number of different types of victimizations experienced is more strongly
related to the odds of negative symptomatology than individual victimizations, becoming
polyvictimization a consistent predictor of negative symptoms (Hickman et al., 2012,
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A., 2007b). According to that, Dong et al. (2013)
observed that those children who experienced PV had more symptoms of depression and
anxiety than those non-polyvictimized. Nevertheless, Hickman found that lifetime sexual
victimization was the only which could be associated with trauma symptoms by itself after

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

11

controlling for the influence of polyvictimization and Radford et al. (2013) discovered that
the relationship between polyvictimization and trauma symptoms is higher with young over
the age of 11.
The Present Study
Since most of the studies have been conducted with North Europeand and North
American samples, the present study aims to build knowledge about the adverse effects of
different forms of child victimization and polyvictimization on a communitary sample of
Spanish children. Specifically, the objectives of the study are to explore whether different
victimization experiences are related to a set of negative symptoms, and the effect of
polyvictimization to explain psychopathology that have been identified in previous literature,
child internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. We will also analyze the influence of
gender and age in the symptoms.
Method
Participants
The sample comprised 1,151 students from 7 secondary different schools in Catalonia.
All participating schools belong to middle and high schools socioeconomic levels. Schools
were randomly chosen in order to represent different school systems and different levels of
education. From these 1,151, only those with ages 12-17 (Mean = 14,53; SD= 1,75) years old
and those who answered were chosen and those who had more than 1 missing in the JVQ
were excluded. Finally, 1,086 students were analized, 53% boys and 47% girls with two
respondents missing. The participants were primarly Spanish (95%), and 5% from different
European, South American and other countries, being none of them from English speaking
language.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

12

Procedure
Analyses were conducted in a year period between January, 2012, and January,
2013.The translation of the scales into Spanish/Catalan followed the established guidelines.
The sample selection procedures were carried out on randomly, depending on its location in
the province of Barcelona and Lleida.The Study has received ethical approval from the
Institutional Review Board of the University of Barcelona. Prior to data collection, all school
boards granted permission. Before participating, both parents and students passive informed
consent was gathered. They received a letter in which they were informed about the general
purpose of the research. If parents did not agree with their childs participation, they could
sign the letter and give it back to the school. Students were told about all aspects of the study
such as confidentiality of participation, and that they were free to decline or to withdraw from
participation at any time.
Administration of the survey was conducted in the classroom. The questionnaires
were administered on a regular school day by a group of trained personnel (psychologists and
criminologists with experience) who completed a formal training to attain standard on the
measures reported here. Researchers made certain that students were sitting far enough from
one another to ensure confidentiality. Students were then given survey packets, each labeled
with a participant ID number, and asked to answer all questions honestly. The researchers
read the instructions aloud. After that, researchers were available to answer questions once
students began responding to survey items. At the end, students were given a list of phone
numbers to call in case they need due to their experience and emotional reaction to the
questionnaires. Students were informed that information given was confidential but that if the
researchers thought they were in danger of serious harm, they would be recontacted by a
clinical member of the research team, keeping the contact until the situation was resolved or

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

13

brought to the attention of appropriate authorities. Researchers maintained a passwordprotected file with a list linking student names to ID numbers for this purpose.

Mesures
Sociodemographic variables. Gender, age and family structures were assessed. All
information was obtained from students interview. To stablish SES, we based on parental
education and current employment based on the Hollingshead index (Hollingshead, A.B,
1975).
The Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ; Finkelhor, D., Hamby, S.L.,
Ormrod, R. & Turner, H., 2005). To assess victimization and polyvictimization, we used
the JVQ Spanish version, which is divided into five general categories of exposure: (a)
conventional crime (9 type items), (b) child maltreatment (4 type items), (c) victimization by
peers and siblings (6 type items), (d) sexual victimization (6 type items) and (e) witnessing
violence (9 type items). Apart from that, we added a sixth category called electronic
victimization with 2 type items following recommendations of the National Survey of
Children Exposure To Violence (NatSCEV). It also has a close-ended follow-up questions for
those who has reported some kind of victimization and it includes information about the
frequency, the people who were implicated and some specific questions about the
victimization reported.
The questionnaire is designed for children between 8 and 17 years old. There are two
perspectives, lifetime and past year victimization but in the current study, we talk about
lifetime victimization reports.
With respect to scoring, it is possible to consider item-level responses or to compute
dichotomous scores for each module (i.e., a score of 1would indicate that at least one type
of victimization within that module was reported). In this paper we used both scoring

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

14

methods. National norms exist for this measure (Pereda et al., 2014), and preliminary
evidence exists for the questionnaires construct validity and reliability (Finkelhor et al.,
2005; Holt et al., 2007).
Youth Self-Report (YSR; Achenback, T.M. & Rescolta, L., 2001). To mesure the
possible internalizing and externalizing consequences of victimization, we used the YSR
Spanish. It is a self-report questionnaire for children between 11 and 18 years old used to
assess emotional and and behavioral problems.
Validity and reliability of the YSR has been documented, and extensive normative
data are available for children ages 11 to 18 (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). It is divided into
two parts; the first part assesses sport, social and academic competences. The second part is a
112 questionnaire which 16 assess the frequency for prosocial and adaptative behavior and
the rest a broad range of problematic behavior.

Data analysis
To explore the relationship between lifetime victimization and polyvictimization and
childrens behavioral and mental health symptoms we conducted a multiple linear regression
controlling for sex and age using SPSS 20.0. Unstandardized Scores from Youth Self-report
and dichotomous modules scores from the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire were used in
the study. Only respondents with less of two missing items in the JVQ were included in the
analyses. The cut-off point to determine polyvictimization was made according to Finkelhor
et al. (2005) distinction, considering lifetime polyvictims only those with the highest number
of victimization (those with 7 or more victimizations).
Dependent variables were all the symptomatic responses included in the YSR (youth
self-report questionnaire) divided by groups: anxiety/depression, withdrawn/depression,
somatic complaints, social problems, thought problems, attention problems, rule-breaking

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

15

problems, aggressive behavior, internalizing problem, externalizing problems and total

problems. Independent variables included gender (male=0; female=1), age (in years), lifetime
victimization (categorical score) and polyvictimization.

Results
Prevalence of lifetime victimization. Among the total sample, the results show an
82% of adolescents who had experienced at least one lifetime victimization (37% girls, 45%
boys) and reaching the maximum of 16 with a mean of 3 (SD= 2.9) victimizations. The most
common victimizations were crime (61%), peer (48%) and witness (48%) victimizations. The
prevalence of the six different groups of victimization according to JVQ are shown in Table 1
and table 2 classified by gender and groups of age. There are some differences between
gender and age. Boys older than 14 years old suffer more crime victimization than girls and
young boys. Girls suffer more sexual and internet victimization than boys. By contrast, we
found no differences of gender in peer and witness victimizations. With respect to age, in
general, the group of older adolescents, 15-17, have a significant higher prevalence of crime,
witness and internet victimization and higher but not significant prevalence of maltreatment,
sexual and peer victimization than the younger group, 12-14.
Prevalence of lifetime polyvictimization. Of those who had experienced any
victimization, we found a 13 % who were labeled as polyvictims, with 7 or more lifetime
victimizations (see table 3). In table 3 we can see the percentage of each single victimization
and compare which proportion of adolescents with certain victimizations are polyvictims as
well. Experiencing sexual victimization is the most related with being a polyvictim, with a
53% of adolescents classified as polyvictims, followed by Internet (42%) and maltreatment
(38%) victimization. When we looked at gender and age, we found a higher percentage in

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

16

polyvictimization in the oldest group but we could not find a significant difference in gender
(see table 1 and table 2)
Effects of victimization and polyvictimization. Victimization and polyvictimization
was a powerful predictor of trauma symptoms (Finkelhor et al. 2007b). To see if there are any
relationship between specific symptomology and specific victimizations, we performed a
hierarchical multiple regression controlling for the two demographic factors, gender and age.
We analyzed every single category of the YSR (dependent variable) with all the categories of
the JVQ with and without polyvictimization.
The results (see Table 4) show the statically significant beta standardized coefficients
and we can see that there are some significant relationship between symptomatology and
victimizations. We found that 21.8% (F6,799 =38.32, p<0.001) of variance in total problems
were explained by lifetime victimizations. When polyvictimization was entered into the
equation, it increased to a 22.3% (F6, 799 =39.59, p<0.001) and these changes were
significantly different in boys and girls, with higher effect in boys than girls. Most of the
effects explained by victimizations and polyvictimization have a R2 higher than 10%, except
for attention problems and withdrawn/depressed symptoms that only have a 4.8% (F4,1038
=14.26, p<0.001) and 4.7% (F4, 1045= 13.95, p<0.001 ) of variance explained, respectively.
Child maltreatment and crime victimizations represented the strongest predictor of all
the different symptomatology problems, as there are effects on all the symptomatology from
the YSR, followed by peer and sexual victimization. When polyvictimization was included in
the equation and it was statically significant, the coefficients of these types of victimizations
decrease but they still remained significant in most of the symptoms. However, being a
polyvictim reduced to non-significance the association between peer victimization and
externalizing problems and sexual victimization and aggressive behavior. On the other hand,
we can see on the table that witnessing and Internet victimizations are not related with almost

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

17

any symptomatology. Moreover, those coefficients that were significant when we did not take
into account polyvictimization, where no longer significant when we included it. It is
important to note that the effects of peer and sexual victimization, even though they are
significant, the coefficients are very low except for the effect of sexual victimization on rulebreaking problems and somatic complaints. It is noteworthy the fact that the results show
little relationship between victimization and the variable withdrawn/depressed of the YSR.
We found only relationship on this symptoms, in crime and maltreatment victimization.
(b=0.103, p<0.01; b=0.134, p< 0.001). It is interesting to emphasize that the only
victimization which were not significantly related with rule-breaking, even without
polyvictimization, was peer victimization. The same happens in witnessing and internet
victimization with thought and externalizing problems, respectively.
Polyvictimization was only significantly related with thought (b=0.128, p<0.001),
rule-breaking problems (b=0.165, p<0.001), aggressive behavior (b= 0.143, p<0.001) and
externalizing symptoms (b= 0.162, p<0.001) when all the other variables were held constant.
Gender is related with almost all trauma symptoms, except for thought and attention
problems, aggressive behavior and externalizing problems. Age is related with attention
problems and externalizing problems. Withdrawn/depressed symptoms, somatic complaints
and rule-breaking problems are related with both, age and gender. There is a positive trend in
the relation between age and all kind of symptomatology, except for somatic complaints,
which decreases with age.
Discussion
Our findings show that most of the adolescents in this sample experienced at least one
kind of victimization during their lifetime (82%). These results are similar to others studies
where they found almost the same percentage (Finkelhor et al., 2009; Turner et al., 2010, Cyr
et al., 2013). When analyzing polyvictimization, we found a total of 138 (13%) out of 1186

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

18

adolescents, the same results found by Pereda et al. (2014b). It also show that children who
suffer from one type of victimization are also likely to be exposed to other kinds of
victimization (Turner et al.; 2006). For example, we found that 53% of all children who had
suffered any sexual victimization and 42% who had suffered electronic victimization, were
also poly-victims. Similar results were found in other studies (Turner et al., 2010b; Cyr et al.,
2013, Finkelhor et al., 2005).Therefore, we underscore the importance of analyzing the data
considering all lifetime trauma exposures together. Studies that consider only one type of
victimization at a time may associate trauma symptoms to particular traumatic experiences
when, in fact, the result is associated with a combination of different victimization
experiences.
Our study reveal that some types of victimization are more common between
adolescents than others. Crime was seen in the 61% of the adolescents and, peer and
witnessing victimization reached almost the 50%. On the other hand, sexual victimization
was the lowest, with only a 9% of prevalence. The study carried out by Pereda et al. (2014)
found the same results. In line with that, Holt et al. (2007) discovered in their sample that
half of youth with multiple victimization were categorized as bully-victims.
As many studies demonstrate, age and gender may influence the results in both
prevalence and the effects of victimization on trauma symptoms. When we classified
victimizations by gender, we could see that conventional crimes had a higher prevalence in
boys than girls (68% versus 54%). On the other side, maltreatment, sexual and electronic
victimization had a significant higher prevalence in girls than boys (29% versus 22%, 14%
versus 4% and 18% versus 8%, respectively). These results go in line with a previous study
by Pereda et al. (2014) and others studies from America (Cyr et al., 2013; Finkelhor et al.,
2009). We also took into account the age of the adolescents, because, according to Finkelhor
et al. (2009) it is assumed that victimization and polyvictimization should increase with age.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

19

Our results confirm this assumption in general. Older adolescents are more victimized and
polyvictimized (87% and 15% in group 15-17 versus 78% and 10% in group 12-14).
However, just as in the study of Pereda et al. (2014), there were no age differences in
maltreatment and sexual victimization and neither with peer. These results are against what
other studies found (Cyr et al., 2013, Finkelhor et al., 2009).
Our findings also show that different forms of lifetime victimization and
polyvictimization are related with some forms of trauma symptomatology. Moreover, we
analyzed if the effects of victimization are reduced when adding polyvictimization, according
to past research studies (e.g. Finkelhor et al., 2009). In this study, Finkelhor et al. (2009)
showed that maltreatment and sexual assault were the only types of victimization that kept
significant to predict trauma symptoms after adding polyvictimization. However, our results
also show conventional crimes and peer victimization as significant to predict certain
symptomatology. These differences may be related to differences in methodology and/or
analysis of data. As Hickman et al. (2012) suggest, we think that the mix of exposure
experiences is what predict symptomatology on adolescents, more than the exposure to a
single victimization after controlling for polyvictimization or the total lifetime victimization.
Our study relates polyvictimization with externalizing problems but could not find
any relationship with internalizing problems when the other victimizations kept held constant.
It does not coincide with the study of Pereda et al. (2014b) which found an association
between polyvictimization and severe internalizing symptoms. This discrepancy could be due
to the differences in the analysis methodology and the fact that they divided internalizing
symptomatology in groups of severity, which could be more precise to determine
relationships.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

20

Limitations
Our study has some limitations that should be taken into account. It is a crosssectional study and, therefore, we can only make associations between measures but
inferences of causality or directionality cannot be made. Another limitation is that all the data
was collected through self-reports in big groups, which could bring some bias due to over or
underreported information. Also, even with a large sample, we cannot assume
representativeness because the adolescents who took part in the study were all from a specific
are in Spain. Moreover, they were all studying at schools, which exclude all of those who are
not attending schools and could be more victimized than the one we analyzed. In addition,
although we took into account age and gender as two important SES variables, we did not
analyzed the effect that other unmeasured factors could concern to trauma symptoms, such as
single parent families, living with biological/stepfamilies or nonvictimization stressors. And
finally, another important thing is that the fact that we grouped together exposures types that
may have very different impact on children (e.g. it could have different effect being bullied
by peers than by siblings or being sexual abused by a parent or by an unknown person). If we
had analyzed more specifically we probably could obtain different results on trauma
symptomatology.
Conclusions and Future Research
Identifying adolescents victims and polyvictims and the related symptomatology is
necessary in order to specify the social and behavioral factors that cause such distressful
situations. As previous research mentioned, the likelihood to accumulate victimizations over
time is high, so that a study with younger children is needed to prevent later victimizations
and especially polyvictimization. The effects of trauma experiences are severe, so that a fast
an effective is required. The link between different entities (child welfare agencies,
community services, schools, governmental organizations) is necessary to prevent future

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

21

mental health problems. Since there are different types of victimization, different areas of
expertise is needed so as to develop suitable interventions and treatments. Another point that
need further studies is the urgency to distinguish specific needs depending on gender and age.
Finally, an important issue to consider is the need to clarify the concept and
boundaries of victimization and especially polyvictimization.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

22

References
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. (2001). ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington:
Aseba.
lvarez-Lister, M. S., Pereda, N., Abad, J., & Guilera, G. (2014). Polyvictimization and its
relationship to symptoms of psychopathology in a southern European sample of
adolescent outpatients. Child abuse & neglect, 38(4), 747-756. doi:
10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.09.005
Andrews, G., Corry, J., Slade, T., Issakidis, C., & Swanston, H. (2004). Child sexual abuse.
Comparative quantification of health risks: global and regional burden of disease
attributable to selected major risk factors, Chapter, 23, 2, 1851-1940.
Briere, J.N., & Elliot, D.M. (1994). Immediated and long-term impacts of child sexual abuse.
The Future of Children, 4, 54-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1602523
Brown, C. F., Demaray, M. K., & Secord, S. M. (2014). Cyber victimization in middle school
and relations to social emotional outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 1221. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.014.
Cuevas, C. A., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H. A., & Ormrod, R. K. (2007). Juvenile Delinquency
and Victimization A Theoretical Typology. Journal of interpersonal violence,
22(12), 1581-1602. doi: 10.1177/0886260507306498.
Cutajar, M. C., Mullen, P. E., Ogloff, J. R., Thomas, S. D., Wells, D. L., & Spataro, J. (2010).
Psychopathology in a large cohort of sexually abused children followed up to 43
years. Child abuse & neglect, 34(11), 813-822. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.04.004
Cyr, K., Chamberland,C., Clment,M.E., Lessard,G., Wemmers,J.A., Collin-Vzina,D.,
Gagn,M.-H.,& Damant,D. (2013).Polyvictimization and victimization of children

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

23

and youth: Results from a populational survey. Child Abuse&Neglect, 37, 814-820.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.03.009
Dong, F., Cao, F., Cheng, P., Cui, N., & Li, Y. (2013). Prevalence and associated factors of
polyvictimization in Chinese adolescents. Scandinavian journal of psychology,
54(5), 415-422. DOI: 10.1111/sjop.12059.
Ellonen, N., Piispa, M., Peltonen, K., & Oranen, M. (2013). Exposure to parental violence
and outcomes of child psychosocial adjustment. Violence and victims, 28(1), 3-15.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.28.1.3
Evans, S. E., Davies, C., & DiLillo, D. (2008). Exposure to domestic violence: A metaanalysis of child and adolescent outcomes. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13(2),
131-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2008.02.005
Finkelhor, D., Hamby, S.L., Ormrod, R. & Turner, H. (2005). The Juvenile Victimization
Questionnaire: reliability, validity, and national norms. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29,
383-412. DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.11.001
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., Turner, H. A., Avery-Leaf, S., Cascardi, M., O'Leary, K. D., ...
& Cuevas, C. (2007). Polyvictimization and trauma in a national longitudinal cohort.
Development and psychopathology, 19(1), 149. DOI:10.1017/S0954579407070083
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2007b). Poly-victimization: A neglected
component in child victimization. Child abuse & neglect, 31(1), 7-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.008.
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., & Turner, H.A. (2009). The developmental epidemiology of
childhood victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(5), 711-731. Doi:
10.1177/0886260508317185

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

24

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2009b). The developmental epidemiology of
childhood victimization. Journal of interpersonal violence, 24(5), 711-731. doi:
10.1177/0886260508317185.
Finkelhor, D. (2011). Prevalence of child victimization, abuse, crime, and violence exposure.
In J. K. White, Violence against women and children: Mapping the terrain (Vol. 1,
pgs. 9-29). Washington: American Psychological Association.
Fowler, P. J., Tompsett, C. J., Braciszewski, J. M., Jacques-Tiura, A. J., & Baltes, B. B.
(2009). Community violence: A meta-analysis on the effect of exposure and mental
health outcomes of children and adolescents. Development and psychopathology,
21(01), 227-259. doi:10.1017/S0954579409000145.
Hawker, D.S., & Boulton, M.J. (2000). Twenty years research on peer victimization and
psycholocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 441-455. DOI: 10.1111/14697610.00629
Hickman, L.J., Jaycox, L.H., Setodji, C.M., Kofner, A., Schultz, D., Barnes-Proby, D. &
Harris, R. (2012). How much does How much matter? Assessing the relationship
between childrens lifetime exposure to violence and trauma symptoms, behavior
problems, and parenting stress. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(10), 1-25. doi:
10.1177/0886260512468239
Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four-factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript, Yale
University, New Haven, CT.
http://elsinore.cis.yale.edu/sociology/yjs/yjs_fall_2011.pdf#page=21
Holt, M. K., Finkelhor, D., & Kantor, G. K. (2007). Multiple victimization experiences of
urban elementary school students: Associations with psychosocial functioning and

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

25

academic performance. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(5), 503-515. DOI:

10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.12.006
Jafee, S.R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., Polo-Toms, M. & Taylor, A. (2007). Individual, family,
and neighborhood factors distinguish resilient from non-resilient maltreated
children: A cumulative stressors model. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 231-253. DOI:
10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.03.011
Kochel, K. P., Ladd, G. W., & Rudolph, K. D. (2012). Longitudinal associations among
youth depressive symptoms, peer victimization, and low peer acceptance: An
interpersonal process perspective. Child development, 83(2), 637-650. DOI:
10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01722.x.
Luthra, R. Abramowitz, R., Greenberg, R., Schoor, A., Newcorn, J., Schmeidler, J., et al.
(2009). Relationship between type of trauma exposure and posttraumatic stress
disorder among urban children and adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
24(11), 1919-1927. doi: 10.1177/0886260508325494
Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M., & Finkelhor, D. (2007). The relative importance of online
victimization in understanding depression, delinquency, and substance use. Child
maltreatment, 12(4), 314-324. DOI: 10.1177/1077559507305996.
Mitchell, K. J., Finkelhor, D., Wolak, J., Ybarra, M. L., & Turner, H. (2011). Youth internet
victimization in a broader victimization context. Journal of Adolescent Health,
48(2), 128-134. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.06.009.
Oddone Paolucci, E., Genuis, M.L. & Violato, C. (2001). A Meta-Analysis of the Published
Research on the Effects of Child Sexual Abuse. The Journal of Psychology, 135 (1),
17-36. DOI:10.1080/00223980109603677

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

26

Peltonen, K., Ellonen, N., Larsen, H. B., & Helweg-Larsen, K. (2010). Parental violence and
adolescent mental health. European child & adolescent psychiatry, 19(11), 813-822.
DOI: 10.1007/s00787-010-0130-8
Pereda, N., Guilera, G., & Abad, J. (2014). Victimization and polyvictimization of Spanish
children and youth: Results from a community sample. Child abuse & neglect,
38(4), 640-649. DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.01.019
Perren, S., Ettekal, I., & Ladd, G. (2013). The impact of peer victimization on later
maladjustment: mediating and moderating effects of hostile and selfblaming
attributions. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 54(1), 46-55.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02618.x.
Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., Fisher, H., Bassett, C., Howat, N., & Collishaw, S.
(2011). Child abuse and neglect in the UK today. http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/
Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., & Fisher, H. L. (2013). The prevalence and impact of
child maltreatment and other types of victimization in the UK: Findings from a
population survey of caregivers, children and young people and young adults. Child
abuse & neglect, 37(10), 801-813. DOI:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.02.004.
Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J.H., Prinzie, P., Boelen, P.A., & Telch, M.J. (2011). Prospectie
linkages between peer victimization and externalizing problems in children: a metaanalysis. Aggressive Behavior, 37 (3), 215-22. doi: 10.1002/ab.20374.
Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J.H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M.J. (2010). Peer victimization and
internalizing problems in children: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child
abuse & neglect, 34 (4), 244-252. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.07.009

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

27

Ruchkin, V., Henrich, C. C., Jones, S. M., Vermeiren, R., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2007).
Violence exposure and psychopathology in urban youth: The mediating role of
posttraumatic stress. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 35(4), 578-593. DOI
10.1007/s10802-007-9114-7.
Schwab-Stone, M., Koposov, R., Vermeiren, R., & Ruchkin, V. (2013). Cross-cultural
findings on community violence exposure and internalizing psychopathology:
comparing adolescents in the United States, Russia, and Belgium. Child Psychiatry
& Human Development, 44(4), 516-524. DOI 10.1007/s10578-012-0344-8.
Spataro, J., Mullen, P. E., Burgess, P. M., Wells, D. L., & Moss, S. A. (2004). Impact of child
sexual abuse on mental health Prospective study in males and females. The British
Journal of Psychiatry, 184(5), 416-421. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.184.5.416
Tucker, C. J., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Shattuck, A. (2013). Association of sibling
aggression with child and adolescent mental health. Pediatrics, 132(1), 79-84. DOI:
10.1542/peds.2012-3801
Tucker, C. J., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Shattuck, A. M. (2014). Sibling and peer
victimization in childhood and adolescence. Child Abuse & Neglect (in press). DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.05.007.
Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2006). The effect of lifetime victimization on the
mental health of children and adolescents. Social Science & Medicine, 62(1), 13-27.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.05.030
Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2009). The effects of adolescent victimization on
self-concept and depressive symptoms. Child Maltreatment. DOI:
10.1177/1077559509349444.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

28

Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2010). Child mental health problems as risk
factors for victimization. Child maltreatment, 15(2), 132-143. doi:
10.1177/1077559509349450
Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2010b). Poly-victimization in a national sample
of children and youth. American journal of preventive medicine, 38(3), 323-330.
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.11.012
Turner, M. G., Exum, M. L., Brame, R., & Holt, T. J. (2013). Bullying victimization and
adolescent mental health: General and typological effects across sex. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 41(1), 53-59. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2012.12.005
Van den Eijnden, R., Vermulst, A., van Rooij, A. J., Scholte, R., & van de Mheen, D. (2014).
The bidirectional relationships between online victimization and psychosocial
problems in adolescents: A comparison with real-life victimization. Journal of youth
and adolescence, 43(5), 790-802. DOI 10.1007/s10964-013-0003-9.
Ybarra, M. L. (2004). Linkages between depressive symptomatology and Internet harassment
among young regular Internet users. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(2), 247-257.
doi:10.1089/109493104323024500
Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Examining characteristics
and associated distress related to Internet harassment: findings from the Second
Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics, 118(4), e1169-e1177. DOI:
10.1542/peds.2006-0815.

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

29

Appendix A
Table A1.Prevalence of Every Victimization and Polyvictimization divided by Gender.

Male

Female

(N=578)

(N= 506)

Crime

68%

54%

22.49**

Maltreatment

22%

29%

6.43*

Peer

49%

48%

0.1

Sexual

4%

14%

32.4**

Witness

49%

48%

0.07

Electronic

8%

18%

22.78**

Any victimization

85%

80%

3.88*

Polyvictimization

13%

13%

0.01

Victimization type

* p<0.05; **p< 0.001

Chi-Square

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

30

Appendix B
Table B2. Percentage of ocurrence in every victimization and polyvictimization divided by
groups of age.
12-14

15-17

(N=539)

(N= 547)

Crime

57%

65%

7.89 *

Maltreatment

24%

27%

1.58

Peer

46%

51%

2.33

Sexual

7%

10%

3.57

Witness

39%

58%

39.24 **

Internet

9%

16%

9.65 *

Any victimization

78%

87%

17.58 **

Polyvictimization

10%

15%

7.97 *

Victimization type

* p<0.01;** p<0.001

Chi-Square

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

31

Appendix C
Table C3. Percentage of adolescents of each single victimization and included as polyvictims
at the same time.
.

Victimization type

Single Victimization

Polyvictimization rate

Chi-Squared

(7 or more lifetime
victimization)1

Crime

664 (61%)

137 (21%)

96.8*

Maltreatment

274 (25%)

103 (38%)

204.6*

Peer

525 (48%)

132 (25%)

141.7*

Sexual

92 (9%)

49 (53%)

149*

Witness

523 (48%)

125 (24%)

114*

Internet

137 (13%)

58 (42%)

124.1*

Any victimization

897 (83%)

138 (15%)

33.3*

1086 (100%)

138 (13%)

Full sample

Proportion of adolescents in each single victimization who are also identified as polyvictims.
*p<0.001

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

32

Appendix D
Table D4. Effects of victimizations and polyvictimization on trauma symptoms. Beta standardized results. Cells without numbers are those that
were excluded in the analysis for not adding anything to the model.
Measures

Anxiety

Withdrawn

Somatic

Social

Thought

Attention

Rule-Breaking

Aggressive

Internalizing

Externalizing

Total

/Depression

Depressed

Complaints

Problems

Problems

Problems

Problems

Behavior

Problems

Problems

Problems

(n=1013)

(n=1050)

(n=1027)

(n=1029)

(n=1012)

(n=1043)

(n=987)

(n=1036)

(n=964)

(n=963)

(n=806)

Crime
Without poly

0.148***

0.103**

0.110***

0.102**

0.142***

0.099**

0.128***

0.165***

0.146***

0.164***

0.176***

With poly

0.148***

0.103**

0.110***

0.102**

0.128***

0.099**

0.119***

0.149***

0.146***

0.163***

0.174***

Without poly

0.187***

0.134***

0.164***

0.203***

0.194***

0.123***

0.163***

0.167***

0.187***

0.186***

0.261***

With poly

0.187***

0.134***

0.164***

0.203***

0.164***

0.123***

0.124***

0.135***

0.187***

0.154***

0.234***

Without poly

0.082**

0.067*

0.105**

0.102**

0.065*

0.091**

0.083**

0.066*

0.089**

With poly

0.082**

0.067*

0.105**

0.084**

0.065*

0.069*

0.083**

Without poly

0.120***

0.109***

0.142***

0.087**

0.088**

0.122***

0.137***

With poly

0.120***

0.087**

0.113***

0.088**

0.09**

0.108**

Without poly

0.075*

0.07*

With poly

Without poly

0.068*

0.064*

With poly

Maltreatment

Peer

Sexual

Witness

Internet

(Continued on next page)

CONSEQUENCES OF VICTIMIZATION AND POLYVICTIMIZATION

Measures

33

Anxiety

Withdrawn

Somatic

Social

Thought

Attention

Rule-Breaking

Aggressive

Internalizing

Externalizing

Total

/Depression

Depressed

Complaints

Problems

Problems

Problems

Problems

Behavior

Problems

Problems

Problems

(n=1013)

(n=1050)

(n=1027)

(n=1029)

(n=1012)

(n=1043)

(n=987)

(n=1036)

(n=964)

(n=963)

(n=806)

Gender
Without poly

0.284***

0.092**

0.222***

0.123***

-0.134***

0.233***

0.125***

With poly

0.284***

0.092**

0.222***

0.123***

0.067*

-0.117***

0.233***

0.125***

0.080**

-0.109***

0.082**

0.156***

0.083**

**

***

**

***

**

Age
Without poly
With poly

0.080

-0.109

0.082

0.166

0.087

0.049

0.067

0.047

0.046

0.128***

0.053

0.165***

0.143***

0.059

0.162***

0.135***

Without poly

0.164

0.047

0.151

0.103

0.148

0.048

0.169

0.111

0.164

0.157

0.218

With poly

0.164

0.047

0.151

0.103

0.155

0.048

0.179

0.119

0.164

0.167

0.223

Polyvictimization
Adjusted R2

*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001