Listening to the Voices of Important Others: How Adolescents Make Sense of Troubled Dating Relationships
Despite efforts by the public health community to prevent it, adolescent dating violence (ADV) is a serious health problem. ADV is defined as “physical, sexual, or psychological/emotional violence within a dating relationship,” and the incidence and prevalence are on the rise. According to CDC data, annual rates of ADV in the United States range from 10% of students experiencing physical dating violence to 25% when verbal, emotional, and sexual dating violence are included. Findings from one study of seven ethnically diverse American high schools suggested that nearly one third of all students experienced some form of physical aggression perpetrated by a current or former romantic partner. When considering the impact of dating violence on the adolescent community, more than 40% of early adolescents (those 11–14) know at least one peer who has experienced verbal abuse by someone they were dating.
Dating violence occurs within the context of adolescent psychosocial development. Adolescence has long been associated with the psychosocial tasks of developing autonomy and independence from parents, increasing intimacy through romantic relationships, and engaging in risk-taking behaviors. As adolescents differentiate from parents and begin to explore dating relationships, these relationships take on tremendous significance. Risk-taking behaviors (e.g., unprotected sex, interpersonal violence) are often experienced within these highly important relationships.
Background and Significance
Numerous risk factors and negative outcomes have been shown to be associated with ADV. Among the risk factors are previous dating abuse, association with violent or victimized peers, personal involvement in violence, family problems, and risky lifestyle behaviors including risky sexual behavior and tobacco, drug, or alcohol use. ADV has also been shown to have numerous negative outcomes, including poor school achievement, eating disorders, drug and alcohol use, depression, and suicide. Of particular concern is the increased risk of adult intimate partner violence for those who experienced dating violence as adolescents.
Studies have suggested that adolescents tend to elicit or receive input about their troubled dating relationships from at least three groups: peers, family (primarily parents), and community members (often school-based individuals). Research has shown that adolescent peers are the most frequently consulted for advice about a dating relationship that is troublesome because peers are perceived to be best able to understand and to maintain confidentiality. Although peers are the group most often consulted, they often lack the maturity to assist their friends to successfully deal with these relationships. Males are particularly prone to receive feedback that minimizes ADV. Adolescents may believe that ADV can be justified as horseplay, love, self-defense, retaliation, or appropriate response to frustrating situations. Peers may also be reluctant to encourage an adolescent to end a particularly troubled dating relationship due to the potential disruption to the peer group. Several studies show that adolescents who experience ADV tend to have friends who also experience ADV. Regardless, adolescent peers who are consulted are likely to minimize the violence, believe that violence is justifiable, try to maintain group integrity, or be experiencing a similar relationship.
There is also evidence that teens rarely consult their parents or other family members for assistance. Adolescents fear that their parents will overreact or not believe them. Talking with parents about troublesome dating relationships has been shown to differ by race and gender. African American adolescents consult their parents more readily than teens of other racial backgrounds, and Latino males tend to talk to parents more than females do.
Community members, especially school-based professionals, often provide input about ADV in prevention programs. These programs, such as Safe Dates and the Youth Relationships Project, assist adolescents in recognizing unhealthy behaviors in dating relationships and have been shown to positively impact knowledge and behavior over time.
The literature suggests that most input adolescents receive about their troubled dating relationships comes from peers, with little from family or community professionals. There seems to be dissonance between what is presented in school-based programs and how adolescent peers respond in real situations. This dissonance may be challenging for adolescents who are experiencing ADV. Little is known about the ways adolescents use varying opinions of others to make sense of difficult relationships. The purpose of this study was to develop a typology of ways by which adolescents incorporate the views of important others in making sense of their troubled dating relationships.
Method
Qualitative research methods were used, specifically grounded theory as developed by Glaser and Strauss. Grounded theory allows the development of a theoretical explanation of how participants solve a psychosocial problem. In this study, the problem was how adolescents use others’ opinions about their troubled dating relationships to make sense of them.
This study was part of a larger funded study. Ninety young adults (ages 18–21) who had experienced dating violence as teens (ages 13–18) were recruited from twelve diverse communities in northeastern Ohio through community sampling. Recruitment methods included flyers, word of mouth, and public service announcements. The term “dating violence” was avoided to ensure broader inclusion of emotional and verbal abuse.
Mental health clinicians trained in grounded theory and interviewing techniques screened participants for inclusion. Interviews were conducted in secure settings, lasted 1.5 to 2 hours, and were divided into an open-ended narrative section and a timeline section detailing specific violent events. If a participant experienced distress, referrals and support services were offered. Participants received $35 for their time and travel.
Data Analysis
Transcripts were analyzed using NVivo 8 software and constant comparison methods by a nine-member research team. After initial coding of the first 20 transcripts, the team noted that views of important others were a salient category. A three-member subteam analyzed all 90 transcripts using three levels of coding.
In Level 1, references to the views of important others were coded. In Level 2, codes were grouped into categories such as “avoid,” “reject,” “acknowledge,” or “accept.” Memos were written to document ideas and decisions. In Level 3, categories were defined, compared across transcripts, and refined into a typology.
Rigor
Rigor was established using Guba’s criteria: credibility (using direct quotes), dependability (audiotaped interviews), confirmability (research team coding), and transferability (detailed sample description).
Results
Sample
The 90 participants included 51 females and 39 males. Fifty-two were Caucasian, 29 African American, and 9 were multiracial or other. Household income levels ranged widely. Most were students, with some working or unemployed. The majority did not have children.
Listening to the Voices of Important Others
The central category that emerged was “listening to the voices of important others.” Almost all participants had influential people in their lives who either provided opinions or were assumed to have opinions about the dating relationship. The word “voices” reflects both spoken and assumed messages. Six specific ways of listening emerged:
Preventing the Challenging Voices of Important Others
Adolescents avoided disclosing their relationship problems to prevent negative feedback or pressure to end the relationship.
Deflecting the Irksome Voices of Important Others
Participants discounted, ignored, or resisted bothersome advice that challenged the relationship.
Considering the Cautionary Voices of Important Others
Adolescents weighed differing opinions against their own, often uncertain due to lack of experience.
Soliciting the Confirming Voices of Important Others
Adolescents sought validation from others when they suspected the relationship was unhealthy.
Succumbing to the Demanding Voices of Important Others
A few participants ended relationships due to pressure from family or friends.
Heeding the Knowing Voices of Important Others
Adolescents listened to and acted upon advice from respected and credible individuals who had relevant life experience.
Each of these ways reflected different levels of openness to external input, ranging from resistance to acceptance.
Discussion
The study supports existing decision-making theories by confirming that adolescents’ decisions are emotional, social, and reasoned. However, it extends those theories by highlighting the nature of advice and the adolescent’s openness to receiving it. While many teens prevent or deflect feedback, others consider, seek out, or heed input from credible others.
The typology offers a framework for understanding adolescent processing of relationship issues and has implications for prevention and intervention efforts.
Implications for Practice
Mental health nurses and other professionals can use the typology to identify which stage a teen may be in and engage them accordingly. Asking open-ended questions based on the six types of listening can create meaningful dialogue and help adolescents reflect on their relationships.
Conclusion
ADV is a significant public health concern. Understanding how adolescents make sense of their troubled relationships through the voices of others can guide more Senaparib effective prevention and intervention strategies.