Objective College matriculation begins a period of transition into adulthood, one that is marked by new freedoms and responsibilities. This transition also is marked by an escalation in heavy drinking and other drug use, and a variety of use-related negative consequences. Trauma and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may affect alcohol and drug problems, and thus may be a point of intervention. Yet no studies have examined trauma, PTSD, and alcohol and drug problem associations during this developmental period. The present study provides such an examination. Method Matriculating college students (N=997) completed surveys in September (T1) and at five subsequent time points (T2-T6) over their first year of college. With latent growth analysis, trajectories of alcohol and drug-related consequences were modeled to examine how trauma (No Criterion A Trauma, Criterion A Only, No PTSD symptoms) and PTSD (partial or full) symptom status predicted these trajectories. Results Results showed substantial risk for alcohol- and other drug-related negative consequences that is conferred by the presence of PTSD at matriculation. Those with both partial and full PTSD started the year with more alcohol and drug consequences. These individuals showed a steeper decrease in consequences in the first semester, which leveled off as the year progressed. Both alcohol and drug consequences remained higher for those in the PTSD group throughout the academic year. Hyper-arousal symptoms showed unique effects on substance consequence trajectories. Risk patterns were consistent for both partial and full PTSD symptom presentations. Trajectories did not vary by gender. Conclusions Interventions that offer support and resources to students entering college with PTSD may help to ameliorate problem substance use and may ultimately facilitate a stronger transition into college and beyond.

Approximately 25% of male college students report engaging in some form of sexual coercion by the end of their fourth year of college. White and Smith (2004) found that negative childhood experiences-childhood sexual abuse, childhood physical abuse, and witnessing domestic violence-predicted sexual aggression perpetrated before college, but not during the subsequent college years, a puzzling finding in view of the reasonably consistent rates of sexual aggression from adolescence to the first 2 years of college. The current study takes a person-centered approach to sexual aggression in an attempt to resolve this discrepancy. We examined the possibility of cohesive subgroups of men in terms of their frequency of sexual aggression across the pre-college and college years. A series of latent class growth models were fit to an existing longitudinal dataset of sexual experiences collected across four time points-pre-college through year 3 of college. A four-trajectory model fit the data well, exhibiting significantly better fit than a three-trajectory model. The four trajectories are interpreted as men who perpetrate sexual aggression at (1) low (71.5% of the sample), (2) moderate (21.2%), (3) decreasing (4.2%), and (4) increasing (3.1%) frequencies across time. Negative childhood experiences predicted membership of the decreasing trajectory, relative to the low trajectory, but did not predict membership of the increasing trajectory, explaining the discrepancy uncovered by White and Smith. Implications for primary prevention of sexual aggression are discussed.

The present article describes the gap that exists between traditional data analysis techniques and more sophisticated methods that tend to be used more commonly among researchers outside of the study of v iolence against women. We briefly characterize growth models and person-centered analyses and describe the growing body of work in v iolence research that has applied these methods. Through an example from our own application of one of these techniques-latent class growth analysis-we highlight the ways that v iolence against women researchers may benefit from applying these more sophisticated methods to their own data, both past and present.

Beyond their status as an alternative to traditional variable-centered approaches, person-centered analyses challenge violence and victimization researchers to rethink the data, constructs, and populations they study. Although broadening one's perspective can be intimidating, person-centered approaches offer violence researchers the opportunity to answer new questions, test theories and taxonomies for the first time, and develop more nuanced understandings of populations under study. Addressing such ranging topics as peer victimization, childhood maltreatment, violence exposure, and risk and coping, the articles in this special issue all use person-centered analyses to examine interpersonal victimization. All four groups of authors use variables indicating participants' multiple victimization or maltreatment statuses to indicate latent heterogeneity. This person-centered approach facilitates the discovery of underlying, homogeneous subgroups of victims. The authors are then able to test associations between likely subgroup membership and risk factors and outcomes. Aside from their obvious utility to more clearly understand patterns of violence and victimization, personcentered analyses offer straightforward interpretations and implications regarding risk for victimization and patterns of childhood maltreatment seemingly tailored for clinical or policy audiences. In all, the person-centered approach brings both rewards and challenges for violence researchers who choose to integrate it into their program of study; they will undoubtedly find that the former greatly outweighs the latter.

Objective: Little research has drawn attention to distinct patterns of sexual victimization across time, although previous findings strongly indicate heterogeneity. Using longitudinal data, we tested a series of latent class growth models in an attempt to find meaningful patterns of sexual victimization frequency among female college students. Method: A sample of women (n = 1,580) answered questions at 5 time points concerning their childhood, adolescent, and collegiate sexual experiences. Latent class growth analysis was used with frequencies of sexual victimization at each of the 5 time points as indicators. Results: A 4-class model was selected on the basis of its fit to the data and its interpretability. The 4 classes are interpreted as low/none, moderate-increasing, decreasing, and high-increasing trajectories of sexual victimization. Negative childhood experiences-childhood sexual abuse, witnessing domestic violence, and parental physical punishment-partially explained latent trajectory membership. Conclusion: Possible implications of this research include the development of more specialized primary, secondary, and tertiary sexual assault prevention programs based on the victimization trajectories indicated by these analyses. Article: A primary goal of sexual victimization research is to prevent it from happening-to prevent perpetrators from perpetrating, to prevent victims from being victimized. Prevention programs on college campuses traditionally aim to stop violence before it occurs by teaching women how to avoid dangerous situations and defend themselves and teaching men how to better control their behaviors. Evaluations of these programs suggest that they are effective for some, but not all, female college students (Lonsway, 1996; Yeater & O'Donohue, 1999). Traditional programs are not as effective for women who have a history of victimization as they are for those without previous assault experiences (Rothman & Silverman, 2007). This disparity suggests that sexual assault prevention would benefit from a more tailored approach that focuses on specific strategies aimed toward specific groups of victims. With prevention efforts in mind, the goal of the present study is to assess the extent to which meaningful patterns exist across time with respect to women's frequency of sexual victimization. Researchers have studied differences among women in terms of sexual victimization for the past 3 decades. Traditionally, researchers have categorized women as those who have been victimized and those who have not and have compared these two groups in terms of predictors, correlates, and outcomes of sexual victimization (e.g., Abbey, Ross, McDuffie, & McAuslan, 1996; Corbin,