Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Youth Soc. 2014 Nov 25;49(3):295–317. doi: 10.1177/0044118X14559503

Table 3.

Multivariate Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting Dating Violence Profile Membership (n = 551)

No Dating Violencea vs. Mutual Violence vs. Victimization Only vs.

Perpetration Onlyb Victimization Onlyc Mutual Violenced Perpetration Only Victimization Only Perpetration Only

RRR
[95% CI]
RRR
[95% CI]
RRR
[95% CI]
RRR
[95% CI]
RRR
[95% CI]
RRR
[95% CI]
Problem Behaviors 3.57***
[1.90, 6.70]
2.15***
[1.43, 3.25]
2.97***
[2.01, 4.40]
1.20
[0.62, 2.31]
0.72
[0.45, 1.16]
1.66
[0.83, 3.31]
Anger 1.17
[0.41, 3.38]
1.23
[0.60, 2.52]
1.97*
[1.03, 3.76]
0.60
[0.20, 1.82]
0.62
[0.27, 1.44]
0.96
[0.29, 3.16]
Discrimination 0.64
[0.10, 4.26]
3.11*
[1.06, 9.07]
4.63**
[1.81, 11.84]
0.14*
[0.02, 0.95]
0.67
[0.21, 2.12]
0.21
[0.03, 1.57]
Female 5.26**
[2.01, 13.77]
0.44**
[0.25, 0.79]
2.31**
[1.38, 3.87]
2.28
[0.83, 6.31]
0.19***
[0.10, 0.38]
11.87***
[4.09, 34.48]
Age 0.95
[0.61, 1.47]
0.76
[0.56, 1.04]
1.17
[0.88, 1.54]
0.81
[0.51, 1.30]
0.65*
[0.45, 0.94]
1.24
[0.75, 2.05]

Note: Pseudo R2 = 0.12; χ2 (15) = 137.43; p = .000; RRR = Relative risk ratio, CI = Confidence Interval

a

n = 350

b

n = 30

c

n = 71

d

n = 100

*

p < .05;

**

p < .01;

***

p < .001