This informative article reviews current research findings and presents a conceptual framework for better understanding the partnership between bullying victimization (hereafter known as victimization) and substance misuse (hereafter known as SM) among adolescents. and college connectedness which could amplify or abate GNF-5 the association between SM and victimization. We discuss practice and plan implications finally. is thought as repeated intense behavior–both direct (e.g. striking kicking or pressing) and Tek indirect (e.g. teasing cultural exclusion or growing a rumor)–meant to trigger physical and/or mental injury to another specific. A nationwide study in 2011 discovered that 23% of general public college college students (aged 12-18) reported bullying victimization (hereafter known as victimization (Robers Kemp & Truman 2013 Another nationwide survey discovered that 28% of college students (aged 12-18) reported becoming bullied on college property and around 16% reported becoming bullied electronically in 2011 (Centers for Disease Control and Avoidance 2012 Bullying victims regularly experience depression anxiousness low self-esteem college adjustment problems educational issues and suicidal behavior (Kim & Leventhal 2008 Reece 2008 Smokowski & Kopasz 2005 Gruber & Fineran 2007 Hjern Alfven & Ostberg 2008 Vanderbilt & Augustyn 2010 Furthermore to victimization element misuse (SM) can be another main concern as it is the leading cause of adolescent morbidity and mortality in the U.S. (Brannigan Schackman Falco & Millman 2004 Sussman Skara & Ames 2008 has referred to meeting requirements for a substance abuse or dependence but the term has been used inconsistently and requires a clearer more precise definition and greater consistency (Kelly 2004 For this article SM is used to describe individuals suffering from ��alcohol/cocaine/etc. abuse GNF-5 or alcohol/cocaine/etc. dependence only when it is known that these individuals meet criteria for such disorders�� (Kelly 2004 p. 85). Alcohol use among adolescents (12-17 years old) has been relatively stable recently with 13.3% of adolescents reporting current use 7.4% reporting current binge drinking episodes and 1.7% reporting heavy drinking episodes (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA] 2012 However adolescent marijuana use is as high as it has been since 2003 at 7.9% (SAMHSA 2012 Overall rates of SM and dependence diagnoses for adolescents in 2011 were 6.9% (SAMHSA 2012 with adolescents accounting for 7.2% of SM treatment admissions (SAMHSA 2012 Among adolescents females reported slightly higher alcohol use rates (13.2%) compared to males (12.6%). However illicit GNF-5 drug use rates were similar between male and female adolescents (9.6 and 9.5% respectively; SAMHSA 2012 It may seem that victimization and SM are distinctly different problems. However research has shown bullying victims are more likely to use substances compared to those uninvolved in bullying (Niemela et al. 2011 Tharp-Taylor Haviland & D��Amico 2009 A recent study on the prevalence of victimization and SM among middle and high school students from sixteen school districts documented that among victims in middle schools 3.2% smoked cigarettes 3.9% consumed alcohol and 2.4% used marijuana. However these prevalence rates are even higher for victims in high school-17.9% smoked cigarettes 34.5% consumed alcohol and 16.6% used marijuana (Radliff Wheaton Robinson & Morrison 2012 A better empirical and theoretical GNF-5 understanding of this relationship is critical for the development of intervention strategies that effectively target modifiable risk and protective factors of victimization and SM. To assist in this aim this article provides the first review of the research to date as far as the authors are aware that integrates the existing empirical findings on victimization and SM. This article presents a conceptual framework that enhances our empirical and theoretical understanding of the association between victimization and SM. First we examine the existing literature on victimization and SM which includes a discussion of their risk (defined as increasing the likelihood of harm while contributing to the development of mental psychosocial and behavioral dysfunction or maintenance of a problem condition; Fraser 2004 Richman & Fraser 2001 protective factors (defined as internal or external resources that promote positive development.