U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

A Message From OJJDP

Children are exposed to violence every 

day in their homes, schools, and communities. Such exposure can cause 

them significant physical, mental, and 

emotional harm with long-term effects 

that can last well into adulthood.

The Attorney General launched Defending Childhood in September 2010 to 

unify the Department of Justice’s efforts 

to address children’s exposure to violence under one initiative. Through 

Defending Childhood, the Department 

is raising public awareness about the 

issue and supporting practitioners, 

researchers, and policymakers as they 

seek solutions to address it. A component of Defending Childhood, OJJDP’s 

Safe Start initiative continues efforts 

begun in 1999 to enhance practice, 

research, training and technical assistance, and public education about children and violence. 

Under Safe Start, OJJDP conducted the 

National Survey of Children’s Exposure 

to Violence, the most comprehensive 

effort to date to measure the extent 

and nature of the violence that children 

endure and its consequences on their 

lives. This is the first study to ask children and caregivers about exposure to 

a range of violence, crime, and abuse in 

children’s lives.

As amply evidenced in this bulletin 

series, children’s exposure to violence 

is pervasive and affects all ages. The 

research findings reported here and 

in the other bulletins in this series are 

critical to informing our efforts to protect 

children from its damaging effects.

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.gov.

Learn more about the Attorney General’s Defending Childhood 

Initiative at justice.gov/ag/defendingchildhood.

Find out more about OJJDP’s Safe Start Initiative at 

safestartcenter.org.

Children’s Exposure to Violence

N A T I O N A L S U R V E Y O F

Children’s Exposure to Violence

Office of Justice Programs Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Jeff Slowikowski, Acting Administrator

Polyvictimization: Children’s 

Exposure to Multiple Types of 

Violence, Crime, and Abuse

David Finkelhor, Heather Turner, Sherry Hamby and 

Richard Ormrod

All too often, children are victims of 

violence, crime, and abuse. This victimization may take the form of physical 

assault, child maltreatment, sexual abuse, 

or bullying. They may also witness such 

events in their homes, schools, and 

communities. Some children suffer several 

different kinds of such victimization even 

over a relatively brief timespan. These 

children and youth are at particularly 

high risk for lasting physical, mental, 

and emotional harm. 

The National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV) was the 

first comprehensive national survey to 

look at the entire spectrum of children’s 

exposure to violence, crime, and abuse 

across all ages, settings, and timeframes. 

NatSCEV examined past-year and lifetime exposure to physical and emotional 

violence through both direct victimization and indirect exposure to violence 

(either as an eyewitness or through other 

knowledge). 

A focus of NatSCEV was multiple and 

cumulative exposures to violence. A large 

proportion of children surveyed (38.7 

percent) reported in the previous year 

more than one type of direct victimization (a victimization directed toward the 

child, as opposed to an incident that the 

child witnessed, heard, or was otherwise 

exposed to). Of those who reported any 

direct victimization, nearly two-thirds 

(64.5 percent) reported more than one type. 

A significant number of children reported 

high levels of exposure to different types 

of violence in the past year: more than 1 

in 10 (10.9 percent) reported 5 or more 

direct exposures to different types of 

violence, and 1.4 percent reported 10 or 

more direct victimizations. 

Children who were exposed to even one 

type of violence, both within the past 

year and over their lifetimes, were at far 

greater risk of experiencing other types 

of violence. For example, a child who 

was physically assaulted in the past year 

would be five times as likely also to have 

been sexually victimized and more than 

four times as likely also to have been 

maltreated during that period. Similarly, a 

child who was physically assaulted during 

October 2011
2

particularly in childhood (Dong et al., 

2004; Rutter, 1983). Other research shows 

that victimizations are not randomly distributed but tend to cumulate for certain 

individuals and in certain environments 

(Tseloni and Pease, 2003). Observers have 

proposed mechanisms for understanding 

why such adversities may cumulate and 

some children are victimized repeatedly, 

including “ecological-transactional” models (Lynch and Cicchetti, 1998) and models 

that emphasize the impact of victimization 

on the formation of “cognitive schemas” 

(Perry, Hodges, and Egan, 2001) or on 

the “dysregulation” of emotions (Shields 

his or her lifetime would be more than 

six times as likely to have been sexually 

victimized and more than five times as 

likely to have been maltreated during his 

or her lifetime (Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod, 

Hamby, and Kracke, 2009). This helps 

explain why victimizations cumulate.

More attention needs to be paid to children who are exposed to multiple types of 

violence, crime, and abuse. Most research 

has looked only at individual forms of 

child victimization—such as sexual abuse 

or bullying—without investigating the 

other exposures these same children may 

face. A new emphasis on the study of what 

is being called “polyvictimization” offers 

to help teachers, counselors, medical 

professionals, psychologists, child welfare 

advocates, law enforcement, juvenile 

justice system personnel, and others who 

work with children identify the most endangered children and youth and protect 

them from additional harm.

This bulletin summarizes some of the key 

findings on polyvictimized youth, based on 

NatSCEV (see “History of the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence”) 

and the closely related Developmental 

Victimization Survey (DVS) (see “Methodology”). Among the key findings: 8 percent 

of all youth in the nationally representative NatSCEV sample had seven or more 

different kinds of victimization or exposures to violence, crime, and abuse in the 

past year. These polyvictimized youth had 

a disproportionate share of the most serious kinds of victimizations, such as sexual 

victimization and parental maltreatment. 

They also had more life adversities and 

were more likely to manifest symptoms of 

psychological distress. Polyvictimization 

tended to persist over time. It was most 

likely to start near the beginning of grade 

school and the beginning of high school, 

and was associated with a cluster of four 

prior circumstances or pathways: living in 

a violent family, living in a distressed and 

chaotic family, living in a violent neighborhood, and having preexisting psychological symptoms. 

Adversities Related to 

Polyvictimization

A number of independent lines of thinking 

have pointed to the importance of examining polyvictimization in childhood. The 

research on cumulative adversity suggests 

that especially intense and long-lasting 

effects occur when problems aggregate, 

and Cicchetti, 1998). At the same time, 

traumatic stress theory—the dominant 

framework for understanding the impact 

of victimization—has evolved toward the 

notion that for some children victimization 

is not a single overwhelming event (like 

a sexual assault) but a condition like neglect or bullying (Finkelhor, Ormrod, and 

Turner, 2007a). This concept is sometimes 

referred to as “complex trauma” (Cook 

et al., 2003). Children who experience 

repeated victimizations and several types 

of victimizations may be at greater risk for 

suffering this complex trauma. 

History of the National Survey of Children’s 

Exposure to Violence 

Under the leadership of then Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder in June 1999, 

the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) created the 

Safe Start initiative to prevent and reduce the impact of children’s exposure to 

violence. As a part of this initiative, and with a growing need to document the full 

extent of children’s exposure to violence, OJJDP launched the National Survey 

of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV) with the support of the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

NatSCEV is the first national incidence and prevalence study to comprehensively 

examine the extent and nature of children’s exposure to violence across all ages, 

settings, and timeframes. Conducted between January and May 2008, it measured 

the past-year and lifetime exposure to violence for children age 17 and younger 

across several major categories: conventional crime, child maltreatment, victimization by peers and siblings, sexual victimization, witnessing and indirect victimization 

(including exposure to community violence and family violence), school violence 

and threats, and Internet victimization. This survey marks the first comprehensive attempt to measure children’s exposure to violence in the home, school, and 

community across all age groups from 1 month to age 17 and the first attempt to 

measure the cumulative exposure to violence over the child’s lifetime. The survey 

asked children and their adult caregivers about not only the incidents of violence 

that children suffered and witnessed themselves but also other related crime and 

threat exposures, such as theft or burglary from a child’s household, being in a 

school that was the target of a credible bomb threat, and being in a war zone or an 

area where ethnic violence occurred. 

The survey was developed under the direction of OJJDP and was designed and 

conducted by the Crimes Against Children Research Center of the University of 

New Hampshire. It provides comprehensive data on the full extent of violence 

in the daily lives of children. The primary purpose of NatSCEV is to document 

the incidence and prevalence of children’s exposure to a broad array of violent 

experiences across a wide developmental spectrum. The research team asked 

followup questions about specific events, including where the exposure to violence 

occurred, whether injury resulted, how often the child was exposed to a specific 

type of violence, and the child’s relationship to the perpetrator and (when the child 

witnessed violence) the victim. In addition, the survey documents differences in 

exposure to violence across gender, race, socioeconomic status, family structure, 

region, urban/rural residence, and developmental stage of the child; specifies how 

different forms of violent victimization “cluster” or co-occur; identifies individual, 

family, and community-level predictors of violence exposure among children; 

examines associations between levels/types of exposure to violence and children’s 

mental and emotional health; and assesses the extent to which children disclose 

incidents of violence to various individuals and the nature and source of any assistance or treatment provided.
3

Methodology

National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence

The National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV) is based on a cross-sectional national telephone survey1 involving a target sample of 4,549 children and youth conducted between January and May 2008, including an oversample of 1,500 

respondents from areas with large concentrations of black, Hispanic, and low-income populations. Participants included youth 

ages 10 to 17, who were interviewed about their own experiences, and the parents or other primary caregivers of children ages 

9 and younger, who provided information about these younger children (Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod, and Hamby, 2009; Finkelhor, 

Turner, Ormrod, Hamby, and Kracke, 2009). 

Interviewers asked the children or their caregivers about their exposure to selected types of violence, crime, and abuse in the past 

year and over their lifetimes. In addition, interviewers asked followup questions about the perpetrator; the use of a weapon; injury; 

and whether multiple incidents of violence, crime, and abuse occurred together. A total of 51 victimization items were extracted 

in the following categories: assaults, bullying, sexual victimization, child maltreatment by an adult, and witnessed and indirect 

victimization. 

Developmental Victimization Survey

The Developmental Victimization Survey (DVS) was based on a cross-sectional national telephone survey involving a target 

sample of 2,030 children and youth between December 2002 and February 2003. Participants included youth ages 10 to 17, who 

were interviewed about their own experience, and the parents or other caregivers of children ages 2 to 9, who provided information about these younger children (Finkelhor, Ormrod, et al., 2005b). 

Researchers also conducted two followup surveys of the same population, the first from December 2003 to May 2004 (approximately 1 year after the baseline survey) and the second from December 2005 to August 2006. A total of 989 respondents (49 

percent of the original sample) took part in all three waves. Attrition was greater among younger children, nonwhites, and lower 

socioeconomic status families, but did not differ by initial level of victimization (Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, and Holt, 2009). 

All three waves of the DVS questioned the respondents about past-year victimizations, using identically worded questions. In addition, in wave 2 (the first followup survey), researchers asked respondents the same set of questions about lifetime victimization 

experiences prior to the past-year data collection period for that wave. 

Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire

In both surveys, the research team measured victimization with versions of the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ) (Finkelhor, Hamby, Ormrod, and Turner, 2005; Finkelhor, Ormrod, et al., 2005b). The basic questionnaire, used in the DVS, contains 

questions about 34 different kinds of victimization that cover 5 general areas of concern: conventional crime, child maltreatment, 

peer and sibling victimization, sexual victimization, and witnessing and indirect victimization. The researchers asked respondents 

who indicated that they had been victimized in any of these ways a series of followup questions about the frequency of the exposure, the identities of offenders, and whether injury occurred, among other things.2

 NatSCEV used an enhanced version of the 

JVQ (JVQ–R1) with 14 additional questions about further types of victimization, including an item about threatening and several

items each about exposure to community violence, exposure to family violence, school violence and threats, and Internet 

victimization.3

Measurement of Distress

In both surveys, the researchers measured distress with items from the Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (TSCC) (for 

children ages 10–17) (Briere, 1996) and the closely related Trauma Symptom Checklist for Young Children (TSCYC) (for children 

younger than 10 years old) (Briere et al., 2001). These checklists evaluate posttraumatic symptoms and other symptom clusters 

in children and adolescents, including the effects of child abuse (sexual, physical, and psychological) and neglect, other interpersonal violence, peer victimization, witnessing violence or other trauma to others, major accidents, and disasters. 

Notes

1

 Because telephone interviews afford greater anonymity and privacy than in-person interviews, they may encourage those interviewed to be more 

forthcoming about such sensitive matters as being exposed to violence or being victims of crime (Acierno et al., 2003; Shannon et al., 2007).

2

 For a complete list of the questions in the JVQ, see appendix A to Finkelhor, Ormrod, and Turner, 2007c. For information about administration and 

scoring, see Hamby et al., 2004. 

3

 For a list of all NatSCEV questions, see appendix A to Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, and Hamby, 2009. 
4

Determining the 

Threshold for 

Polyvictimization

Polyvictimization can be defined as having 

experienced multiple victimizations of different kinds, such as sexual abuse, physical abuse, bullying, and exposure to family 

violence. This definition emphasizes different kinds of victimization, rather than just 

multiple episodes of the same kind of victimization, because this appears to signal 

a more generalized vulnerability. The field 

has not yet developed a consensus about 

what the exact numerical threshold should 

be for a child to qualify as a polyvictim. 

The threshold used in research connected 

to NatSCEV designates approximately the 

most victimized 10 percent of the survey 

sample as polyvictims (Finkelhor, Ormrod, 

and Turner, 2009).

Much of the research on polyvictimization 

has been based on the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ), an instrument that asks about almost three dozen 

kinds of different victimization exposures 

(Finkelhor, Ormrod, and Turner, 2007b; 

Finkelhor, Ormrod, et al. 2005a). The JVQ 

was the basis for the questions in both the 

DVS and NatSCEV (see “Methodology,” p. 

3). Both the JVQ and NatSCEV’s JVQ–R1 

asked children and youth about exposures 

to conventional crime, including property crime, child maltreatment, peer and 

sibling victimization, sexual victimization, 

and the witnessing of family and community violence. 

NatSCEV found a significantly greater 

level of distress among children and 

youth who suffered seven or more kinds 

of victimization in a single year (figure 

1). This cutoff designates 8 percent of 

the sample and is used for exploratory 

purposes as the threshold for defining 

polyvictimization.

Past-Year Versus 

Lifetime Exposures 

as a Measure of 

Polyvictimization

Some researchers have preferred to assess for polyvictimization in the context 

of a child’s full lifetime experience rather 

than simply for a single year. When defining polyvictimization over the course of 

childhood, one must keep in mind that 

older youth will accumulate more victimizations than younger children simply 

because they have lived longer. One 

option when using lifetime measures of 

polyvictimization is to establish lower 

thresholds for younger children if a goal is 

to identify vulnerable children at an earlier 

age (Finkelhor, Ormrod, and Turner, 2009).

Some have wondered whether weighting 

more heavily some victimization experiences that are presumed to be more serious, such as sexual abuse, would be more 

advantageous when assessing vulnerability. Various schemes for weighting victimizations made little difference in predicting 

distress when working with past-year 

victimizations (Finkelhor, Ormrod, et al., 

2005a). In lifetime assessments, however, 

weighting the experiences of sexual assault and child maltreatment more heavily 

improved prediction of distress from 

victimization (Finkelhor, Ormrod, and 

Turner, 2009).

Past-Year and Lifetime 

Polyvictimization 

Rates Among NatSCEV 

Respondents

In NatSCEV’s representative sample of 

U.S. children, 49 percent of children and 

youth surveyed suffered two or more 

types of victimization (including both 

direct and indirect victimizations) in the 

past year. The largest number of different 

types of victimizations was 18. The median 

number of past-year exposures to violence among victims was three. Figure 1a, 

which illustrates the relationship between 

past-year exposure to violence and the 

number of trauma symptoms, shows that 

distress scores rise significantly from the 

overall trend at the level of seven or more 

victimization types in the past year. These 

children and youth (about 8 percent of the 

sample) are designated as polyvictims. 

A graph of the number of different victimizations over the child’s lifetime (figure 

1b) shows a similar, if more extended 

distribution. The median number of lifetime exposures to violence among victims 

was three. The plot for distress symptoms 

shows an elevation above the linear trend 

at the level of 11 or more exposures, 

which designates 10 percent of the survey 

participants, totaling the percentage of all 

participants who had a given number of 

lifetime exposures.

The remainder of the bulletin will primarily discuss polyvictims as classified by 

their past-year experiences. Nearly 

three-quarters (72 percent) of these children would also qualify as lifetime polyvictims using the cutoff of 11 or more lifetime 

exposures to violence. This bulletin 

focuses on past-year polyvictims for two 

reasons: (1) the multiple exposures are 

closer in time to each other and to the survey for this group, and thus signify a high 

level of current vulnerability; and (2) this 

group has a less skewed age distribution, 

as lifetime calculations tend to overrepresent older youth who accumulate more 

exposures over time. (For an analysis of 

the experiences of children who qualify as 

polyvictims on the basis of lifetime experiences, see Turner, Finkelhor, and Ormrod, 

2010.)

Characteristics of 

Polyvictims

Among the characteristics that distinguish 

polyvictims from children who are less 

exposed to violence are the more serious 

nature of their victimizations; the greater 

range of victimizations they suffered; and 

their overrepresentation among certain 

demographic groups: boys, older children, 

children of medium socioeconomic status 

(SES), African American children, and 

children in single-parent, stepparent, and 

other adult caregiver families.

Incidence of Serious 

Victimizations Among 

Polyvictims

Polyvictims not only have many victimizations, they also suffer more serious victimizations. As figure 2 (p. 6) shows, in the 

past year, 55 percent of polyvictims had a 

victimization injury, 42 percent faced an 

assailant who carried a weapon or other 

harmful object, 36 percent experienced 

sexual victimization, and 53 percent had 

been victimized by a caretaker. These 

levels of serious victimization were four to 

six times greater than the levels for other 

victimized children.

Exposure to Multiple 

Domains of Victimization

The polyvictims had also experienced 

victimization across a broad range of different types of victimization. Nearly three 

out of five polyvictims (58 percent) had 

victimizations in five or more “domains” 

(e.g., maltreatment, sexual victimization, 

bullying) (see figure 3, p. 6). Such victimization exposure across so many domains 
5

may be what leaves these children so particularly distressed. There are relatively 

few areas of safety for them.

Demographic Characteristics 

of Polyvictims

Polyvictims are somewhat more likely to 

be boys than girls: 54 percent of polyvictims were boys, whereas 46 percent 

Figure 1: Relationship Between Multiple Types of Victimizations and 

Number of Trauma Symptoms: Past-Year and Lifetime Victimizations Percent of Sample

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14+

Polyvictims

Trauma Symptoms

1a. Past year

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Number of Types of Victimizations

Percent of Sample

Trauma Symptoms

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18+

Percent of Sample Mean Trauma Symptoms

1b. Lifetime

Polyvictims

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Number of Types of Victimizations

of polyvictims were girls. They are also 

overrepresented among older youth (41 

percent of polyvictims were in the 14–17 

age group, comprising 13.0 percent of all 

youth surveyed in that age group) (see 

table 1, p. 7). NatSCEV found lower polyvictimization rates among both higher and 

lower SES families compared to families 

in the middle. It found no difference in 

polyvictimization rates in urban and rural 

areas. However, there were higher rates 

among African Americans and lower rates 

among Hispanics. Youth living in singleparent and stepparent families had higher 

rates of polyvictimization.

Other Lifetime 

Adversities and 

Levels of Distress 

Among Polyvictims

A notable characteristic of polyvictimization is the far greater level of additional 

lifetime adversities and levels of distress 

these children experience. Polyvictims 

were more likely to have had other kinds 

of lifetime adversities such as illnesses, 

accidents, family unemployment, parental 

substance abuse, and mental illness (an 

average of 4.7 adversities versus 2.1 for 

nonpolyvictims).

Polyvictims were clearly experiencing 

high levels of distress as measured by a 

checklist of symptoms that included indicators of anxiety, depression, anger, and 

posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The 

symptom score for polyvictims was more 

than one standard deviation higher than 

for other victims and nonvictims. Further, 

polyvictims were well represented among 

distressed children. Among children 

who were in the top 10 percent of the 

distressed children, 30 percent could be 

classified as polyvictims.

Polyvictims were not only more distressed 

than other victims in general; they were 

also more distressed than those who experienced frequent victimization of a single 

type. Figure 4 (p. 8) shows symptom levels 

for four groups of children with different 

kinds of victimization profiles: (1) those 

who had experienced no victimization, (2) 

those who were exposed to less than the 

average frequency of one type of victimization (e.g., bullying), (3) those with a 

more than average frequency of one type 

of victimization (e.g., chronic bullying), 

and (4) those exposed to a specific type 

of victimization who were also polyvictims (meaning, for example, that they had 

been bullied and had also been exposed 

to victimizations of several other types). 

The polyvictims were considerably more 

distressed than the children who were victims of one type of chronic victimization 

but did not have additional different kinds 

of victimization. 
6

As figure 4 shows, this was true for virtually every individual form of victimization. 

Having multiple sexual victimizations, for 

example, was not associated with nearly 

as much distress as having any sexual 

victimization in combination with several 

other different kinds of victimization. This 

suggests that among children identified 

with a single kind of victimization (such 

as sexual assault), the ones with the most 

distress will generally be those with other 

kinds of victimization as well. This may 

be because these children have no or few 

environments in which they feel truly safe. 

It suggests that studies and intervention 

programs targeted at any particular kind 

of victimization, like bullying or exposure 

to family violence, need also to assess 

children for other kinds of victimization. 

Exposure to multiple types of victimization may be the most important feature 

underlying high levels of distress.

Development and 

Persistence of 

Polyvictimization

Given how serious polyvictimization 

appears to be, little is now known about 

how it develops and progresses. In the 

Developmental Victimization Survey (DVS) 

(Finkelhor, Ormrod, et al. 2005b), a similar 

but smaller national survey that preceded 

NatSCEV, researchers followed up with 

children three times during a 4-year period 

to learn more about such developmental 

patterns. They found that polyvictimization tended to persist. Of the children the 

researchers categorized as polyvictims 

prior to the first wave of the study, 55 

percent were still polyvictims in one of 

the next two waves (Finkelhor, Ormrod, 

Turner, and Holt, 2009). This suggests

that many youth find it hard to escape 

polyvictimization.

Onset of Polyvictimization

The DVS also looked at the characteristics 

of children who became new polyvictims 

over the course of the followup period. 

Children ages 7 and 15 at the time they 

were interviewed were most likely to have 

become polyvictims for the first time during the previous year (i.e., during the year 

that generally corresponded to their first 

year of grade school or high school) (see 

figure 5, p. 9). It may be that some children 

are particularly vulnerable when they 

make the transition into a new school environment. It is a time when they have to 

Figure 2: Seriousness of Polyvictims’ Victimization Experiences

Nonpolyvictim Polyvictim 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent of Victims

12

55

6

42

6

36

14

53

Any Victim 

Injury

Any Victimization

Involving a Weapon

Any Sexual

Victimization

Any Caregiver 

Perpetration

Figure 3: Polyvictims’ Domains of Victimization

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent of Polyvictims

88

52

70

84

36

51

Any 

Physical 

Assault

Any 

Property

Crime

Any

Maltreatment

Any

Bullying

Any

Sexual

Victimization

Any 

Witnessing

of Family

Violence

Any 

Exposure to

Community

Violence

98

Source: NatSCEV data for children age 2 and older, weighted.

deal with many new people and navigate 

new environments without knowing yet 

where the dangers are. 

Children who became new polyvictims 

during the course of the DVS tended to 

average more victimizations in the year 
7

child welfare and other professionals 

intervene on these children’s behalf, 

they need to ensure that they are not 

minimizing polyvictims’ victimization 

histories (e.g., treating them simply as 

victims of child abuse when they are 

also being bullied, or simply as victims 

of bullying when they are also being 

sexually abused). In addition, as studies 

have shown that bully-victims (victims 

of violence who also bully others) have 

Table 1: Past-Year Polyvictimization Rate by Demographic Characteristic 

(NatSCEV, ages 2–17)

Characteristic Polyvictim (%)

Gender*

Female 7.5

Male 8.4

Age Group*

2–5 Years 5.2

6–9 Years 4.0

10–13 Years 9.5

14–17 Years 13.0

Socioeconomic Status*

Low 7.3

Middle 8.8

High 4.7

Race/Ethnicity*

White, non-Hispanic 7.7

Black, non-Hispanic 12.8

Other Race, non-Hispanic 7.9

Hispanic, Any Race 4.5

Family Structure

Two-Parent Family 5.2

Stepparent or Partner Family 12.8

Single-Parent Family 12.4

Other Adult Caregiver 13.9

City Residence (300,000+ population)

Yes 8.3

No 7.8

Note: Values derived from weighted data. Differences in values for these characteristics are significant 

at *

p<.05; details on p. 5.

prior to their onset than other children 

who were not polyvictims. However, 

no particular constellation of victimizations seemed to predict the onset of 

polyvictimization. In their year of onset, 

new polyvictims registered on average 

four different kinds of new victimizations 

and disproportionate increases in sexual 

victimizations, property victimizations, 

and physical assaults.

Pathways to Polyvictimization

Using the DVS, the researchers developed 

and tested a conceptual model that specifies four distinct pathways for children 

culminating in polyvictimization (see 

figure 6, p. 9). These four pathways are: 

(a) living in a family that experiences considerable violence and conflict (dangerous 

families); (b) having a family beset with 

problems around such things as money, 

employment, and substance abuse that 

might compromise a child’s supervision 

or create unmet emotional needs (family 

disruption and adversity); (c) residing in 

or moving into a dangerous community 

(dangerous neighborhoods); and (d) 

being a child with preexisting emotional 

problems that increase risky behavior, 

engender antagonism, and compromise 

the capacity to protect oneself (emotional 

problems). The study confirmed that each 

of these appears to contribute independently to the onset of polyvictimization 

(Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, and Holt, 

2009). The emotional problems pathway 

was most prominent for children younger 

than 10 years old, and the other pathways 

appeared to be more predictive for children 10 and older.

Implications for 

Practitioners, 

Policymakers, 

and Researchers

Awareness about polyvictimization has 

many potential implications for those who 

work with juvenile victims and what they 

can do to identify and intervene on behalf 

of children who are exposed to multiple 

forms of violence: 

u Assess for more victimizations.

Children need to be assessed for a 

broader range of victimizations. When 

children are identified as victims of 

sexual abuse or bullying, professionals 

who work with them need to find out 

what else is going on, as these children 

often experience other victimizations 

and adversities. 

u Priority for polyvictims. Professionals who work with children need to 

pay particular attention to polyvictims 

because of their vulnerability to mental 

health, behavioral, school performance, 

and other problems. These children 

can be identified in schools, in social 

welfare and mental health caseloads, 

and in the foster care and juvenile justice systems; and they warrant priority 

in victimization interventions. When 
8

Figure 4: Trauma Symptom Scores Across Victim Groups

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Assault Victims

Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Maltreatment Victims

Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Sexual Assault Victims

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Bullying Victims

Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Witness to Family Violence

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Exposed to Community Violence

Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim Nonvictim Low Chronic High Chronic Polyvictim

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

Mean Trauma Score

Victim Group

Note: NatSCEV past-year data, weighted. Analysis of variance between groups includes gender, age, race/ethnicity, family structure, and 

socioeconomic status as covariates.
9

the worst outcomes and are more likely 

to have multiple victimizations, educators and other child welfare professionals who work with children who bully 

should recognize the need for more 

comprehensive assessments to identify 

them as potential polyvictims and for 

treatment that takes into account their 

multiple domains of victimization (Holt, 

Finkelhor, and Kaufman Kantor, 2007).

u Polyvictim interventions. Interventions 

need to be developed to encompass 

multiple victimizations. Therapies 

should not just focus on (for example) 

sexual abuse alone, but should be 

multifaceted, addressing multiple types 

of victimizations, as many of the risk 

factors for one type of victimization

are shared among multiple types of 

victimization. Therefore, prevention 

interventions that focus on addressing 

common underlying risk factors are 

likely to have the greatest benefit. Strategies for reducing stigma or traumatic 

reminders also need to be applied to 

the full range of victimization exposure.

u Treat underlying vulnerabilities.

Professionals who conduct interventions with polyvictims must recognize 

Figure 5: Polyvictimization Onset by Age

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Percent of Onsets

Age at Onset

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Figure 6: Conceptual Models of Pathways to Polyvictimization

Pathway 1

Dangerous

Families

Sibling Assault

Child Maltreatment

Witness Domestic

Violence/Sibling 

Maltreatment 

Peer Victimization

Pathway 3

Dangerous

Neighborhoods Peer Victimization

Sexual Victimization

Property Crime

WitnessingViolence

Pathway 4 

Emotional

Problems Impaired Self-Protection

Poor Social Skills

Stigma

Burden for Caregivers

Peer Victimization

Sexual Victimization

Child Maltreatment

Pathway 2

Family

Disruption

and Adversity

Emotional Deprivation

Poor Supervision Sexual Victimization

Property Victimization

Peer Victimization

Polyvictimization

Note: χ2 = 46.8, df = 17, p < .001, n = 112 for new polyvictims identified in Wave 2 of the 

Developmental Victimization Survey.
10

that such children not only suffer from 

victimization trauma but may also be 

caught in an overall environment or 

individual-environmental-interactive 

conditions that perpetuate victimization. Therefore, intervention professionals must assess for these conditions and develop strategies—such as 

teaching parenting and guardianship 

skills to parents and other adult caregivers—that address them.

u Broaden child protection. Awareness 

of the importance of polyvictimization suggests that the traditional child 

protective services (CPS) approach 

might benefit from some broadening of 

its capacities. An intervention system 

that helps children only in regard to 

threats from family members may be 

too narrow. Although it is unrealistic to 

expand CPS to respond to reports of all 

forms of child victimization, children 

within the current CPS system may 

benefit if child protection workers are 

trained to assess children for exposure 

to multiple forms of victimization in 

the same way that police are trained to 

assess for multiple crimes. CPS systems 

could then design and implement service responses that are pertinent to the 

variety of threats children face. They 

have to be prepared to work with law 

enforcement, educators, and mental 

health professionals.

u Interrupt onset sequences. Because 

polyvictimization is associated with so 

much distress, it should be a priority to 

figure out how to interrupt the pathways 

into this condition. Early intervention 

and primary prevention are needed, 

along with an awareness that dangerous and disrupted families, dangerous 

neighborhoods, and emotional problems can all be early warning indicators 

of current or future polyvictimization. 

Professionals who work with children 

need to help build the supervision and 

protection capacities of family members, legal guardians, caregivers, teachers, and other adults who may be in a 

position to intervene to help children, 

and thus stop the onset of and progression toward polyvictimization. 

One strategy may be to target the transition to new schools, particularly elementary and high schools. It may be useful 

to sensitize teachers and other school 

staff to quickly identify children in these 

entering classes who may be victimized to 

ensure that prevention and intervention 

approaches that address multiple forms of 

victimization experiences and focus on the 

prevention of perpetration are in place for 

children during these important transitional phases. 

The findings also suggest another strategy, to encourage teachers and child 

welfare professionals to be more aware of 

younger children with emotional distress 

symptoms. In addition to whatever mental 

health interventions these children might 

receive to address their victimization 

experiences and associated symptoms, 

these professionals can take advantage of 

the opportunity to refer children and their 

families to preventive interventions that 

can address individual, relationship, and 

community factors that predict perpetration and prevent repeated or additional 

forms of victimization experiences from 

occurring. Another implication is that 

school staff and child welfare workers 

should pay particular attention when children report sexual victimization, including 

sexual harassment by peers. These events 

may signal broader victimization vulnerability, and responding adults may need 

to extend their focus beyond the specific 

sexual report to include an assessment of 

other forms of exposure to victimization.

References

Acierno, R., Resnick, H., Kilpatrick, D.G., 

and Stark-Riemer, W. 2003. Assessing elder 

victimization—Demonstration of a methodology. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric 

Epidemiology 38(11):644–653.

Briere, J. 1996. Trauma Symptoms Checklist 

for Children (TSCC): Professional Manual. 

Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment 

Resources.

Briere, J., Johnson, K., Bissada, A., Damon, 

L., Crouch, J., Gil, E., Hanson, R., and Ernst, 

V. 2001. The Trauma Symptom Checklist 

for Young Children (TSCYC): Reliability 

and association with abuse exposure in 

a multi-site study. Child Abuse & Neglect

25:1001–1014.

Cook, A., Blaustein, M., Spinazzola, J., and 

van der Kolk, B. 2003. Complex Trauma in 

Children and Adolescents (White Paper). 

Los Angeles, CA: National Child Traumatic 

Stress Network, Complex Trauma Task 

Force.

Dong, M., Anda, R.F., Felitti, V.J., Dube, 

S.R., Williamson, D.F., Thompson, T., Loo, 

C., and Giles, W.H. 2004. The interrelatedness of multiple forms of childhood abuse, 

neglect, and household dysfunction. Child 

Abuse & Neglect 28(7):771–784.

Finkelhor, D., Hamby, S.L., Ormrod, R.K., 

and Turner, H.A. 2005. The JVQ: Reliability, 

validity, and national norms. Child Abuse & 

Neglect 29(4):383–412.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner, 

H.A. 2007a. Poly-victimization: A neglected 

component in child victimization trauma. 

Child Abuse & Neglect 31:7–26.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner, 

H.A. 2007b. Poly-victimization and trauma 

in a national longitudinal cohort. Development and Psychopathology 19(1):149–166.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner, 

H.A. 2007c. Revictimization patterns in a 

national longitudinal sample of children 

and youth. Child Abuse & Neglect 31: 

479–502.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner, 

H.A. 2009. Lifetime assessment of polyvictimization in a national sample of 

children and youth. Child Abuse & Neglect 

33:403–411.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., Turner, H.A., 

and Hamby, S.L. 2005a. Measuring polyvictimization using the JVQ. Child Abuse & 

Neglect 29(11):1297–1312.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., Turner, H.A., 

and Hamby, S.L. 2005b. The victimization 

of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child Maltreatment

10(1):5–25.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., Turner, 

H.A., and Holt, M.A. 2009. Pathways to 

poly-victimization. Child Maltreatment

14(4):316–329.

Finkelhor, D., Turner, H.A., Ormrod, R., 

and Hamby, S.L. 2009. Violence, abuse, and 

crime exposure in a national sample of 

children and youth. Pediatrics 124(5):1–13.

Finkelhor, D., Turner, H.A., Ormrod, R., 

Hamby, S.L., and Kracke, K. 2009. Children’s Exposure to Violence: A Comprehensive National Survey. Bulletin. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice 

and Delinquency Prevention.

Hamby, S.L., Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R., and 

Turner, H. 2004. The Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ): Administration 

and Scoring Manual. Durham, NH: Crimes 

Aagainst Children Research Center.

Holt, M.K., Finkelhor, D., and Kaufman 

Kantor, G. 2007. Multiple victimization 

experiences of urban elementary schoolstudents: Associations with psychosocial 

functioning and academic performance. 

Child Abuse & Neglect 31:503–515.
11

Share With Your Colleagues

Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. We encourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, and reprint it in 

your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP and the authors 

of this bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such as how you received 

a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDP materials meet your 

individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments and questions to:

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse

Publication Reprint/Feedback

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

800–851–3420

301–519–5600 (fax)

Web: tellncjrs.ncjrs.gov

Acknowledgments 

This bulletin was written by David Finkelhor, Ph.D., Director, Crimes Against Children 

Research Center, University of New Hampshire; Heather Turner, Ph.D., Professor, 

Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire; Sherry 

Hamby, Ph.D., Research Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Sewanee: 

The University of the South; and Richard Ormrod, Ph.D., Research Professor, Crimes 

Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire. OJJDP wishes to 

acknowledge the contributions to this bulletin of Melissa T. Merrick, Ph.D., Epidemiologist, Division of Violence Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and 

Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). OJJDP also wishes to 

acknowledge the support of CDC for the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to 

Violence and its partnership in the Safe Start initiative to create safe, stable, and 

nurturing environments for children and their families.

This bulletin was prepared under cooperative agreement number 2005–JL–FX–0048 

from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice.

Points of view or opinions expressed in this 

document are those of the authors and do 

not necessarily represent the official position or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office 

of Justice Programs, which also includes the 

Bureau of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of 

Justice Statistics; the National Institute of Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and the 

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, 

Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.

Lynch, M., and Cicchetti, D. 1998. An ecological transactional analysis of children 

and contexts: The longitudinal interplay 

among child maltreatment, community 

violence, and children’s symptomatology. Development and Psychopathology 

10:235–257.

Perry, D.G., Hodges, E.V.E., and Egan, S.K. 

2001. Determinants of chronic victimization by peers: A review and new model 

of family influence. In Peer Harassment in 

School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and 

Victimized, edited by J. Juvonen and S. 

Graham. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 

pp. 73–104.

Rutter, M. 1983. Statistical and personal 

interactions: Facets and perspectives. 

In Human Development: An Interactional 

Perspective, edited by D. Magnusson and 

V. Allen. New York, NY: Academic Press, 

pp. 295–319.

Shannon, E.E., Mathias, C.W., Marsh, D.M., 

Dougherty, D.M., and Liguori, A. 2007. 

Teenagers do not always lie: Characteristics and correspondence of telephone and 

in-person reports of adolescent drug use. 

Drug and Alcohol Dependence 90(2–3):

288–291.

Shields, A., and Cicchetti, D. 1998. Reactive 

aggression among maltreated children: 

The contributions of attention and emotion dysregulation. Journal of Clinical Child 

and Adolescent Psychology 27(4):381–395.

Tseloni, A., and Pease, K. 2003. Repeat 

personal victimization: ‘Boosts’ or ‘flags’? 

British Journal of Criminology 43:196–212.

Turner, H.A., Finkelhor, D., and Ormrod, 

R. 2010. Poly-victimization in a national 

sample of children and youth. American 

Journal of Preventive Medicine 38(3):

323–330.
Bulletin

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

NCJ 235504

*NCJ~235504*