Substance Use and Physical Dating Violence

Introduction

Theoretic models suggest that associations between substance use and dating violence perpetration may vary in different social contexts, but few studies have examined this proposition. The current study examined whether social control and violence in the neighborhood, peer, and family contexts moderate the associations between substance use (heavy alcohol use, marijuana, and hard drug use) and adolescent physical dating violence perpetration.

Methods

Adolescents in the eighth, ninth, and tenth grades completed questionnaires in 2004 and again four more times until 2007 when they were in the tenth, 11th, and 12th grades. Multilevel analysis was used to examine interactions between each substance and measures of neighborhood, peer, and family social control and violence as within-person (time-varying) predictors of physical dating violence perpetration across eighth through 12th grade (N=2,455). Analyses were conducted in 2014.

Results

Physical dating violence perpetration increased at time points when heavy alcohol and hard drug use were elevated; these associations were weaker when neighborhood social control was higher and stronger when family violence was higher. Also, the association between heavy alcohol use and physical dating violence perpetration was weaker when teens had more-prosocial peer networks and stronger when teens’ peers reported more physical dating violence.

Conclusions

Linkages between substance use and physical dating violence perpetration depend on substance use type and levels of contextual violence and social control. Prevention programs that address substance use–related dating violence should consider the role of social contextual variables that may condition risk by influencing adolescents’ aggression propensity.

Introduction

Physical dating violence perpetration (PDVP), which is the use of physical violence against a dating partner during adolescence, is a prevalent national problem¹ that can result in devastating consequences.² One risk factor that has been consistently linked to adult3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and adolescent14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 partner violence is substance use. The predominant explanation for this linkage is that psychopharmacologic effects impair cognition and disinhibit aggression.10, 11 However, many individuals who engage in substance use do so without engaging in partner violence, suggesting that other factors may play a role in conditioning their association.4, 5, 10, 11 This notion is consistent with numerous theoretic “interaction” models that suggest the effects of substance use on PDVP will vary depending on the characteristics of the individual and the social context.21, 22, 23, 24, 25 Some research with adults supports this proposition21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; however, few studies have examined moderators of the linkage between substance use and adolescent PDVP. A better understanding of the contextual factors that condition associations between substance use and PDVP could inform primary prevention efforts that go beyond focusing exclusively on individual risk factors to changing the social contexts that influence risk for substance-related PDVP. To this end, the current longitudinal study examined whether indicators of violence exposure and social control drawn from family, peer, and neighborhood environments, three critical social contexts that influence adolescent development, moderated associations between substance use (heavy alcohol use [HALC], marijuana use [MAR], and hard drug use [HDRG]) and PDVP across eighth through 12th grades.

Empirical studies with adults suggest that substance use works synergistically with other aggression-provoking factors to predict the use of partner violence.21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 These findings are consistent with theoretic models that propose that substance use will more likely lead to partner violence among individuals with greater propensity for aggression.21, 25 The basic reasoning underlying these models posits that individuals vary in their aggression threshold, which is the point at which the strength of aggressive motivation exceeds the strength of aggressive inhibitions; when the threshold is exceeded, violent behavior results. Substance use intoxication may lower the threshold by impairing cognitive function. Intoxication will thus be more likely to lead to partner violence among individuals with increased aggression propensity because they already have low thresholds, even in the absence of intoxication.5, 21, 25 Conversely, this reasoning suggests that substance use may be less likely to lead to partner violence among individuals with high aggression thresholds (e.g., owing to strong inhibitions against the use of aggression) because intoxication will not lower the threshold enough for violence to occur.

Contextual social control and violence are aspects of adolescents’ social environments that may influence aggression propensity and thus moderate associations between substance use and PDVP. Contexts (i.e., neighborhoods, peer groups, families) that promote social control may increase constraints or inhibitions against aggressive behavior, producing a higher aggression threshold, through social regulation of deviant behavior and by encouraging conformity to prosocial values and norms, including antiviolence and social responsibility norms.34, 35 As such, the effects of substance use on PDVP may be weaker among adolescents nested in social environments with higher levels of social control (e.g., higher levels of parent monitoring) because these controls establish a higher aggression threshold.

Exposure to violence in different contexts may also influence aggression propensity and thus moderate the influence of substance use on PDVP. In particular, elevated levels of contextual violence may increase adolescent propensity for aggression (and thus lower aggression thresholds) by making it more likely that youth access aggressive scripts and schemas as guides for behavior or by increasing negative affect.36, 37, 38, 39, 40 Increased propensity for aggression that results from violence exposure (e.g., family violence exposure) may work synergistically with substance use to increase risk for PDVP.

The current study aims to determine whether and how indicators of contextual social control and violence moderate associations between HALC, MAR, and HDRG and PDVP. The overarching hypotheses are that associations between substance use and PDVP will be weaker when contextual social control is elevated and stronger when contextual violence is elevated. Hypotheses are tested with longitudinal data using an analytic strategy focused on within-person changes in substance use in relation to within-person changes in PDVP; this approach allows for determining if PDVP increases at time points when substance use is elevated, an expectation based on the psychopharmacologic effects model of substance use on PDVP, and whether that effect is moderated by changes in contextual social control or violence.⁴¹ The potential for sex differences in moderated effects is also explored based on work suggesting that associations between substance use and PDVP may differ for boys and girls.16, 17, 18

Few studies have examined contextual moderators of the association between substance use and PDVP. The only study to examine social control as a contextual moderator found that neighborhood collective efficacy, defined as community social cohesion and willingness to intervene for the common good, did not moderate the association between a composite measure of substance use and PDVP assessed 6 years later⁴²; however, that study did not distinguish among specific substances, and focused on the distal effects of early substance use on later PDVP. Previous research using the same data source as the current study found that the association between HALC and PDVP was moderated by family and peer violence but not neighborhood violence. However, that study did not control for or examine interactions with other substances or examine measures of contextual social control as potential moderators.³⁹ The current study addresses these limitations and builds on this previous work by simultaneously examining interactions between indicators of contextual social control and violence and the unique effects of three substance use behaviors (HALC, MAR, and HDRG) as predictors of PDVP.