Dating Violence, Sexual Violence, and Bullying Victimization Among High School Students — Youth Risk Behavior Survey, United States, 2021

Discussion

This report describes 2021 prevalence estimates and trends in prevalence during 2011–2021 for different forms of IVV experienced by U.S. high school students. Findings indicate that multiple forms of TDV, sexual violence, and bullying victimization are common experiences for U.S. youths. Disparities in exposure also are evident, with female, racial and ethnic minority, and sexual minority youths disproportionately affected by these forms of violence in adolescence. Although other studies have demonstrated greater rates of violence among certain racial and ethnic and sexual minority groups (1,2), the number of subgroups examined with nationally representative data has been limited. This report presents data for additional population characteristics and behavior including AI/AN, Asian, NH/OPI, and multiracial youths; bisexual and questioning youths; and sex of sexual contacts, providing a nuanced context of prevalence and disparities among racial and ethnic and sexual minority youths.

Consistent with other studies, prevalence of both physical and sexual TDV was higher for females than males (1). Although males also report TDV victimization, factors including community norms that support gender inequity might increase the likelihood that females experience and report TDV (4). In addition, rates of both physical and sexual TDV were higher for AI/AN, NH/OPI, and multiracial youths than for White youths, and the prevalence of experiencing any TDV was highest for AI/AN youths. Trends indicate that sexual TDV increased from 2019 to 2021. Research has linked increases in stress and isolation to poor mental health in youths, which is associated with TDV (5). Although not yet examined, these effects might help explain this increase in sexual TDV during the pandemic period. The reasons why sexual TDV increased whereas physical TDV remained stable are unclear; additional research could examine whether factors such as technology-facilitated sexual violence (e.g., posting or sharing sexual pictures of someone without their consent, or nonconsensual sexting) and sexual harassment contribute to this finding. These trends and evidence of disparities in TDV experiences, with particularly vulnerable youths experiencing higher rates, highlight the need for comprehensive violence prevention efforts that are grounded in equity principles and address the unique needs of adolescents disproportionately affected by TDV.

Prevalence of lifetime forced sex and sexual violence victimization by anyone was higher for females than males, consistent with other studies (1). Rates of forced sex were also two to four times higher for AI/AN youths compared with other single-race groups, consistent with recent findings that nearly one in four AI/AN women experienced sexual abuse as a child, the highest rate among racial and ethnic groups (6). Of those students who reported sexual violence by anyone, 59.9% also reported sexual TDV, which indicates that a substantial portion of sexual violence victimization experiences were by someone other than a dating partner. Sexual violence in adolescence often is perpetrated by peers outside a dating context (7) and also can be perpetrated by family members, other known adults, and strangers, among others. Because of recent increases in lifetime forced sex (from 2015 to 2021) and past-year sexual violence victimization by anyone (from 2017 to 2021), prevention efforts that address sexual violence in both dating and nondating contexts are critical (https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2012FindingsonSVinYouth-508.pdf).

All forms of bullying victimization were more common among females, White youths, and sexual minority youths, consistent with previous research (1). In addition to White youths, AI/AN and multiracial youths had higher bullying rates than other racial and ethnic groups. Research on IVV experiences among AI/AN youths typically is limited to comparisons with White youths; therefore, these findings comparing AI/AN youths with other racial and ethnic minority youths provide needed data for the field (8,9). Tailoring prevention strategies to the cultural beliefs and norms of racial and ethnic minority subgroups that are disproportionately at risk for IVV might help address these disparities (10). Overall, rates of bullying victimization decreased from 2011 to 2021; however, the decrease in bullying on school property from 19.5% prepandemic (2019) to 15.0% during the COVID-19 pandemic (2021) was likely driven by reduced time spent on school property during 2020–2021. Electronic bullying rates remained stable, which is not a surprising finding because virtual learning and overall online interactions increased during the pandemic (5).

Sexual minority youths were at an increased risk for all forms of IVV included in this report compared with heterosexual youths. Although other studies indicate how sexual minority youths experience higher rates of bullying and sexual and physical violence compared with their peers who are not sexual minority youths, others excluded questioning youths and did not examine differences with bisexual youths or sex of sexual contacts (2,11). By disaggregating sexual minority youths and including identity and sex of sexual contacts (i.e., youths who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, questioning, or other and youths who have sexual contact with same-sex partners only and partners of both sexes), this report adds further context to national prevalence estimates of violence victimization against sexual minority youths; for example, students who identify as bisexual and students who have sexual contact with both sexes experience violence victimization at higher rates. School-based strategies to support LGBQ+ youths have been found to be associated with decreases in IVV among both LGBQ+ youths and heterosexual youths, contributing to safer school environments for all students (12). The consistent disparities in violence by sexual orientation found in this analysis highlight the important role of LGBTQ+ supportive practices in reducing experiences of violence.

Effective, evidence-based primary prevention is critical to reducing the substantial risk for violence victimization during high school, and research points to the importance of starting these prevention efforts early, before violence begins. Prevention strategies work best when they operate across levels of the social ecological model, addressing risk and protective factors of persons, their peers and families, and their physical and social environments (https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/about/connectingthedots.html). CDC developed a series of guides that outline prevention resources to help communities identify effective approaches and implement comprehensive, multicomponent prevention efforts based on the best available research evidence to address sexual violence, youth violence, and intimate partner violence (https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/communicationresources/pub/technical-packages.html#technicalPackages). For example, one prevention approach involves teaching youths how to act as engaged, proactive bystanders when they encounter sexist, homophobic, racist, or violence-supportive attitudes. Youth Voices in Prevention, a youth-led sexual violence prevention program, was found to increase bystander behaviors and decrease violence-related attitudes, with stronger effects for sexual minority and AI/AN youths (13). In addition, CDC developed Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen Relationships, which includes prevention strategies focused on healthy relationship skills for youths and their families, schools, and neighborhoods.

Findings in this report highlight the importance of tailoring prevention strategies to create safe, nonjudgmental environments that promote protective factors to reduce disparities and increase safety among youths (6). Prevention efforts must also address disparities in risk for adolescent victimization by sex, race and ethnicity, and sexual minority status. Approaches should be designed or adapted to address the unique social and structural risk and protective factors affecting these groups, including social determinants of health (e.g., racism, discrimination, and socioeconomic disadvantage) that perpetuate and reinforce health disparities (14,15). For example, approaches that strengthen household financial security, create safer and healthier communities through physical environment enhancements, or connect youths to caring adults through mentoring or job training programs can help build protective environments for youths at higher risk for violence exposure (https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/yv-technicalpackage.pdf) (14).