PSY325: Statistics for the Behavioral & Social Sciences
March 11, 2013
Introduction
The number of cases of domestic violence is staggering. When people think about the word domestic violence they only think about the people that are directly involved in the altercation. The “silent victims” in domestic violence are the kids that witness the violence and have lasting effects from it (Child Welfare Information Gateway2009). We will review some studies that go over just some of the impacts that domestic violence has on the children in the household. For the remainder of this study review when you see you will see DV in place of domestic violence. Children that have been exposed to DV can …show more content…
show effects from DV that may linger for years to come.
The research question for this paper would be do kids that see DV at home have lasting effects that reach far beyond the walls of their homes? The research hypothesis that all children will have lasting effects where there is DV exposure at home. If there was a null hypothesis it would be that children exposed to DV would no lasting effects on the children.
The thing the studies will show you after witnessing DV at home children are more likely show more aggression or violence. The kids may be socially delayed due to the DV they see at home. The reason for the delay is it can make the children more withdrawn and less likely to make friends as easy. Another thing is the DV can cause the parents to not be able to give the children the attention they need to be able to hit certain milestones on time like the rest of the kids their age. Another key effect is that the children that have been exposed to DV may develop depression which may linger for years to come. After looking at the studies it will be evident that the victims of DV are not just the adults that are being physically, mentally or worse abused but it is also the children that live in the home that have lasting effects from witnessing the DV in their homes.
There are three studies that will be reviewed in this paper the first one is “Domestic Violence, Gun Ownership, and Parental Educational Attainment: How do They Affect the Aggressive Beliefs and Behaviors of Children?
By Julie Sprinkle this study was done in South Carolina and set out to answer three questions; “What is the relationship of South Carolinas domestic violence rates to levels of aggression in the state’s school-aged children? What is the relationship of South Carolinas gun ownership rates to levels of aggression in the state’s school-aged children? What is the relationship of South Carolina citizen’s educational attainment to levels of aggression in the state’s school-aged children?”(Sprinkle2007).
The second study by Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo entitled “The Effects of Child Abuse and Exposure to Domestic Violence on Adolescent Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior Problems” is trying to see how child abuse and domestic violence affects the psychosocial outcomes in adolescence the children in the household. It also looks to see if gender of the children plays a role in effects such as depression and
aggression.
The third study titled “The Influence of Domestic Violence on Preschooler Behavior and Functioning.” by Ybarra, Wilkens, and Lieberman, is aimed to see the effects that DV has on kids that are at preschool age. The study was done using 62 preschoolers aged 3 to 5 years and their mothers. There was also a separate “community pool” made up of 52 children and their moms that had no exposure to DV were asked to participate in the study. The hypothesis for the study is that exposure to DV can affect the children developmentally.
Methods
The first study was done on students at four different schools in three counties in the state. Students from grades 4 through 6 were used as the participants of the study. The sample (number of children involved in the study) contained of a nearly equal number of boys and girls. There were 154 boys and 156 girls that participated in the study (Sprinkle2007). The use of different counties gave it a demographical method as well. Two schools from low income and two schools from higher income where used. The participants were tested using The Normative Beliefs about Aggression Scale (NOBAGS) and the Aggressive Behavior Teacher Checklist (ABTC) (Sprinkle2007)
The next study is an ongoing study that started in the 1970s to see how the abuse and domestic violence affects the children as they go on through their lives. It is a repeated measures study because participants are tested at several different times in their lives. “An initial assessment of children and their families was completed in 1976–1977, when children were of preschool age. Children then ranged in age from 18 months to 6 years. The second wave of data collection occurred between 1980 and 1982, when the children were between8 years and 11 years of age. The third assessment was completed in 1990–1991, when the children ranged from age 14 to 23 (average age: 18 years).” (Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo 2010 Page4 paragraph 3) The fourth phase is under way now which is testing the same participants as adults. There were 416 individuals assessed in the first three phases of testing of this sample group the gender split was 248 males and 209 females (Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo 2010).
The third study was done using children of preschool age. The children’s mothers were single mothers that had recently separated from partner after an episode of DV. All were referred to the program after the DV by a caseworker or social worker. The study was aimed to get a better understanding of and describe the extent of child difficulties that are related to DV. A more thorough understanding of these relations is needed so effective treatments can be set up for children that witness DV (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). The study hoped that by uncover what affect DV had on the children’s development interventions if needed could be set up for the children that were exposed to DV. Results
. This study showed a clear link between the children that witnessed DV at home had an increase in aggression and even violence outside of the home which impacted them socially and with their education (Sprinkle2007). The Pearson’s correlation is significant at the p < 0.1 level. The study showed that the total mean score on the general aggression dimension was 14 (SD = 5.7). MANOVA analysis was used to determine the impact of exposure to domestic violence and level of parental education on the NOBAGS and ABTC instruments. A MANOVA is a Multivariate analysis of variance which is different from an ANOVA and was used because there are more variants to be taken in to consideration (Cooksey2012). The variants in this study in this study are gender, race, and income status of the family, just to name a few.
The study by Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo was done using a repeated measures design so that the effects could be tested over a large period of time and be compared to younger testing (Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo 2010). The reason they used a repeated measures design was because they tested the participants more than one time. The participants were tested at three (fourth in progress) different times in their lives preschool, school age, and adolescence. It was also done using an ANOVA so that all variations could be taken into account. The reason that a T-test was not used is that a T-test is used to measure the difference between the means of two groups, but an ANOVA tests the difference between the means of more groups (Tanner2011).
With the third study the matching process and the DV Exposed and Non-Exposed group assignment were first analyzed using separate independent sample t-tests to explore the influence of domestic violence on child cognitive and behavioral functioning (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). Separate t-tests also were used to explore group differences for maternal functioning. , univariate analyses of variance (ANOVA) was done to Using separate two ANOVA it was tested to see if there was a statistical difference between the first was gender and exposure to DV the second was gender and non-exposure to DV it was done for a more specific evaluation of possible gender differences, and Chi square analyses on demographic and CTS scores.” (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). The children that were exposed to DV were more likely to act out and did not seem to be at the same developmental level as the kids that were not exposed to DV (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). Discussion
The data in the first study shows that there is a link between the kids seeing violence at home and them acting more violent at school (Sprinkle2007). The results show that the effects on the children affect them even outside the home. The exposure can make them more likely to jump to aggression or violence when they are faced with a situation that they are not sure of or if there is any kind of argument the child is more likely to use violence to end the argument. Kids that see situations resolved at home with violence think that this is the only way to handle situations (Sprinkle2007). To better this study there should be further research as to what treatments are best for treating the aggression and anger that is caused by the fact that these children came from a home where they witnessed DV first hand (Sprinkle2007). And to take that even a step further it would be interesting to see this study redone as a repeated measures design so that it could be seen if the children got better or worse with their aggression or worse over time. If they showed improvement it would be interesting to see what could be the reasons behind the improvement.
The Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo studies results show a link in children suffering from depression and aggression when they are subjected to DV. The study also looked to see if there was a statistical significance in children that had both exposure to DV and were abuse the study concluded that the double exposure did not have a large statistical difference compared to kids that had single exposure. This study shows that the children are not only affected at the time of the DV but because it was a repeated measures design and the kids were tested over a period of time it show that the effects lasted for a long period time. To better this study more research should have been done to see if there was less lingering effects for the children that received treatment after the DV as opposed to those that received no treatment at all. And if there was less lingering effects it would be worth researching if the treatment is done sooner if the effects can be cured all together.
The third study showed significant statistical differences in kids that were exposed to DV compared to those that had no DV exposure. The results showed that the kids that had been exposed where at a lower IQ level, lower verbal skills and less social skills than the kids that had no DV exposure (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). The delays can make the child show more aggression even at this young age (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007). If the child has delayed verbal skills it can affect everything else the fact that the child cannot verbalize what they want can cause the child to act out with tantrums and aggression. This study would be better if it was done by using a repeated measures design that way the affects could be known as too if the children are able to catch up developmentally and socially as time passes since the DV exposure. Another thing that should be looked into is if the child received special education services such as speech therapy or other special education assistance did it help them to catch up compared to the children that did not get special education services while they were in school. Conclusion
The study by Julie Sprinkle showed a strong statistical link between children school aged that were exposed to DV and the fact that they are more likely to show signs of aggression and violence at school and with friends than those that had no DV exposure (Sprinkle2007).. The study by Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo has showed that there was also a strong link as time went on that the DV had a lasting effect on the children that witnessed it (Moylan, Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl & Russo 2010). The last study by Ybarra, Wilkens, and Lieberman showed that even the youngest children are affected by DV it can delay their development in many ways (Ybarra, Wilkens & Lieberman2007)..
The hypothesis was proven to be correct by these three studies. All three studies showed a link in aggression violence and or depression in kids that had been exposed to DV over those that had no exposure to DV. The null hypothesis was disproved because there was a proven statistical significance that children exposed to DV do in fact have lasting effects as a result of the exposure. Now the question is what can be done to help these children? Treatment options need to be researched to see what if any treatments are best for children that have been exposed to DV. Maybe early treatment would help the children be able to move past the exposer to the DV and be able to live more productive and happy lives without being weighed down by the effects of the DV. Also protocols should be set up so that not only the adults in DV cases are considered victims of the violence the children witnesses should be taken into consideration and not left to deal with the demons that they may be facing after the DV exposure on their own.
All of the studies that were reviewed showed that the adults that are directly involved in the acts of violence are not the only ones that are affected or the only victims when DV takes place in a home. The children are the silent victims that some people seem to forget are hurt by the DV as well. These studies only explored the effects that the DV can have on the children now it needs to be taken one step further. Now that the effects are better understood through the research more steps can be taken to help these silent victims of DV.
The hope is that with more research ways can be found to help these children to overcome the DV exposure. More research needs to be done to see how to best to treat and help these children to overcome the violence that they have seen and heard in their homes. DV is not always physical abuse or violence so the research needs to go into treating for each type of DV and abuse that may have occurred in the home. When the treatment is designed to treat the patient for a specific type of DV the treatment is more likely to be more effective than if it was just a blanket treatment for every DV case. Not two people or two cases are the exact same so every case must be treated on its own merits. The studies reviewed show a strong statistical link between children that are exposed to DV and the lasting effects that it can have on them. References
Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2009, Domestic Violence and the Child Welfare System https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/domestic_violence/impact.cfm
Cooksey R., 2012 analysis of variance (ANOVA) Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhVLqtlW_Fs
Moylan, C., Herrenkohl, T., Sousa, C., Tajima, E., Herrenkohl, R., & Russo, M. M. (2010). The Effects of Child Abuse and Exposure to Domestic Violence on Adolescent Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior Problems. Journal Of Family Violence, 25(1), 53-63. doi:10.1007/s10896-009-9269-9
Sprinkle, J. (2007). Domestic Violence, Gun Ownership, and Parental Educational Attainment: How do They Affect the Aggressive Beliefs and Behaviors of Children?. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 24(2), 133-151. doi:10.1007/s10560-006-0071-8
Tanner, D. (2011). Statistics for the Behavioral & Social Sciences. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Ybarra, G., Wilkens, S., & Lieberman, A. (2007). The Influence of Domestic Violence on Preschooler Behavior and Functioning. Journal Of Family Violence, 22(1), 33-42. doi:10.1007/s10896-006-9054-y