These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Poly-victimization from different methodological approaches using the juvenile victimization questionnaire: Are we identifying the same victims?
    Author: Segura A, Pereda N, Guilera G.
    Journal: J Trauma Dissociation; 2018; 19(3):289-306. PubMed ID: 29547078.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether three different methodological approaches used to assess poly-victimization that apply the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ; Finkelhor, Hamby, Ormrod, & Turner, 2005) identify the same group of adolescent poly-victims. METHOD: The sample consisted of 1,105 adolescents (590 males and 515 females), aged 12-17 years old (M = 14.52, SD = 1.76) and recruited from seven secondary schools in Spain. The JVQ was used to assess lifetime and past-year experiences of victimization. RESULTS: Poly-victims were more likely to experience all types of victimization than victims, regardless of the method used. The degree of agreement between the methods for identifying poly-victimization was moderate for both timeframes, with the highest agreements being recorded between the one-above-the-mean number of victimizations and Latent Class Analysis (LCA) for lifetime, and between the top 10% and LCA for past-year victimization. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers and clinicians should be aware that the use of different methods to define poly-victimization may mean that different victims are identified. The choice of one method or another may have important implications. In consequence, focusing on how we operationalize poly-victimization should be a priority in the near future.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]