Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Article
Crime & Delinquency
Victimization
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)
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
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
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)
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) —
985
Note: OR = odds ratio.
*p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.
986 Crime & Delinquency 61(7)
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)
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.
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.