CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Intimate Partner and Family ViolencePsychometric Methodologies and TestingAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Testing the factor structure and measurement invariance of the conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory

Open access
Shorey, Ryan C., Allan, Nicholas P., Cohen, Joseph R., Fite, Paula J., Stuart, Gregory L., Temple, Jeff R.·2019·Psychological Assessment
DOI 10.1037/pas0000678PMC PMC6389429
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Intimate-partner violence (IPV) in adolescent and young-adult dating relationships is a prevalent and serious public health problem. The measurement of IPV across adolescence has most commonly relied on the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory (CADRI; Wolfe et al., 2001), which postulates 5 distinct yet related types of IPV (i.e., threatening, verbal/emotional, relational, physical, and sexual). However, the CADRI has received minimal examination to confirm its factor structure, in particular, whether the factor structure is invariant across sex, race/ethnicity, and time, despite the clinical use of this measure for screening and treatment purposes. In response, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of the CADRI and tested whether the factor structure was invariant across sex, race/ethnicity, and time. Adolescents (N = 1,042, 56% girls, mean age at baseline = 15.09, SD = 0.79) from high schools in the southwestern United States completed the CADRI annually for 6 consecutive years. Results confirmed the 5-factor structure of the CADRI and demonstrated measurement invariance across sex, race/ethnicity, and time. Our findings suggest that the CADRI captures 5 related but distinct types of IPV and that use of the CADRI is appropriate across sex, race/ethnicity, and time. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pas0000678

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Not all studies have achieved gender invariance for sexual harassment measures.

    “For sexual harassment, not all studies have achieved gender invariance.”

    From Online Sexual Harassment Perpetration Among Peer Adolescents: A Cross-National and Cross-Gender Study (2025) · cites this paper as Shorey et al., 2019

    The Results (Measurement Invariance by Sex; page unavailable) report that the CADRI did not achieve sex invariance at Wave 3 and required adjustments to sexual-aggression items at Wave 2. The Method (Measure; page unavailable) identifies the CADRI as a measure of adolescent dating aggression, including sexual aggression—not a sexual-harassment measure. Thus the finding supports the narrower point that one related measure did not achieve sex invariance at every wave, but not the claim as phrased about sexual-harassment measures. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Shorey et al. (2019) attempted to achieve metric invariance between boys and girls in teen dating violence perpetration but were unsuccessful, with low internal consistency in the sexual abuse subscale.

    “Shorey et al. (2019) attempted to achieve metric invariance between boys and girls in the perpetration of teen dating violence, but were unsuccessful, with the results indicating low internal consistency in the sexual abuse subscale.”

    From Online Sexual Harassment Perpetration Among Peer Adolescents: A Cross-National and Cross-Gender Study (2025) · cites this paper as Shorey et al. (2019)

    The Method (Measure; page not supplied) reports low internal consistency for the sexual subscale (α = .15–.56). The Results (Measurement Invariance by Sex; page not supplied) report that invariance was not achieved at Wave 3, but scalar invariance—which the paper tested together with metric invariance—was achieved at the other five waves. The claim overstates the overall failure. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Antonio T, & Hokoda A (2009). Gender variations in dating violence and positive conflict resolution among Mexican adolescents. Violence and Victims, 24, 533– 545. DOI: 10.1891/0886-6708.24.4.533 19694356 · DOI
  2. Bovaird JA, & Koziol NA (2012). Measurement models for ordered-categorical indicators In Hoyle RH (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 495– 511). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
  3. Brown TA (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  4. Cascardi M, & Muzyczyn B (2016). Concordant responding on the physical assault/abuse subscales of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales 2 and Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory. Psychology of Violence, 6, 303– 312. DOI: 10.1037/VI00000013 · DOI
  5. Cohen JR, Shorey RC, Menon SV, & Temple JR (2018). Predicting teen dating violence perpetration. Pediatrics, 141 e20172790. 29531125 PMC5869330
  6. Davidov E, Meuleman B, Cieciuch J, Schmidt P, & Billiet J (2014). Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 55– 75.DOI: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043137 · DOI
  7. Dimitrov DM (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43, 121– 149. DOI: 10.1177/0748175610373459 · DOI
  8. Ellis WE, & Wolfe DA (2015). Bullying predicts reported dating violence and observed, qualities in adolescent dating relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 3043– 3064. DOI: 10.1177/0886260514554428. 25355858 · DOI
  9. Fernández-Fuertes AA, Fuertes A, & Pulido RF (2006). Evaluación de la violencia en las relaciones de pareja de los adolescentes. Validación del Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory (CADRI)-versión española. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 339– 358. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2016.02.011 · DOI
  10. Foshee VA, McNaughton Reyes HL, & Ennett ST (2010). Examination of sex and race differences in longitudinal predictors of the initiation of adolescent dating violence perpetration. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19, 492– 516. DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2010.495032 PMC4254793 25484571 · DOI
  11. Hu LT, & Bentler PM (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1– 55. DOI: 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Jouriles EN, McDonald R, Garrido E, Rosenfield D, & Brown AS (2005). Assessing aggression in adolescent romantic relationships: Can we do it better?. Psychological Assessment, 17, 469– 475. DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.17.4.469 16393013 · DOI
  13. Millsap RE (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York, NY: Routledge.
  14. Muthén LK & Muthén BO (1998- 2017). Mplus User’s Guide. Eighth Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  15. Niolon PH, Vivolo-Kantor AM, Latzman NE, Valle LA, Kuoh H, Burton T,... & Tharp AT (2015). Prevalence of teen dating violence and co-occurring risk factors among middle school youth in high-risk urban communities. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56, S5– S13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.07.019O’ PMC5871230 25620454 · DOI
  16. O’Leary KD (1999). Developmental and affective issues in assessing and treating partner aggression. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6, 400– 414. DOI: 10.1093/clipsy.6.4.400 · DOI
  17. Rasmussen A, Verkuilen J, Ho E, & Fan Y (2015). Posttraumatic stress disorder amongrefugees: Measurement invariance of Harvard Trauma Questionnaire scores across global regions and response patterns. Psychological Assessment, 27, 1160– 1170. DOI: 10.1037/pas0000115 25894706 PMC4615261 · DOI
  18. Ryan KM (2013). Issues of reliability in measuring intimate partner violence during courtship. Sex roles, 69(3–4), 131– 148. DOI: 10.1007/s11199-012-0233-4 · DOI
  19. Shorey RC, Cohen JR, Lu Y, Fite PJ, Stuart GL, & Temple JR (2017). Age of onset for physical and sexual teen dating violence perpetration: A longitudinal investigation. Preventive Medicine, 105, 275– 279. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.10.008 28987333 PMC5653441 · DOI
  20. Shorey RC, Cornelius TL, & Bell KM (2008). A critical review of theoretical frameworks for dating violence: Comparing the dating and marital fields. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 185– 194. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2008.03.003 · DOI
  21. Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, & Sugarman DB (1996). The revised conflicttactics scales (CTS2) development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283– 316. DOI: 10.1177/019251396017003001 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Temple JR, Shorey RC, Fite P, Stuart GL, & Le VD (2013). Substance use as alongitudinal predictor of the perpetration of teen dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 596– 606. DOI: 10.1007/s10964-012-9877-1 23187699 PMC3670106 · DOI
  23. Vagi KJ, Rothman EF, Latzman NE, Tharp AT, Hall DM, & Breiding MJ (2013). Beyond correlates: A review of risk and protective factors for adolescent dating violence perpetration. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 633– 649. DOI: 10.1007/s10964-013-9907-7 23385616 PMC3697003 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Vandenberg RJ, & Lance CE (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4– 70. DOI: 10.1177/109442810031002 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Wolfe DA, Crooks C, Jaffe P, Chiodo D, Hughes R, Ellis W,... & Donner A (2009). A school-based program to prevent adolescent dating violence: A cluster randomized trial. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163, 692– 699. DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.69 19652099 · DOI
  26. Wolfe DA, Scott K, Reitzel-Jaffe D, Wekerle C, Grasley C, & Straatman AL (2001). Development and validation of the conflict in adolescent dating relationships inventory. Psychological Assessment, 13, 277– 293. DOI: 10.1037//1040-3590.13.2.277 11433803 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shorey, R. C., Allan, N. P., Cohen, J. R., Fite, P. J., Stuart, G. L., & Temple, J. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
  • Ohio University (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of Kansas (US)
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
  • The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2019-03
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
410-416
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
DOI
10.1037/pas0000678
PMC
PMC6389429
OpenAlex
W2906785258
Cited by
31
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Justice (2016-R2-CX-0035, 2012-WG-BX-0005)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (K24AA019707)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development (K23HD059916)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
intimate partner violence, adolescent dating relationships, factor structure, measurement invariance, threatening behavior, physical abuse, sexual abuse, sex differences, racial and ethnic differences
MeSH terms
Intimate Partner Violence, Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Conflict, Psychological, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Psychometrics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review