Exploring Latinx Youth Experiences of Digital Dating Abuse

Background and Objective: Digital dating abuse (DDA), or the use of social media and mobile phones to abuse a dating partner, is a common and harmful form of dating violence. Research on dating violence among Latinx youth remains an understudied topic and, to date, this is the first study of DDA within this population. The current study investigates, 1) For Latinx youth, how common is DDA and are there gender differences? 2) What is the association between on-line and off-line dating abuse? 3) How much dating relationship knowledge and conflict resolution skills do youth report? 4) Are relationship knowledge and conflict resolution skills related to DDA experience?

Method: This study used survey data from a sample of 70 Latinx teenaged youth with dating experience (73.1% girls, mean age 15.65, 65.2% participated in a free/reduced lunch program, and 78.6% reported being exclusively heterosexual). DDA victimization and perpetration were measured using the scale from Reed, Tolman, & Ward (2017). DDA was measured using three subscales: Digital Monitoring/Control, Digital Direct Aggression, and Digital Sexual Abuse. Traditional dating violence experience was assessed with the Safe Dates measure (Foshee et al. 1998). The Perceived Relationship Knowledge Scale (Bradford et al., 2015) assessed healthy relationship knowledge. A modified Healthy Conflict Resolution in Peer and Dating Relationships Scale assessed the use of conflict resolution skills (Ball et al., 2012).

Results: The most common DDA victimization experiences were monitoring of who the participants talk to and are friends with (41.3%), pressure to respond quickly to calls and messages (33.7%), and monitoring whereabouts and activities (33.3%). Girls were more likely to report that their partner sent a hurtful private message, t(63.97) = 2.64, p = .010, that their partner threatened to physically harm them using digital media, t(46) = 2.55, p = .014, and that their partner looked at their private digital information to check up on them without permission, t(62.07) = 2.81, p = .007. Girls were also more likely to report pressuring their partner to “sext,” t(48) = 2.86, p = .006. Youth reported high levels of healthy dating relationship knowledge (M = 3.10, SD = .60) and conflict resolution skills (M = 3.10, SD = .60). For girls, Digital Direct Aggression was associated with conflict resolution skills , r(49) = -.363, p = .010, and Digital Monitoring/Control victimization was negatively associated with conflict resolution skills, r(49) = .-.446, p = .001. For boys, there were negative associations between Digital Direct Aggression victimization and both healthy relationship knowledge and conflict resolution skills, r(17) = -.565, p = .018 and r(17) = -.506, p = .038.

Conclusions: Most participants reported high levels of healthy relationship knowledge and conflict resolution skills. Results indicated a link between DDA experience and fewer positive conflict resolution behaviors. The study has implications for the assessment and prevention of DDA among diverse populations of youth, supports the incorporation of conflict resolution skills in dating violence prevention, and calls for future research on the cultural context of DDA among Latinx youth.