Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

An abused child may be bullied at school and, as an

adult, be a victim of domestic violence. Furthermore,

the effect of these different victimizations may be more

than simply the sum of the individual types.

Finally, the need for an integrative approach is par-

ticularly demonstrated by the shared interpersonal

nature of the victimization phenomena. If the key facet

of the victimization experience that defines it is the

interpersonal nature of the victimization, then there is

quite likely to be a shared psychological expression of

exposure to victimization across types of victimization.

An integrative approach allows for the examination of

this common core of psychological features attendant

to this definition of victimization.

Effects of Victimization

The early research on the consequences of victimiza-

tion detailed the many psychological consequences of

exposure to victimization. Typically, researchers would

identify populations previously victimized and com-

pare this population with a nonvictimized population

on standardized measures, primarily of psychological

disturbance. This research has demonstrated that vic-

timization exposure is a pathogen. In addition to the

possible physical effects associated with victimization,

there may be psychological symptoms across a range of

domains, such as dissociation, depression, anxiety, and

interpersonal difficulties. Additionally, specific forms

may have more specific outcomes. For example, child

sexual abuse may be linked to sexual difficulties. Not

only is there a wide range of possible symptoms asso-

ciated with victimization, but there also is a wide range

of severity of response to victimization. With the matu-

ration of the field, particularly with the leadership pro-

vided by researchers such as David Finkelhor,

emphasis has shifted from specific psychological

symptoms and the recognition of PTSD to core psycho-

logical issues or processes that are affected by victim-

ization. These core psychological issues include

damage to interpersonal relationships and self.

One of the accomplishments of the several decades

of research into the consequences of exposure to vio-

lence and victimization is the recognition that PTSD

is often a specific consequence of victimization. This

recognition has brought considerable attention to the

role of trauma in the lives of human beings and an

awareness that exposure to trauma, particularly chronic,

repetitive trauma, creates a unique kind of psychologi-

cal response that does not fit the typical understanding

of PTSD and, instead, requires an understanding of not

only trauma and its response but also trauma and the

task of adjusting to chronic exposure to trauma. This has

led researchers to identify different types of PTSD,

described as complex PTSD, to distinguish it from the

diagnosis of PTSD as given in the Diagnostic and

Statistical Manual(fourth edition; DSM-IV).

Likewise, in the lives of children, there is a greater

recognition that the responses of children to chronic,

repetitive stressful events cannot be subsumed under

the diagnosis of PTSD, which was developed primar-

ily in the crucible of wartime experiences of soldiers.

Thus, in the current scientific community, there is an

appreciation that the unique adjustment capacities and

responses of children and adolescents require some

new types of diagnostic nomenclature. In particular,

the notion of a developmental trauma disorder has

been brought into the scientific community by several

people and is being considered for inclusion in subse-

quent editions of the DSM. The finding that should be

emphasized, however, is that trauma exposure is a

unique and particular pathogen that occasions a range

of responses in humans. In part, these outcomes can

be captured by the diagnosis of PTSD; however, the

range of responses needs a more articulated and spe-

cific set of diagnostic categories to be able to delineate

the variety of responses and syndromes observed in

children, adolescents, and adults.

The fact that victimization typically occurs within

the context of an interpersonal relationship has pro-

found consequences for understanding the conse-

quences of victimization. Such victimization elicits

unique interpersonal, emotional, and developmental

issues. Humans form their working models of the world

in the context of relationships. It is how we come to

understand what we may expect from other people and

how we learn to interact with others. Thus, the conse-

quences of victimization, particularly victimization that

occurs in the context of central human relationships, are

far reaching and may affect later relationships.

As originally proposed by John Bowlby, our core

attachment figures are the lens through which we

develop our understanding of the world. The theory of

the world we form in these relationships, thus,

becomes the template against which we judge subse-

quent experiences and by which we shape our own

actions in the world. When these models are damaged

or distorted by victimization, the primary consequence

is that all subsequent interactions are affected by the

accommodations that the victim has to make to the

Victimization——— 835

V-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 835