This document summarizes preliminary findings from the Maltreatment and Adolescent Pathways (MAP) Longitudinal Study regarding the relationship between self-compassion, childhood maltreatment, and adolescent dating violence in youth involved with child welfare services. The study found that the majority of youth reported no dating violence involvement over four time points, though a minority reported repeated involvement. It also found that females experienced dating violence two or more times more than males. Regarding childhood maltreatment, levels of self-compassion were significantly lower in youth who reported more maltreatment.

1. Self-compassion and adolescent dating violence in a sampleSelf-compassion and adolescent dating violence in a sample
of child welfare-involved youth:of child welfare-involved youth:
Preliminary findings from the Maltreatment and AdolescentPreliminary findings from the Maltreatment and Adolescent
Pathways (MAP) Longitudinal StudyPathways (MAP) Longitudinal Study
July 10July 10thth
, 2012, 2012
PresenterPresenter: Christine Wekerle, Ph.D: Christine Wekerle, Ph.D
(wekerc@mcmaster.ca)(wekerc@mcmaster.ca)
Associate Professor, Pediatrics, McMaster UniversityAssociate Professor, Pediatrics, McMaster University

2. Maltreatment and Adolescent Pathways Study (MAPS)Maltreatment and Adolescent Pathways Study (MAPS)
Principal InvestigatorPrincipal Investigator::
Christine Wekerle, Ph.D. (wekerc@mcmaster.ca)Christine Wekerle, Ph.D. (wekerc@mcmaster.ca)
Co-InvestigatorsCo-Investigators::
Michael Boyle, Ph.D.;Michael Boyle, Ph.D.; Harriet MacMillan, M.D.; Randall Waechter, Ph.D.Harriet MacMillan, M.D.; Randall Waechter, Ph.D. (McMaster)(McMaster)
Deborah Goodman, Ph.D.; Eman Leung, Ph.D.Deborah Goodman, Ph.D.; Eman Leung, Ph.D. (University of Toronto)(University of Toronto)
Bruce Leslie, M.S. W.; Brenda Moody, M.B.A.Bruce Leslie, M.S. W.; Brenda Moody, M.B.A. (ON Children’s Aid Society)(ON Children’s Aid Society)
Nico TrocméNico Trocmé, Ph.D., Ph.D. (McGill)(McGill)
Collaborating Scientists:Collaborating Scientists:
Abby Goldstein, Ph.D.Abby Goldstein, Ph.D. (University of Toronto)(University of Toronto)
Jonathan Weiss, Ph.D.Jonathan Weiss, Ph.D. (York University)(York University)
Stephen Ellenbogen, Ph.D.Stephen Ellenbogen, Ph.D. (Memorial University)(Memorial University)
Tiffany Thornton, MSWTiffany Thornton, MSW (Health Canada)(Health Canada)
Lil Tonmyr, Ph.D.Lil Tonmyr, Ph.D. (Public Health Agency of Canada)(Public Health Agency of Canada)
Marlyn Bennett, Ph.D.Marlyn Bennett, Ph.D. (First Nations Child & Family Caring Society of Canada)(First Nations Child & Family Caring Society of Canada)
MAP Advisory BoardMAP Advisory Board::
Kong Chung, Lori Bell, NatashaKong Chung, Lori Bell, Natasha
Budzarov, Darlaine Mathews, David Firang, Dan Cadman, Susan GainesBudzarov, Darlaine Mathews, David Firang, Dan Cadman, Susan Gaines
Cherry Chan, Mario Giancola, Judith Wharton, Bervin Garraway, Carla Da Fonte, JacquelineCherry Chan, Mario Giancola, Judith Wharton, Bervin Garraway, Carla Da Fonte, Jacqueline
BittencourtBittencourt
MANY THANKS to ALL the YOUTH and CASEWORKERS for their time and efforts!MANY THANKS to ALL the YOUTH and CASEWORKERS for their time and efforts!

3. Background – Teen Dating ViolenceBackground – Teen Dating Violence
 Adolescent dating violence continues as an under-attended issue,Adolescent dating violence continues as an under-attended issue,
associated with mental health problems, higher in at-risk groupsassociated with mental health problems, higher in at-risk groups
 YRBSS 2011: Past 12 months,YRBSS 2011: Past 12 months, 9.4%9.4% (8.6%-10.3%) of high school(8.6%-10.3%) of high school
youth report having been hit, slapped, or physically hurt onyouth report having been hit, slapped, or physically hurt on
purpose by a boyfriend/girlfriend [stable]purpose by a boyfriend/girlfriend [stable]
 YRBSS 2011: Lifetime physically forced to have sexualYRBSS 2011: Lifetime physically forced to have sexual
intercourse,intercourse, 8.0%8.0% (7.3% - 8.8%) [stable](7.3% - 8.8%) [stable]
 Self-compassion is a novel area of application to violence areaSelf-compassion is a novel area of application to violence area
 May be viewed as a resilience construct in romantic relationshipsMay be viewed as a resilience construct in romantic relationships
 FocusFocus:: What is the relationship of historical adversityWhat is the relationship of historical adversity
(childhood maltreatment), and proximal adversity(childhood maltreatment), and proximal adversity
(adolescent dating violence) to self-compassion among(adolescent dating violence) to self-compassion among
youths receiving child welfare services?youths receiving child welfare services?

4. MAP Methods – Dating ViolenceMAP Methods – Dating Violence
 Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory, CADRIConflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory, CADRI (Wolfe et al., 2004)(Wolfe et al., 2004)
 7-item short-form, same items for perpetration and victimization (7-item short-form, same items for perpetration and victimization (Wekerle et al., 2001;Wekerle et al., 2001;
Fernandez, Goldstein & Wekerle, in press)Fernandez, Goldstein & Wekerle, in press)
 Verbal/Emotional AbuseVerbal/Emotional Abuse: “: “I said things just to make my partner angryI said things just to make my partner angry””
 Physical AbusePhysical Abuse: “: “I kicked, hit, or punched my partnerI kicked, hit, or punched my partner””
 Sexual AbuseSexual Abuse: “: “I threatened my partner in an attempt to have sexI threatened my partner in an attempt to have sex””
 ThreateningThreatening: “: “I threatened to hurt my partnerI threatened to hurt my partner”;”;
 ““During a conflict or argument, how often…”During a conflict or argument, how often…”
 Response: (0) Never (1) Seldom (1-2 conflict) (2) Sometimes (3-5 conflict) (3) Often (6 orResponse: (0) Never (1) Seldom (1-2 conflict) (2) Sometimes (3-5 conflict) (3) Often (6 or
more)more)
 Recode response 0,1 = “0” and 2,3 = “1”Recode response 0,1 = “0” and 2,3 = “1”
 Total score for each type ranged from 0-7;Total score for each type ranged from 0-7;
 Perpetration and victimization is determined if total score >0 for each type of DV.Perpetration and victimization is determined if total score >0 for each type of DV.
 Reliability in initial sample:Reliability in initial sample: αα = .74 for perpetration;= .74 for perpetration; αα = .83 for victimization.= .83 for victimization.

5. Results – Response to DV questionsResults – Response to DV questions
Initial time, n = 401Initial time, n = 401 As perpetratorsAs perpetrators As victimsAs victims
““I …”I …” ““My partner …”My partner …”
Male 178 (%)Male 178 (%) Female 223(%)Female 223(%) Male 178 (%)Male 178 (%) Female 223(%)Female 223(%)
(V/EA) I said things just to make(V/EA) I said things just to make
my partner angry.my partner angry.
24.724.7 25.625.6 28.728.7 30.930.9
(PA) I kicked, hit, or punched my(PA) I kicked, hit, or punched my
partner.partner.
8.48.4 6.36.3 5.15.1 6.36.3
(PA) I slapped my partner or(PA) I slapped my partner or
pulled my partner's hair.pulled my partner's hair.
3.93.9 3.63.6 4.54.5 4.94.9
(Threat) I threatened to hurt my(Threat) I threatened to hurt my
partner.partner.
7.37.3 3.13.1 6.76.7 3.13.1
(Threat) I threatened to hit or(Threat) I threatened to hit or
throw something at my partner.throw something at my partner.
7.97.9 4.54.5 5.15.1 2.72.7
(PA) I pushed, shoved, shook, or(PA) I pushed, shoved, shook, or
pinned down my partner.pinned down my partner.
6.76.7 5.45.4 7.37.3 4.94.9
(SA) I threatened my partner in(SA) I threatened my partner in
an attempt to have sex.an attempt to have sex.
1.11.1 0.90.9 2.32.3 1.81.8

6. MAP Methods – DV per time pointMAP Methods – DV per time point
Total sample N eligible Initial (561) 6m (496) 18m (345) 24m (206)
DV data available, % (n) 71.5 (401) 58.1 (285) 55.4 (191) 66 (136)
Age, Mean (SD) 15.9 (1.0) 16.4 (1.0) 17.5 (1.0) 17.9 (1.0)
Males, % 47.1 46 50.8 47.1
Begun dating, % 98.5 97.9 96.9 94.1
DV perpetration only, % 8.7 8 9.9 7.4
DV victimization only, % 8 5.6 7.9 7.4
DV involvement, % 34.4 32.3 34 36

7. MAP Dating Violence (DV) Prevalence of DV continuityMAP Dating Violence (DV) Prevalence of DV continuity
by genderby gender
 Among 136 (72 F; 64 M) who participated in all 4 time pointsAmong 136 (72 F; 64 M) who participated in all 4 time points
 MAJORITY - NO DATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENTMAJORITY - NO DATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENT
F Initial: 62.5% 6 Months: 63.9% 18 Months: 72.2% 24 Months: 56.9%F Initial: 62.5% 6 Months: 63.9% 18 Months: 72.2% 24 Months: 56.9%
M Initial: 62.5% 6 Months: 76.6% 18 Months 64.1% 24 Months: 60.9%M Initial: 62.5% 6 Months: 76.6% 18 Months 64.1% 24 Months: 60.9%
DATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENT OVER 4 TIME POINTSDATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENT OVER 4 TIME POINTS
 MINORITY - DATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENT REPEATEDLYMINORITY - DATING VIOLENCE INVOLVEMENT REPEATEDLY
F 1 DV: 29.2% 2 DV: 22.2% 3 DV: 12.5% 4 DV: 8.3%F 1 DV: 29.2% 2 DV: 22.2% 3 DV: 12.5% 4 DV: 8.3%
M 1 DV: 25.0% 2 DV: 17.2% 3 DV: 17.2% 4 DV: 6.3%M 1 DV: 25.0% 2 DV: 17.2% 3 DV: 17.2% 4 DV: 6.3%
 Analysis of DV continuity showedAnalysis of DV continuity showed significantly more females thansignificantly more females than
males experienced DV two or more times during two years.males experienced DV two or more times during two years.
 For 2 or more DVs timepoints, DV consists of both roles as perpetrator
and victim – no pure group of victim only or perpetrator only

8. MAP Methods – Childhood MaltreatmentMAP Methods – Childhood Maltreatment
 Childhood Trauma QuestionnaireChildhood Trauma Questionnaire CTQ, Bernstein et al., 1994; Bernstein etCTQ, Bernstein et al., 1994; Bernstein et
al., 2003al., 2003
 28 item; 5 subscales; stem “While growing up….”28 item; 5 subscales; stem “While growing up….”
 Physical AbusePhysical Abuse: “: “I got hit so hard by someone in my family that I had to see a doctorI got hit so hard by someone in my family that I had to see a doctor
or go to the hospitalor go to the hospital””
 Sexual AbuseSexual Abuse: “: “Someone threatened to hurt me or tell lies about me unless I didSomeone threatened to hurt me or tell lies about me unless I did
something sexual with themsomething sexual with them””
 Emotional AbuseEmotional Abuse: “: “People in my family said hurtful or insulting things to mePeople in my family said hurtful or insulting things to me””
 Physical NeglectPhysical Neglect: “: “I had to wear dirty clothes”I had to wear dirty clothes”
 Emotional NeglectEmotional Neglect: “: “There was someone in my family who helped me feel that IThere was someone in my family who helped me feel that I
was important or special”was important or special”
 Reliability in MAP sample:Reliability in MAP sample: α = .92α = .92

9. Self-Compassion Scale (http://www.self-Self-Compassion Scale (http://www.self-
compassion.org)compassion.org) 26-item self-report measure, with three SCS components:26-item self-report measure, with three SCS components:
 (1)(1) Self-kindness:Self-kindness: ““I try to be loving towards myself when I’m feeling emotional painI try to be loving towards myself when I’m feeling emotional pain””
 (2)(2) Common humanityCommon humanity: “: “When things are going badly for me, I see the difficultiesWhen things are going badly for me, I see the difficulties
as part of life that everyone goes through”as part of life that everyone goes through”
 (3)(3) MindfulnessMindfulness: “: “When something upsets me I try to keep my emotions in balance”When something upsets me I try to keep my emotions in balance”
 Responses:Responses: (1) almost never to (5) almost always(1) almost never to (5) almost always
 Dichotomous variable was created for low and high total average SCSDichotomous variable was created for low and high total average SCS
scores by median splitscores by median split
 Reliability in study sample:Reliability in study sample: αα = .89= .89
 Presently, a short-form available (12 items), shows good correlation toPresently, a short-form available (12 items), shows good correlation to
outcomes as full scale (26 items) in MAP; also Compassion Towards Othersoutcomes as full scale (26 items) in MAP; also Compassion Towards Others
 Neff, K. D. (2003). Development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion.Neff, K. D. (2003). Development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion.
Self and Identity, 2, 223-250.Self and Identity, 2, 223-250.
 Raes, F., Pommier, E., Neff, K. D., & Van Gucht, D. (2011). Construction and factorialRaes, F., Pommier, E., Neff, K. D., & Van Gucht, D. (2011). Construction and factorial
validation of a short form of the Self-Compassion Scale. validation of a short form of the Self-Compassion Scale. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy.Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy.
1818, 250-255., 250-255.

10. Results – Self-compassion and CMResults – Self-compassion and CM
 Self-compassionSelf-compassion
 Mean (Mean (SDSD):): 3.10 (0.56)3.10 (0.56)
SCS High SCS Low Cohen’s
N = 56 N = 62 d
CTQ score (SD )
Physical abuse 9.7 (5.7) 11.9 (6.1) 0.49 0.053
Sexual abuse 6.8 (4.3) 8.2 (6.1) 0.28 0.168
Emotional abuse 10.3 (5.4) 13.2 (6.3) 0.58 0.011
Physical neglect 9.3 (4.4) 9.9 (4.1) 0.24 0.432
Emotional
neglect
13.3 (5.4) 16.0 (6.1) 0.45 0.025
P

11. Results – Self-compassion and DVResults – Self-compassion and DV
-There was a group difference, χ2 (1, N = 77) = 10.4, p = .001
-There was no case with pure-type continuous dating violence.
DV continuity measured by DV at 2 or more time points, n=136
Continuity of dating
violence
2+ times across 4
time points
No dating violence at
all time points
77.8 41.5
Both types at least 2
of 4 time points
22.2 58.5
SCS High, n=36 (%) SCS Low, n=41 (%)

12. DiscussionDiscussion
 Findings:Findings:
 There was no “pure victimization” or “pure perpetration” pattern. ExperiencingThere was no “pure victimization” or “pure perpetration” pattern. Experiencing
both roles is common in both sexes; most MAP youth did not engage in DV.both roles is common in both sexes; most MAP youth did not engage in DV.
 SCS was association with (1) childhood physical abuse; (2) childhood emotionalSCS was association with (1) childhood physical abuse; (2) childhood emotional
maltreatment; and (3) DV continuity ( 2 or more time points)maltreatment; and (3) DV continuity ( 2 or more time points)
LimitationLimitation
 Attrition of sample and missing data is a major challenge in this study of ChildAttrition of sample and missing data is a major challenge in this study of Child
Protection Services-involved adolescentsProtection Services-involved adolescents
 Sample size was small; findings are preliminary, pending replicationSample size was small; findings are preliminary, pending replication
 Next stepsNext steps
 Further psychometric examinations for the measurements of DV and SCS inFurther psychometric examinations for the measurements of DV and SCS in
child welfare adolescents are neededchild welfare adolescents are needed
 Confirm these findings with an increased size of sample, as well as with differentConfirm these findings with an increased size of sample, as well as with different
adolescent samples, in both normative and various at-risk groupsadolescent samples, in both normative and various at-risk groups

13. ReferenceReference
 Bernstein, D. P., Fink, L., Handelsman, L., Foote, J., Lovejoy, M.,Bernstein, D. P., Fink, L., Handelsman, L., Foote, J., Lovejoy, M.,
Wenzel, K., Sapareto, E., & Ruggiero, J. (1994). Initial reliability andWenzel, K., Sapareto, E., & Ruggiero, J. (1994). Initial reliability and
validity of a new retrospective measure of child abuse and neglect.validity of a new retrospective measure of child abuse and neglect.
American Journal of PsychiatryAmerican Journal of Psychiatry, 151(8), 1132-1136., 151(8), 1132-1136.
 Neff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale toNeff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to
measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223–250.measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223–250.
 Wekerle, C., Leung, E., Wall, A. M., MacMillan, H., Boyle, M.,Wekerle, C., Leung, E., Wall, A. M., MacMillan, H., Boyle, M.,
Trocmé, N., & Waechter, R. (2009a). The contribution of childhoodTrocmé, N., & Waechter, R. (2009a). The contribution of childhood
emotional abuse to teen dating violence among child protectiveemotional abuse to teen dating violence among child protective
services-involved youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(1), 45-58services-involved youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(1), 45-58
 Wolfe, Reitzel–Jaffe, Gough, & Wekerle, youth and their parent. TheWolfe, Reitzel–Jaffe, Gough, & Wekerle, youth and their parent. The
average participa1994).average participa1994).
 THANK YOU!THANK YOU!
 To obtain ppt, contact Dr. C. Wekerle (wekerc@mcmaster.ca)To obtain ppt, contact Dr. C. Wekerle (wekerc@mcmaster.ca)