4.2 Article

A Longitudinal Analysis of Drinking and Victimization in College Women: Is There a Reciprocal Relationship?

Journal

PSYCHOLOGY OF ADDICTIVE BEHAVIORS
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages 943-951

Publisher

EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/a0036283

Keywords

drinking; victimization; longitudinal study; college women; reciprocal relationship

Funding

  1. NIAAA NIH HHS [R01 AA013986, R01AA013986] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of the current study was to assess the relationship between drinking and severe physical and sexual victimization in a sample of 989 college women over 5 years. Participants completed a Web-based survey each fall semester, beginning as first-time incoming freshman, and continuing each year for 5 years. The survey was comprehensive in assessing drinking, victimization, and relevant covariates. Women were followed whether they remained at university or not. Prior year same type of severe victimization predicted current year victimization, both severe physical and sexual. However, prior year drinking did not predict current year severe victimization. Prior year severe sexual victimization predicted current year drinking. Our findings of a longitudinal relationship between severe sexual victimization and subsequent increases in drinking suggests that college women may be drinking to cope with negative sequelae that they experience as a result of the victimization. We did not find the same longitudinal relationship between drinking and severe physical or sexual victimization, suggesting that a reciprocal relationship does not exist between drinking and victimization among college women. We did find that severe sexual victimization decreased across college, suggesting that the year prior to and the first year of college may be a critical period for intervening to reduce risk for severe victimization.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available