CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AND ADULT SEXUAL REVICTIMIZATION

A limitation of this study was that labeled terms were used to assessfor abuse
experiences and, as previously mentioned, this may have omitted women
from the victimization categories who experienced an assault and did not
label it as such. In addition, the study did not have a nonvictim control
group for comparison on symptom measures.
SUMMARY
We examined nine studies that investigated the relationship between
CSA and ASA. Studies were selected on the basis of their use of large, representative
community and college samples. All studies found support for the
phenomenon of revictimization. In each study, women with a history of CSA
were significantly more likely than nonvictims to have experienced a subsequent
sexual assault. Across these studies, victims of CSA were generally
two to three times more likely to have experienced ASA compared with
non-CSA victims. Therefore, simplyhaving a prior assault history increased
a woman's risk for later sexual assault in adolescence or adulthood.
Across studies,potential mediating variables that might shed more light
on specifically why those with a history of CSA are at greater risk for later
revictimization were rarely examined. Of the fewstudies that assessedmediating
variables, findings indicated that revictimization was associated with
participants reporting a higher number of sexual partners (Mayall & Gold,
1995), more unintended pregnancies and abortions (Wyatt et al., 1992),
greater alcohol use (Koss& Dinero, 1989), and use of illicit drugs (Kilpatrick
et al., 1997).
LIMITATIONS IN CURRENT LITERATURE
As noted in this chapter and in Table 2.1, studies differedon a number
of critical methodological and definitional characteristics. Regardlessof the
limitations acrossstudies, a significant relationship between child and adult
sexual victimization experiences was observed. In addition, several mediating
variables such as drug and alcohol use and number of sex partners were
found to be associatedwith sexual revictimization. However, the significance
of mediating variables was inconsistent acrossstudies. Study differences and
limitations may have prohibited researchers from identifying variables that
may put a woman at risk for a sexual revictimization. Subsequently, knowledge
that might guide effective programs designed to prevent sexual
revictimization is limited. For example, across studies, different definitions
of abusewere used. Some researchers used a narrower definition, assessingfor
either attempted or completed rape experiences involving force or threats of
force (e.g., Kilpatrick et al., 1997). Other researchers used a broader defini-
CHIW SEXUAL ABUSE AND ADULT SEXUAL REVICTIMlZATION 61