See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323382793

Child Victimization and Polyvictimization Among

Young Adults in Northern Chile

Article  in  Journal of Interpersonal Violence · February 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 187

1 author:

Cristián Pinto Cortez

University of Tarapacá
47 PUBLICATIONS   60 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Victimization and Poly-Victimization in a Community Sample... View project

Prevalence Of Child Sexual Abuse In Men From Northern Chile And Their Psychological And Sexual Health
View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cristián Pinto Cortez on 24 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

759058
research-article2018
JIVXXX10.1177/0886260518759058Journal of Interpersonal ViolencePinto-Cortez et al.

Original Research
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
1­–23
Child Victimization © The Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permissions:
and Polyvictimization sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0886260518759058
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518759058
Among Young Adults in journals.sagepub.com/home/jiv

Northern Chile

Cristián Pinto-Cortez1  ,
Pablo Gutiérrez-Echegoyen,2
and Diego Henríquez1

Abstract
This study examined the prevalence of victimization and polyvictimization and
gender differences in young adults from Arica in northern Chile. In all, 718
college students participated (46.9% men, 53.1% women), aged between 17 and
28 years old (M = 21.6; SD = 4.11). The Spanish version of Juvenile Victimization
Questionnaire ( JVQ) was used to access five categories of child victimization
(conventional crime, child maltreatment, peer and siblings victimization,
sexual victimization, and indirect victimization). In total, 98.7% of young adults
reported at least one type of victimization throughout their life. In general,
males are more exposed to victimization for conventional crimes and indirect
victimization and women to sexual victimization and bullying. A total of 89.1%
of the sample was considered polyvictims (i.e., experienced five or more forms
of victimization). This research provides information about the epidemiology
of victimization and polyvictimization in young adults in the international
context, and is the first study from this point of view in a South American
country. The results show that young adults in northern Chile experience a
high level of victimization, even mostly higher than others studies realized in
the international context. Gender is a variable that has a significant influence
and must be taken into account in the analyses of this complex subject of study.

1Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, Chile

2Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain
Corresponding Author:
Cristián Pinto-Cortez, Escuela de Psicología y Filosofía, Universidad de Tarapacá,
18 de Septiembre #2222, Arica, Chile.
Email: cpinto@uta.cl
2 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Keywords
cultural contexts, violence exposure, child abuse, bullying, sexual assault

Child victimization is an interpersonal process through which a child or ado-

lescent suffers the physical and psychological consequences of a criminal act
of another person that is also a behavior contrary to social norms (De Jorge,
1998). In this context, multiple investigations have demonstrated child and
youth vulnerability to suffer victimization processes across different environ-
ments (Radford, Corral, Bradley, & Fisher, 2013).

Developmental Victimology
Developmental victimology is a field intended to help promote interest in and
understanding of the broad range of victimizations that children suffer from,
and suggest some specific lines of inquiry that such an interest should take
(Finkelhor, 2008).
The study of the risk factors and effects of child victimization have fos-
tered the field of developmental victimology for approximately a decade
(Finkelhor, 2007; Kendall-Tackett & Giacomoni, 2005). This field contrib-
utes to the discussion of the psychological and social effects of victimization
and multiple victimization during childhood and adolescence (Holt,
Finkelhor, & Kaufman, 2007). Thus, the scientific literature includes several
studies on the psychological and social effects of unique types of victimiza-
tion, including sexual abuse (Pereda, Guilera, Forns, & Gómez-Benito,
2009), exposure to gender-based violence (Margolin & Vickerman, 2011),
bullying (Craig et al., 2009), community violence (Alkhatib, Regan, &
Barrett, 2007), physical abuse (Stoltenborgh, Bakermans-Kranenburg, Alink,
& van IJzendoorn, 2015), and others. The last decade has considered the pos-
sibility that children and adolescents experience more than one type of vic-
timization throughout their lives, thereby creating a cumulative risk effect
(Saldaña, Jiménez, & Oliva, 1995).
In this context, Finkelhor (2007) coined the term “polyvictimization” which
refers to the experience of multiple victimizations of different kinds, such as
sexual abuse, physical abuse, bullying, and exposure to family violence, not
just multiple episodes of the same kind of victimization (Finkelhor, 2011).
The importance of investigating polyvictimization is given by the scientific
findings showing that the effects of adversity do not dissipate over time; rather,
they produce a cumulative risk that affects the neurobiological system, creating
a long-term vulnerability for the development of different mental health prob-
lems (Shonkoff, Boyce, & McEwen, 2009). In this context, although child and
Pinto-Cortez et al. 3

sexual abuse significantly contribute to mental health problems (Nanni, Uher,

& Danese, 2012; Paolucci, Genius, & Violato, 2001), the relationship between
single types of victimization and mental health has been overestimated
(Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2007). Thus, the polyvictimization model is a
better predictor of mental health problems such as traumatic symptomatology
(Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2007; Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, & Hamby,
2005), posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, substance use problems (Ford,
Elhai, Connor, & Frueh, 2010), and anxiety and anger/aggression (Cyr,
Clément, & Chamberland, 2014).
Over the last decade, the study of polyvictimization has gained relevance
worldwide (Cyr et al., 2013; Pereda, Guilera, & Abad, 2014). Research on
this topic has been performed with children, adolescents, and young adults in
community samples as well as groups at risk such as children and adolescents
in the child welfare system and the juvenile justice system (Ford, Grasso,
Hawke, & Chapman, 2013).
Studies have shown cultural differences in polyvictimization across coun-
tries using child and youth community samples. A high prevalence of child
and youth polyvictimization exists in North America (Cyr et al., 2013;
Finkelhor et al., 2007) and Europe (Aho, Proczkowska-Björklund, & Svedin,
2016; Pereda et al., 2014), although a much higher prevalence exists in Asia
(Le, Holton, Nguyen, Wolfe, & Fisher, 2015). These differences are attrib-
uted to the influence of cultural factors on the understanding of the concept
of violence in each country (e.g., the use of corporal punishment for children
within the family or the acceptance of peer violence in the community; Le,
Holton, Nguyen, Wolfe, & Fisher, 2015; Runyan et al., 2005).

Polyvictimization Studies of Adults

Retrospective studies on the epidemiology of lifetime polyvictimization using
adult samples have been conducted primarily in the United States (Elliott,
Alexander, Pierce, Aspelmeier, & Richmond, 2009; Richmond, Elliott, Pierce,
Aspelmeier, & Alexander, 2009), Russia (Bogolyubova, Sckochilov, &
Smykalo, 2015), and Australia (Price-Robertson, Higgins, & Vasallo, 2013).
These studies have shown variations in their prevalence figures. This variation
is attributed to the differences of the evaluation methods used as well as the
characteristics of the cultural contexts in each country in question. For exam-
ple, studies of college women from the United States using the Juvenile
Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ; Elliott et al., 2009; Richmond et al., 2009)
have presented similar findings among them. Richmond et al. (2009) used a
sample age range from 18 to 23 years old. Of the total sample of university
students, they found that 15.4% had experienced six types of victimization,
4 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

26.7% had experienced five, 25.7% had experienced four, 13.8% had experi-
enced three, 10.3% had experienced two, and 5.5% had experienced only one.
Alternatively, Elliott et al. (2009) also studied college women and found that
24.6% experienced six types of victimization throughout their lives, whereas
21.8% experienced four, 14% experienced three, 6.9% experienced two, and
5.3% reported the experience of a unique type of victimization throughout
their lives.
In Australia, however, Price-Robertson et al. (2013) designed a measure to
assess different forms of maltreatment among university students between 23
and 24 years old of both sexes. They found that 15% experienced only one
type of child abuse, whereas 8% experienced multiple types of child abuse
(two or more types of abuse). Emotional abuse (17%) was the most common,
whereas neglect (3%) was the least common.
Finally, Bogolyubova et al. (2015) used the JVQ to study polyvictimiza-
tion in a sample of Russian university students of both sexes between 19 and
25 years old. They found that 24.6% of the sample experienced between five
and seven types of victimization before age 18 (i.e., the low polyvictimiza-
tion group), 45.4% experienced between 8 and 14 types of victimization (i.e.,
the high polyvictimization group), and 10.8% experienced 15 or more types
of victimization (i.e., the extreme victimization group).
In line with studies using child and youth samples, adult samples have
revealed that it is rare for adults to have experienced only one type of victim-
ization throughout their lives (Elliott et al., 2009; Richmond et al., 2009). In
fact, polyvictimization is the best predictor of psychological distress
(Richmond et al., 2009), social and emotional maladjustment (Elliott et al.,
2009), depression, anxiety, antisocial behavior, and general health problems
(Price-Robertson et al., 2013).

Studies of Victimization Among Chilean Adults

Similar to the international context, research in Chile on child victimization
has been conducted with samples of children and adolescents (see Pinto-
Cortez, Pereda, & Flores, 2017) as well as youth and adults victimized during
childhood. In this regard, the number of retrospective studies with adult sam-
ples is low; in fact, only five articles published in peer-reviewed journals
were found, all of them focused on sexual victimization.
Vizcarra and Balladares (2003) provided the first prevalence data obtained
in Chile. These authors worked with a random sample of university students
from Temuco in southern Chile. The authors found that 14.3% of the 598
people interviewed between 17 and 38 years old reported having been sexu-
ally abused at some point during their childhood before the age of 12. This
Pinto-Cortez et al. 5

percentage was 11.8% in boys and 14.8% in girls. Lehrer, Lehrer, Lehrer, and
Oyarzún (2007) conducted another study on the prevalence of child sexual
abuse in Chile with university women from Santiago de Chile. These authors
observed that 21% of a sample of 445 women with an average age of 19 years
reported having experienced some form of sexual abuse before age 14, and
31% reported having experienced various forms of sexual victimization since
age 14. They also found that the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse was
25% among participants who had witnessed domestic violence and 19%
among those who had not.
Another study by Lehrer, Lehrer, and Oyarzún (2009) of a sample of 484
university women and 466 university men from Santiago de Chile identified
that 35% of women and 21% of men reported having been victims of sexual
violence since the age of 14.
Other investigations have focused on male samples. For example, another
study by Lehrer, Lehrer, and Koss (2013) of a sample of 416 men between 17
and 30 years old from Santiago found that 20.4% reported unwanted sexual
experiences (including sexual abuse and rape) since age 14, and 9.4%
reported these experiences as occurring before age 14. On the contrary, Pinto-
Cortez, Pereda, and Chacon (2017) examined a community sample of 464
young men in northern Chile, and the prevalence of sexual abuse was 8.4%
before age 18. This study also assessed other types of maltreatment, such
emotional abuse (30.8%), neglect (11.6%), and physical abuse (3%).
The prevalence of sexual abuse found by Chilean studies is similar to the
rates reported by other international studies (Pereda et al., 2009). Although
the rates found with regard to women are higher than those regarding men,
abuse is a powerful problem for both genders. A key aspect of understanding
this problem, which has clinical implications, is to observe whether there are
significant differences between men and women in the frequency and type of
victimization experienced during childhood. Boys and girls suffer victimiza-
tion differently (Pereda et al., 2009; Stoltenborgh, van IJzendoorn, Euser, &
Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2011). Gender and victimization differences have
been observed in international studies outside of Latin America (Abajobir,
Kisely, Maravilla, Williams, & Najman, 2017). The studies conducted in
Chile indicate that certain factors are correlated with the high rate of sexual
abuse in women, for example, the acceptance of the myths associated with
gender stereotypes in both men and women such as the myth rape (Lehrer
et al., 2009), which is influenced by beliefs and cultural taboos (Macintyre,
Montero-Vega, & Sagbakken, 2015).
Although studies on sexual abuse in Chile have enabled an estimation of the
reality of the number of adults victimized during childhood, the view that these
investigations offer remains incomplete. In addition, emphasis has been placed
6 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

on the fragmentation of the different types of violence that affect children in

lieu of an integral approach proposed by the polyvictimization model. In this
context, little is known about the experiences of childhood polyvictimization
among the population of Chilean adults. Furthermore, our review did not reveal
any research regarding this problem among the adult Chilean population.
Importantly, a comprehensive approach to child victimization among the
adult population might contribute to the development of evidence-based pro-
grams that enable the provision of treatments tailored to the needs of the
victims. Moreover, such an approach might improve the efficiency of the
State’s investment in public policy on childhood and mental health, which, in
the case of Chile, has increased significantly since the 1990s.
Thus, the lack of knowledge about polyvictimization among the Chilean
adult population and the practical knowledge that might be derived from it led
us to ask ourselves about the rates of victimization and polyvictimization among
the Chilean adult population. We paid special attention to the gender differences
regarding a wide range of victimizations, beyond sexual victimization.

The Current Study

Following the perspective of developmental victimology (Finkelhor, 2007),
we sought to expand the existing knowledge about the extent of violence
against young adults in Latin America, facilitating comparisons with studies
conducted in developed countries.
The present study aimed to identify a wide range of victimization types
and polyvictimization frequencies during the lifetimes of young adults in
northern Chile. Following a similar methodology to previous polyvictimiza-
tion studies outside of Latin American young adults (Bogolyubova et al.,
2015; Elliott et al., 2009; Richmond et al., 2009), we considered the gender
perspectives and differences related to this variable, as suggested by previous
studies conducted in Chile (Lehrer et al., 2013; Lehrer et al., 2009).

Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 718 university students of both sexes (46.9% men
and 53.1% women), aged 17 to 28 years (M = 21.6 years; SD = 4.11 years),
who belonged to 12 undergraduate university programs in Arica, northern
Chile. The participants were selected via nonprobabilistic quota sampling
based on the variable “degree taken.” As a first step, all students enrolled dur-
ing the academic year 2016 were considered as a population. Subsequently,
Pinto-Cortez et al. 7

quotas were assigned according to the “degree taken” variable, in a similar

proportion to those degrees taken among the population. Once the quotas
were determined, the study participants were chosen. Approximately 31.5%
of the sample was composed of first-year university students, 26.5% were
second-year students, 19.4% were third-year students, 16.1% were fourth-
year students, 5.7% were fifth-year students, and 0.8% were sixth-year uni-
versity students.

Measures
The questionnaire included the following sections:

1. Sociodemographic data: Sociodemographic data were collected through

a survey designed to obtain information on age, gender (i.e., male or
female), academic program, degree, and year of study.
2. Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire–Adult Retrospective Questionnaire
(JVQ; Hamby, Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2004): The JVQ is a ques-
tionnaire designed for adults that aims to collect information about a wide
range of victimizations that occurred during childhood up to 17 years of
age. It is a comprehensive instrument composed of 34 items that are
answered via self-report that provides a quantitative description of the
major forms of violence against children. The JVQ investigates 34 indi-
vidual forms of victimization covering five general areas: conventional
crime (eight items, for example, theft or personal thefts), child maltreat-
ment (four items, for example, physical violence and neglect), peer and
sibling victimization (five items, for example, bullying), sexual victimiza-
tion and assault (seven items, for example, sexual abuse), and witnessing
and indirect victimization (nine items, for example, witnessing domestic
violence). For example, one question related to physical punishment is
“Not including spanking, did any adult hit you, kick you, or physically
hurt you in any way during your childhood?”

To answer the questionnaire, participants reported the number of times

that they experienced each aggression from the time they were born up to the
age of 17 on a 6-point scale (i.e., none, 1 time, 2 times, 3 times, 4 times, or 5
or more times). The JVQ also identifies the group of participants exposed to
multiple types of child victimization who are therefore more vulnerable to the
negative effects of trauma (i.e., the polyvictimization group). These data
were obtained through the continuous measure of polyvictimization that was
calculated by adding all responses “yes” of the 34 types of victimization that
each participant reported.
8 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

The present study used the Spanish version of the JVQ with an adaptation
to the local language. Permission for using the JVQ in this study was obtained
from the original authors. The JVQ has shown satisfactory psychometric
properties in validation studies in the United States. The Cronbach’s alpha for
all scales is .80 (which is very good), varying between modules for sexual
assault and peer or sibling assault (.35), and physical assault (.64) as reported
by Finkelhor, Hamby, Ormrod, and Turner (2005). In the present study, the
JVQ omega (ω) coefficients were .84 for the conventional crime domain, .78
for the child maltreatment domain, .75 for the peer and sibling victimization
domain, .88 for the sexual victimization and assault domain, and .83 for the
indirect victimization domain. The internal consistency for the total JVQ and
for each of its modules was calculated using Omega’s alpha as a measure of
coherence. Omega’s coefficient has been shown to be more accurate than the
Cronbach’s alpha, reducing the risks of overestimating or underestimating
reliability (Dunn, Baguley, & Brunsden, 2014).

Procedure
The study data were collected in 2016 in Arica, northern Chile, as part of a
larger project aimed at determining the relationship between child victimiza-
tion experiences and their negative consequences on mental health. As a first
step, project approval was requested and provided by the ethics committee of
the School of Psychology and Philosophy of University of Tarapacá
(ACC07/2016). Thereafter, we contacted the relevant professors for an
appointment to administer the questionnaire during their class time. To per-
form the fieldwork, three students from advanced psychology courses with
certified degrees in psychology were adequately trained to ensure the correct
administration of the questionnaires. This collaborating team attended the
appointments and collectively surveyed the students who attended class that
day during class time. When the number of students was not sufficient to fill
the planned quota, a new appointment was made with academic program
members of the same degree until the required total was reached. The average
time taken to administer the questionnaire was approximately 35 min for
each group. In all cases, the participating students were adequately informed
of the voluntary and anonymous nature of their participation in the study as
well as the study objectives. All students voluntarily agreed to participate
without receiving compensation in return.

Data Analyses
The data were processed using SPSS 22. To calculate the different types of
victimization throughout childhood, descriptive statistics were performed
Pinto-Cortez et al. 9

using the cutoff points proposed by Finkelhor, Ormrod, and Turner (2009),
who identified 10% as the most victimized group of participants.
Besides the criteria of Bogolyubova et al. (2015) for retrospective studies
with adults, establishing the categories of nonvictimization, less victimiza-
tion (1-4 types of experiences of victimization), low polyvictimization (5-7
types), and high polyvictimization (8-17 types). The cutoff point of 10%
allowed us to identify the extreme victimized group of participants (Finkelhor,
Ormrod, & Turner, 2009).
This 10% subsample of participants who experienced 18+ types of life-
time victimization was included. To estimate gender differences between
types of victimization, the Pearson’s chi-square test was used, and the odds
ratio (OR) was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), not including
a value of 1. To perform the estimation between gender differences and poly-
victimization, the mean of polyvictimization was the sum of all types of vic-
timization, which obtained a continuous variable (polyvictimization). The
mean number of victimizations was calculated based on gender and with
regard to each JVQ module. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare
between-group differences (scores on all scales were not distributed nor-
mally; therefore, nonparametric tests were used).

Results
Of the 718 adults who participated in the present study, 98.7% reported at
least one type of victimization since infancy (99.1% men and 96.0% women).
See Table 1 for a complete list of victimization types and rates.

Conventional Crime
Approximately 93.9% of participants reported conventional crime victimiza-
tion during their childhood (90.0% men and 86.3% women). The most com-
mon conventional crimes were personal theft (68.5%), vandalism (63.7%), and
assault without a weapon (63.1%). Approximately, 40.9% reported bias attack.
Male participants were more likely to be the target of this form of victimization
than females, specifically assault with weapon (OR = 0.49, 95% CIs = [0.35,
0.68]), assault without a weapon (OR = 0.67, 95% CIs = [0.49, 0.92]), attempted
assault (OR = 0.57, 95% CIs = [0.42, 0.77]), or kidnapping (OR = 0.53, 95%
CIs = [0.28, 0.98]).

Child Maltreatment
A total of 64.3% of adults reported suffering experiences of abuse during
childhood. The most frequent types of maltreatment were psychological/
10 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Table 1.  Lifetime Victimization.

Lifetime Victimization

Victimized Gender (%)

Victimization n % M F OR

Module A: Conventional crime 674 93.9 93.6 93.0 1.03

C1 Robbery 283 41.7 43.6 40.1 0.87
C2 Personal theft 471 68.5 66.7 70.2 1.18
C3 Vandalism 440 63.7 64.8 63.0 0.92
C4 Assault with weapon 212 30.7 38.8 23.6 0.49*
C5 Assault without weapon 433 63.1 68.0 58.9 0.67*
C6 Attempted assault 281 40.8 48.0 34.3 0.57*
C7 Kidnapping 45 6.6 8.7 4.8 0.53*
C8 Bias attack 282 40.9 38.0 43.6 1.26
Module B: Child maltreatment 462 64.3 63.2 62.8 0.99
M1 Physical abuse by caregiver 185 27.1 26.5 27.7 1.06
M2 Psychological/emotional abuse 358 52.0 49.1 54.7 1.25
M3 Neglect 112 16.3 18.4 14.5 0.75
M4 Custodial interference/family abduction 112 16.4 18.9 14.3 0.72
Module C: Peer and sibling victimization 631 87.9 89.4 85.6 0.70
P1 Gang or group assault 152 22.2 29.2 15.9 0.46*
P2 Peer or sibling assault 439 64.0 65.6 62.7 0.88
P3 Nonsexual genital assault 195 28.6 42.5 16.2 0.26*
P4 Bullying 415 60.4 33.4 30.9 1.42*
P5 Emotional bullying 425 61.1 56.1 64.4 1.39*
P6 Dating violence 108 15.7 20.4 11.7 0.52*
Module D: Sexual victimization and assault 340 47.4 42.5 48.4 1.34
S1 Sexual assault by known adult 63 9.1 5.9 12.4 2.26*
S2 Sexual assault by unknown adult 51 7.3 4.6 5.4 1.12
S3 Sexual assault by peer 58 8.4 7.4 9.5 1.31
S4 Rape: attempted or completed 72 10.5 7.1 13.8 2.10*
S5 Flashing/sexual exposure 109 15.8 11.7 19.7 1.85*
S6 Verbal sexual harassment 153 22.2 16.0 28.0 2.04*
S7 Statutory rape/sexual misconduct 138 20.2 22.0 48.6 0.81
Module E: Witnessing and indirect victimization 647 90.1 91.8 87.8 0.65
W1 Witness to domestic violence 190 27.7 30.1 25.6 0.80
W2 Witness to parent/sibling assault 143 20.8 21.2 20.7 0.97
W3 Witness to assault with weapon 412 60.1 64.9 55.8 0.68*
W4 Witness to assault without weapon 515 74.9 78.5 71.7 0.69*
W5 Burglary of family household 320 46.2 46.0 46.7 1.03
W6 Murder of family member or friend 110 15.9 17.2 15.0 0.85
W7 Witness to murder 76 11.1 13.8 8.7 0.60*
W8 Exposure to random shooting, terrorism, 279 40.6 45.4 36.4 0.69*
or riots
W9 Exposure to war or ethnic conflict 27 3.9 5.9 2.2 0.37*

Note. OR = odds ratio.

*p < .05.
Pinto-Cortez et al. 11

emotional abuse (52%) and physical abuse by a caregiver (27.1%). The less
frequent cases of maltreatment were neglect (16.3%) or family abduction
(16.4%). No gender differences were found.

Peer and Sibling Victimization

A total of 87.9% of the study participants reported experiencing at least one
type of victimization by their peers or siblings. The most frequent types of
victimization were peer or sibling assault (64.0%) and emotional bullying
(61.1%). Males were more likely to be the target of nonsexual genital assault
(OR = 0.26, 95% CIs = [0.18, 0.37]), gang or group assault (OR = 0.46, 95%
CIs = [0.32, 0.66]), dating violence (OR = 0.52, 95% CIs = [0.34, 0.79]), and
bullying (OR = 1.42, 95% CIs = [1.04,1.93]), whereas women showed a
higher frequency of victimization via emotional bullying (OR = 1.39, 95%
CIs = [1.02, 1.89]).

Sexual Victimization and Assault

A total of 47.4% of the participants reported sexual victimization during
childhood. The most frequent types of sexual assault were verbal sexual
harassment (22.2%) and statutory rape/sexual misconduct (20.2%). Important
gender differences were found regarding sexual victimization and assault:
Verbal sexual harassment (OR = 2.04, 95% CIs = [1.40, 2.97]), flashing/
sexual exposure (OR = 1.85, 95% CIs = [1.21, 2.83]), rape (attempted or
completed; OR = 2.10, 95% CIs = [1.25, 3.53]), and sexual assault by a
known adult (OR = 2.26, 95% CIs = [1.29, 3.97]) were significantly more
frequently reported by women than men.

Witnessing and Indirect Victimization

A total of 90.1% suffered from indirect victimization during their child-
hood or adolescence. The most frequent types of indirect victimization
found were witnessing an assault with a weapon (60.1%), burglary of the
family household (46.2%), or exposure to random shootings, terrorism, or
riots (40.6%). Important gender differences were also found regarding this
category: Men reported significantly more frequent exposure to shootings,
terrorism or riots (OR = 0.69, 95% CIs = [0.51, 0.93]), witnessing an
assault with a weapon (OR = 0.68, 95% CIs = [0.50, 0.93]), witnessing a
murder (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = [0.37, 0.97]), exposure to war or ethnic
conflict (OR = 0.37, 95% CIs = [0.16, 0.85]), or witnessing an assault
without a weapon (OR = 0.69, 95% CIs = [0.49, 0.99]) than women.
12 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Polyvictimization
According to the criteria described in the “Data Analyses” section and as
shown in Table 2, four groups of polyvictimization and their respective per-
centages were described. The group with the least victimization (1-4 types of
victimization) represented 9.5% of the sample, the group defined as “low”
polyvictimization (5-7 types of victimization) included 142 participants
(19.7%), the group defined as “high” polyvictimization (8-17 types of vic-
timization) included 393 participants (54.7%), whereas the “extreme” poly-
victimization group (18+ types of victimization) included 106 participants
(14.7%).
In all of the groups of victimization and polyvictimization, the most fre-
quent types of victimization were conventional crimes, peer and sibling vic-
timization, and indirect victimization, whereas child maltreatment and sexual
victimization were the least frequent.
Significant differences were found between men and women after analyz-
ing the polyvictimization variable (U = 42.601, p = .035, d = 0.13). The results
indicated that men experienced a greater number of victimizations during
childhood (up to the age of 18) on average (Table 3). This same trend was
observed with regard to peer and sibling victimization (U = 49.052, p = .015,
d = 0.20) and indirect victimization (U = 45.668, p = .000, d = 0.30). Despite
the number of victimizations included in these modules, the effect sizes
observed were low, excluding indirect victimization, which showed a medium
effect size. Significant gender differences were not found with regard to con-
ventional crime, child maltreatment, or sexual victimization.

Discussion
This research sought to analyze the rates of lifetime victimization and poly-
victimization among university young adults in northern Chile, considering
possible differences based on the type and frequency of victimization as well
as gender. We also aimed to facilitate comparisons with studies conducted
internationally (i.e., outside of Latin America). The results of the present
study showed that the almost all of university young adults in Arica have suf-
fered from at least one type of victimization throughout their childhood
(98.7%; 99.1% men, 96.0% female). Furthermore, the results revealed that
the victimization of university young adults in this region is common; more-
over, it is exceptional for university young adults in this area to grow and
develop without having at least one experience of victimization throughout
their lives. Importantly, these results show a similar trend to those of previous
international studies, which indicates a high prevalence of victimization
 Table 2.  Polyvictimization and Types of Victimization.

Victimization Category (%)

  Polyvictimized
Less
  Anya Victimized Low High Extreme

  1-18+ Types (1-4 Types) (5-7 Types) (8-17 Types) (18+ Types)

  n n = 709 n = 68 n = 142 n = 393 n = 106

98.7 9.5 19.7 54.7 14.7
Module A: Conventional crime 674 93.9 25.3 19.0 31.4 11.8
Module B: Child maltreatment 462 64.3 35.7 14.9 10.0 0.7
Modulo C: Peer and sibling victimization 631 87.9 36.2 21.8 22.5 2.7
Modulo D: Sexual victimization and assault 340 47.4 28.3 10.3 3.7 1.2
Modulo E: Witnessing/indirect victimization 647 90.1 28.2 18.2 33.5 6.3

Note. Sample = 718.

aAt least one experience of victimization lifetime.

13
14 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Table 3.  Polyvictimization and Gender Differences.

Men Women

Factor M (SD) M (SD) U p d

Polivictimization 26.93 (19.35) 24.37 (18.94) 42.601 .035 0.13
Module A: Conventional crime 8.79 (7.13) 8.30 (6.93) 50.939 .317 0.03
Module B: Child maltreatment 2.61 (3.27) 3.09 (4.03) 58.899 .435 0.06
Module C: Peer and siblings 5.90 (5.29) 4.90 (4.58) 49.052 .015 0.20
victimization
Module D: Sexual victimization 1.56 (3.03) 2.16 (3.79) 60.877 .058 0.17
Module E: Witnessing and 8.07 (6.19) 6.25 (5.47) 45.668 .000 0.31
indirect victimization

among young adults (e.g., 99.3% in Russia, Bogolyubova et al., 2015; 98%
in the United States with college woman samples, Elliott et al., 2009; and
97%, Richmond et al., 2009). It should also be noted that the high prevalence
of victimization detected was given by the type of instrument used, which
assesses infrequent forms of victimization not regularly included in other
studies (e.g., those conducted in Chile). This instrument incorporated a com-
prehensive view of victimization based on the pathways to polyvictimization,
currently an internationally recognized scientific phenomenon (Finkelhor,
Ormrod, Turner, & Holt, 2009).
With regard to gender, victimization via conventional crimes and indirect
victimization affect men in greater proportion than women, whereas women
suffer more frequently from sexual victimization. Regarding peer victimiza-
tion, women are more frequently emotional bullied, whereas men suffer
more from peer and sibling assaults, gang or group assaults, bullying, and
dating violence. Importantly, men were affected in greater proportion by the
types of violence that occur in the community or in extra-familial contexts
(e.g., violent crime and indirect victimization). A tentative explanation of
this finding might be related to the influence of gender socialization and
gender stereotypes. For example, an erroneous social belief exists that boys
are less likely to be victimized in community spaces or outside the home
than girls. Furthermore, some people tend to think that boys can defend
themselves or avoid threats; therefore, they require less care than their
female counterparts. Undoubtedly, this mistaken belief, which is widely
accepted by society in general and Chilean society in particular, places boys
in a position of greater vulnerability to become victims of community vio-
lence (Alaggia & Millington, 2008). Gender socialization might also explain
the differences found with regard to peer victimization. Investigations of the
Pinto-Cortez et al. 15

gender differences in victimization within pairs show that in general, men

are more often involved in situations of physical aggression than women
(Baldry & Farrington, 2000), whereas indirect aggression through social
exclusion, considered as bullying or emotional bullying in the JVQ, is more
common among women (Crapanzano, Frick, & Terranova, 2010).
On the contrary, the current results show that dating violence affects men
in greater proportion than women. Although this finding differs from what is
known from the research on gender violence in marriage or adulthood, it
matches studies indicating that the violence committed by young women is
greater than that committed by men (Windle & Mrug, 2009). In the same
vein, Cuevas, Sabina, and Bell (2014) studied Latino youth residing in the
United States using the JVQ. A possible explanation for these differences lies
in the assessment methods used to examine dating violence because these
studies vary in the operational definition of abuse. The majority of studies
reporting that girls are more often victimized than boys in dating violence
integrate all types of abuse into one variable (Mangold & Koski, 1990). On
the contrary, the majority of studies reporting that men are more frequently
victimized than women in dating relationships tend to assess types of vio-
lence separately (e.g., only sexual abuse, only physical and/or emotional
abuse; Foshee, 1996). In this case, the JVQ assesses only physical violence,
and this specificity might explain the gender differences regarding dating
violence found in these cases.
Finally, the present study found a high prevalence of sexual victimization
among women. In Latin America, the high rates of violence against women
(Wilson, 2014) have been associated with the cultural values of machismo
and traditional sex roles (Jasinski, 2001) that persist today. These values
might be present in general society across different contexts, for example,
parenting within families, in schools, and the community. The high preva-
lence of sexual victimization among women has also been found by previous
review studies (Abrahams et al., 2014), confirming that sexual violence
against girls and women is a worldwide problem that crosscuts different cul-
tures and societies that commonly practice the objectification and sexual rei-
fication of women (Kalra & Bhugra, 2013).
Although these explanations are linked to sexism approach as the cause of
violence, we cannot overlook the similar proportion of men and women who
have reported being victimized in this study. This leads us to link our findings
with the theory on the need for control within relations as a coincidental fac-
tor for men as well as for women (Felson, 2002). This gains relevance, when
we consider that the study participants were children when they experienced
violence, and as such, they were more vulnerable to suffering violence.
Nevertheless, given the scope of this research, we cannot affirm beyond any
16 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

doubt that sexism is not an influence in attacks on women, as we do not have

any details about those who attacked the participants in this study. This back-
ground information would be important if, for example, the majority of
attackers were male. Without doubt, this study has opened a necessary debate
to be pursued in future research.

Polyvictimization
Comparing the data of the present study with those of Bogolyubova et al.
(2015), the only previous study that defined groups of polyvictimization in
adults, we observed that the numbers found in Chile are higher than those
found in Russia, especially among the people at the 10% cutoff point corre-
sponding to extreme polyvictimization. In Russia, people who belonged to
this group correspond to those who had experienced 15 or more victimiza-
tions, whereas it corresponded to those who have experienced 18 or more
victimizations in Chile. Considering these data, coupled with the previous
work regarding child and adolescent polyvictimization in Chile that also con-
firmed a higher prevalence of lifetime polyvictimization than that found in
international studies of adolescents (Pinto-Cortez & Venegas, 2015), we jus-
tifiably stress the seriousness of the problem of violence toward children in
Chile, which is more frequent than the problem in other contexts. Nevertheless,
these results are along the same lines as the research that highlights Latin
America as a geographical area with high levels of violence, even higher than
those other regions of the world (Imbusch, Misse, & Carrión, 2011). The fac-
tors proposed in the literature to date explain that the high rates of violence in
Latin America include structural, societal, or personal background; peculiari-
ties of Latin American history or the history of single countries; high rates of
economic and social inequality and forms of social disintegration; truncated
modernization processes; and race, class, and poverty (Buvinic, Morrison, &
Orlando, 2005; Imbusch et al., 2011).
On the contrary, the data in this study showed significant differences
between men and women with respect to polyvictimization; however, the size
of the effect of these differences was small.
This study should be considered as the starting point for future research
on polyvictimization in Chile. Future lines of research should consider a
wide range of victimization experiences during childhood to study victim-
ization in Chile. In relation to the previous point, it is important that these
studies include the influence of cultural factors with regard to the type of
victimization and the consequences of these factors on mental health among
adults from Chile (e.g., how to explain the consequences of polyvictimiza-
tion according to gender).
Pinto-Cortez et al. 17

On the contrary, the results of this study open a theoretical discussion

about the trends of victimization related to gender highlighted by the devel-
opmental victimology model (Finkelhor, 2007), which is based on studies
developed outside of Latin America. Nevertheless, this study presents certain
limitations that must be addressed. First, this research is a cross-sectional
study; therefore, we cannot establish causal relationships. Second, the results
are based on the retrospective information provided by the participants them-
selves about what happened years ago, which might introduce memory bias.
Finally, the representativeness of the current university sample is limited
because it corresponds to a specific area of Chile. Thus, we must be careful
not to generalize these results as though they were valid for the whole coun-
try. Future studies should replicate these results with university and nonuni-
versity samples across different Chilean regions and cities.

Practical Implications
The findings of this study reaffirm the need to address victimization with a
comprehensive approach. Regarding the issue of prevention, the data obtained
enabled the identification of the types of victimizations that most commonly
affect both genders, thereby providing the possibility of school and commu-
nity prevention programs that consider the vulnerability of boys and girls
who suffer from specific types of victimization. These interventions should
therefore act on an informed and accurate basis to improve the effectiveness
and efficiency of the programs and their resources. This suggestion is consis-
tent with the public policy of the Ministry of Women and Gender Equity of
Chile (SERNAMEG, in particular, with regard to the policy of prevention of
violence against women, without minimizing violence against men).
On the contrary, empirical evidence shows that unique types of victimiza-
tion alone do not explain mental health problems during early adulthood (Elliott
et al., 2009); moreover, polyvictimization is strongly associated with the emer-
gence of multiple negative effects on mental health. In relation to practical
interventions, it is necessary to construct broad risk profiles. For example,
mental health services that care for young adults might have evaluation proto-
cols to assess a wide range of victimization types rather than a unique type of
victimization (or a few of them) because although particular forms of violence
no doubt cause serious psychological consequences (e.g., neglect, severe phys-
ical abuse, and sexual abuse), other types of violence that significantly affect
people during childhood cannot be ignored if we want a more complete and
reliable image of the mental health of young adults. It is necessary to consult
with users on these matters to guide plans of intervention consistent with
adverse life experiences during childhood (Shonkoff et al., 2009).
18 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Conclusion
The findings of the present study show high rates of child victimization and
polyvictimization among university young adults in northern Chile with gen-
der differences: Women are primarily affected by sexual victimization and
peer victimization (bullying), whereas men are affected by conventional
crimes, indirect victimization, peer victimization (gang and peer aggression),
and dating violence. These findings support the results of previous interna-
tional research (Bogolyubova et al., 2015; Elliott et al., 2009; Price-Robertson
et al., 2013; Richmond et al., 2009) showing high rates of victimization and
polyvictimization during childhood in samples of young adults. At the same
time, the findings of the present study show that the accumulation of these
types of experiences (polyvictimization) during the life span is greater in
Chile than in other countries where similar studies have been conducted
(Bogolyubova et al., 2015). However, those studies did not differentiate
experiences of polyvictimization by gender. In conclusion, experiences of
childhood and youth victimization and polyvictimization are problems of
considerable magnitude among university young adults in northern Chile.
This finding should alert us to the need to explore this problem further to
guide medical and therapeutic interventions in crucial health contexts.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the
Performance Agreement granted to Universidad de Tarapacá by Ministerio de
Educación de Chile (MINEDUC-UTA). This research was supported in part by a
grant from the “Proyecto Mayor de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica.
Universidad de Tarapacá. UTA/MAYOR 2017 Nro. 3746/17.”

ORCID iD
Cristián Pinto-Cortez   https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4311-9135

References
Abajobir, A. A., Kisely, S., Maravilla, J. C., Williams, G., & Najman, J. M. (2017).
Gender differences in the association between childhood sexual abuse and risky
sexual behaviours: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 63, 249-260. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.023
Pinto-Cortez et al. 19

Abrahams, N., Denvries, K., Watts, C., Pallito, C., Petzold, M., Shamu, S., & Garcia-
Moreno, C. (2014). Prevalence of non-partner sexual violence: A review of global
data. In P. D. Donnelly & C. L. Ward (Eds.), Violence prevention: Epidemiology,
evidence and policy (pp. 49-56). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Aho, N., Proczkowska-Björklund, M., & Svedin, C. G. (2016). Victimization, poly-
victimization, and health in Swedish adolescents. Adolescent Health, Medicine
and Therapeutics, 7, 89-99. doi:10.2147/AHMT.S109587
Alaggia, R., & Millington, G. (2008). Male child sexual abuse: A phenomenology of
betrayal. Clinical Social Work Journal, 36, 265-275. doi:10.1007/s10615-007-0144-y
Alkhatib, A., Regan, J., & Barrett, D. (2007). The silent victims: Effects of war and
terrorism on child development. Psychiatric Annals, 37, 586-589.
Baldry, A. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2000). Bullies and delinquents: Personal charac-
teristics and parental styles. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,
10, 17-31. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298
Bogolyubova, O., Skochilov, R., & Smykalo, L. (2015). Childhood victimization
experiences of young adults in St. Petersburg, Russia. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 30, 1153-1167. doi:10.1177/0886260514539849
Buvinic, M., Morrison, A., & Orlando, M. B. (2005). Violence, crime and social
development in Latin America and the Caribbean Papeles de Población, 11(43),
167-214.
Craig, W., Harel-Fisch, Y., Fogel-Grinvald, H., Dostaler, S., Hetland, J., Simons-
Morton, B., . . . Pickett, W. (2009). A cross-national profile of bullying and
victimization among adolescents in 40 countries. International Journal of Public
Health, 54, 216-224. doi:10.1007/s00038-009-5413-9
Crapanzano, A. M., Frick, P. J., & Terranova, A. M. (2010). Patterns of physical
and relational aggression in a school-based sample of boys and girls. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 433-445. doi:10.1007/s10802-009-9376-3
Cuevas, C. A., Sabina, C., & Bell, K. A. (2014). Dating violence and interpersonal
victimization among a national sample of Latino youth. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 55, 564-570. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.04.007
Cyr, K., Chamberland, C., Clément, M. È., Lessard, G., Wemmers, J. A., Collin-
Vézina, D., & Damant, D. (2013). Polyvictimization and victimization of chil-
dren and youth: Results from a populational survey. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37,
814-820. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.03.009
Cyr, K., Clément, M. È., & Chamberland, C. (2014). Lifetime prevalence of multiple
victimizations and its impact on children’s mental health. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 29, 616-634. doi:10.1177/0886260513505220
De Jorge, L. (1998). Victims and Criminal Process. España: Fondo de Población de
Naciones Unidas (PNUD).
Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practi-
cal solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British
Journal of Psychology, 105, 399-412. doi:10.1111/bjop.12046
Elliott, A. N., Alexander, A. A., Pierce, T. W., Aspelmeier, J. E., & Richmond, J. M.
(2009). Childhood victimization, poly-victimization, and adjustment to college
in women. Child Maltreatment, 14, 330-343. doi:10.1177/1077559509332262
20 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Felson, R. B. (2002). Violence and gender reexamined. Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association.
Finkelhor, D. (2007). Developmental victimology. In R. C. Davis, A. J. Luirigio, & S.
Herman (Eds.), Victims of crime (3rd ed., pp. 9-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Finkelhor, D. (2008). Childhood victimization: Violence, crime, and abuse in the lives
of young people. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Finkelhor, D. (2011, September). Crime, violence and abuse in the lives of children:
Developmental victimology. Presented at the 5th Violence Prevention Milestones
Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa.
Finkelhor, D., Hamby, S. L., Ormrod, R., & Turner, H. (2005). The Juvenile
Victimization Questionnaire: Reliability, validity, and national norms. Child
Abuse & Neglect, 29, 383-412. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.11.001
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2007). Poly-victimization: A
neglected component in child victimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 7-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.008
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2009). Lifetime assessment of poly-
victimization in a national sample of children and youth. Child Abuse & Neglect,
33, 403-411. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.09.012
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., Turner, H. A., & Hamby, S. L. (2005). Measuring
poly-victimization using the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire. Child Abuse
& Neglect, 29, 1297-1312. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.06.005
Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., Turner, H. A., & Holt, M. (2009). Pathways to poly-vic-
timization. Child Maltreatment, 14, 316-329. doi:10.1177/1077559509347012
Ford, J. D., Elhai, J. D., Connor, D. F., & Frueh, B. C. (2010). Poly-victimization and
risk of posttraumatic, depressive, and substance use disorders and involvement in
delinquency in a national sample of adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health,
46, 545-552. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.11.212
Ford, J. D., Grasso, D. J., Hawke, J., & Chapman, J. F. (2013). Poly-victimization
among juvenile justice-involved youths. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37, 788-800.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.01.005
Foshee, V. A. (1996). Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse prevalence, types
and injuries. Health Education Research, 11, 275-286. doi:10.1093/her/11.3.275-a
Hamby, S. L., Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R. K., & Turner, H. A. (2004). The Juvenile
Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ): Administration and scoring manual. Durham,
NH: Crimes Against Children Research Center.
Holt, M. K., Finkelhor, D., & Kaufman, G. (2007). Multiple victimization experiences
of urban elementary school students: Associations with psychosocial functioning
and academic performance. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 503-515. doi:10.1016/j.
chiabu.2006.12.006
Imbusch, P., Misse, M., & Carrión, F. (2011). Violence research in Latin America
and the Caribbean: A literature review. International Journal of Conflict and
Violence, 5, 88-154.
Jasinski, J. L. (2001). Theoretical explanations for violence against women. In C. M.
Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. Kennedy (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against
women (pp. 5-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pinto-Cortez et al. 21

Kalra, G., & Bhugra, D. (2013). Sexual violence against women: Understanding
cross-cultural intersections. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 55, 244-249.
doi:10.4103/0019-5545.117139
Kendall-Tackett, K., & Giacomoni, S. (2005). Child victimization. New York, NY:
Civic Research Institute.
Le, M. T., Holton, S., Nguyen, H. T., Wolfe, R., & Fisher, J. (2015). Poly-victimisation
among Vietnamese high school students: Prevalence and demographic correlates.
PLoS ONE, 10(5), 1-22. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125189
Lehrer, J. A., Lehrer, E. L., & Koss, M. P. (2013). Unwanted sexual experiences in
young men: Evidence from a survey of university students in Chile. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 42, 213-223. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0004-x
Lehrer, J. A., Lehrer, E. L., & Oyarzún, P. B. (2009). Sexual violence in young
men and woman in Chile: Results from a 2005 survey of university stu-
dents. Revista médica de Chile, 137(5), 599-608. doi:10.4067/S0034-
98872009000500002
Lehrer, J. A., Lehrer, V. L., Lehrer, E. L., & Oyarzún, P. B. (2007). Prevalence of
and risk factors for sexual victimization in college women in Chile. International
Family Planning Perspectives, 33, 168-175. doi:10.1363/ifpp.33.168.07
Macintyre, A. K.-J., Montero-Vega, A. R., & Sagbakken, M. (2015). From disease to
desire, pleasure to the pill: A qualitative study of adolescent learning about sex-
ual health and sexuality in Chile. BMC Public Health, 15(1), 2-14. doi:10.1186/
s12889-015-2253-2259
Mangold, W. D., & Koski, P. R. (1990). Gender comparisons in the relationship
between parental and sibling violence and nonfamily violence. Journal of Family
Violence, 5, 225-235. doi:10.1007/BF00980818
Margolin, G., & Vickerman, K. A. (2011). Posttraumatic stress in children and
adolescents exposed to family violence: I. Overview and issues. Couple and
Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1(S), 63-73. doi:10.1037/2160-
4096.1.S.63
Nanni, V., Uher, R., & Danese, A. (2012). Childhood maltreatment predicts unfa-
vorable course of illness and treatment outcome in depression: A meta-
analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 141-151. doi:10.1176/appi.
ajp.2011.11020335
Paolucci, E. O., Genius, M. L., & Violato, C. (2001). A meta-analysis of the published
research on the effects of child sexual abuse. The Journal of Psychology, 135, 17-
36. doi:10.1080/00223980109603677
Pereda, N., Guilera, G., & Abad, J. (2014). Victimization and polyvictimization of
Spanish children and youth: Results from a community sample. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 38, 640-649. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.01.019
Pereda, N., Guilera, G., Forns, M., & Gómez-Benito, J. (2009). The international
epidemiology of child sexual abuse: A continuation of Finkelhor (1994). Child
Abuse & Neglect, 33, 331-342. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.07.007
Pinto-Cortez, C., Pereda, N., & Flores, J. (2017). Studies on interpersonal vio-
lence against children and adolescents in Chile: A Review. Interciencia, 42
(5), 277-285.
22 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 00(0)

Pinto-Cortez, C., Pereda, N., & Chacón, F. (2017). Prevalence of Child Sexual
Abuse in Men from Northern Chile and their Psychological and Sexual Health.
Interciencia, 42 (2), 94-100.
Pinto-Cortez, C., & Venegas, K. (2015). Victimization and Polyvictimization
Experiences among Young from Chile. Revista Señales, 9(14), 5-25.
Price-Robertson, R., Higgins, D., & Vassallo, S. (2013). Multi-type maltreatment and
polyvictimisation: A comparison of two research frameworks. Family Matters,
93, 84-98.
Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., & Fisher, H. L. (2013). The prevalence and
impact of child maltreatment and other types of victimization in the UK:
Findings from a population survey of caregivers, children and young peo-
ple and young adults. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37, 801-813. doi:10.1016/j.
chiabu.2013.02.004
Richmond, J. M., Elliott, A. N., Pierce, T. W., Aspelmeier, J. E., & Alexander, A. A.
(2009). Polyvictimization, childhood victimization, and psychological distress in
college women. Child Maltreatment, 14, 127-147. doi:10.1177/1077559508326357
Runyan, D. K., Cox, C. E., Dubowitz, H., Newton, R. R., Upadhyaya, M., Kotch, J.
B., & Knight, E. D. (2005). Describing maltreatment: Do child protective ser-
vice reports and research definitions agree? Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 461-477.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.200406.016
Saldaña, D., Jiménez, J., & Oliva, A. (1995). Child abuse in Spain: A study
of child protection services files. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 18(71), 59-68.
doi:10.1174/02103709560575488
Shonkoff, J. P., Boyce, W. T., & McEwen, B. S. (2009). Neuroscience, molecular
biology, and the childhood roots of health disparities: Building a new framework
for health promotion and disease prevention. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 301, 2252-2259. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.754
Stoltenborgh, M., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Kranenburg, M. J., Alink, L. R.,
& van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2015). The prevalence of child maltreatment across
the globe: Review of a series of meta-analyses. Child Abuse Review, 24, 37-50.
doi:10.1002/car.2353
Stoltenborgh, M., van IJzendoorn, M. H., Euser, E. M., & Bakermans-
Kranenburg, M. J. (2011). A global perspective on child sexual abuse: Meta-
analysis of prevalence around the world. Child Maltreatment, 16, 79-101.
doi:10.1177/1077559511403920
Vizcarra, B., & Balladares, B. (2003). Prevalence of child sexual abuse in a sample
of university students from Chile. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 37(1),
51-65.
Wilson, T. D. (2014). Violence against women in Latin America. Latin American
Perspectives, 41(1), 3-18. doi:10.1177/0094582X13492143
Windle, M., & Mrug, S. (2009). Cross-gender violence perpetration and victim-
ization among early adolescents and associations with attitudes toward dating
conflict. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 429-439. doi:10.1007/s10964-
008-9328-1
Pinto-Cortez et al. 23

Author Biographies
Cristián Pinto-Cortez has completed Bachelor of Psychology in Universidad de
Tarapacá, Chile. He was certified in Child and Youth Clinical Psychologist, IFIV-
Barcelona. He has completed PhD in social psychology, Universidad Complutense de
Madrid, España. Also, he is a professor and researcher at the School of psychology and
philosophy, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica-Chile. He has worked as clinical psychol-
ogist in Ministerio de Salud de Chile (2002-2004), Servicio Nacional de Menores de
Chile (2004-2007), Centro Exil Barcelona with Victims of Violation Human Rights
(2011-2014). He is also a clinical supervisor at the Centro de Investigación e
Intervención Psicosocial (CEINPSI), Universidad de Tarapacá (2014-2018).
Pablo Gutiérrez-Echegoyen has completed a double degree in philosophy and edu-
cation at the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso-Chile and completed MSc
in cognitive sciences at the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España. He is also
a PhD candidate in cognitive sciences in Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España
and lecturer at the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España.
Diego Henríquez is a research assistant in School of Psychology and Philosophy,
Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, Chile.

View publication stats