|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this study by Griffin was to examine a number of childhood characteristics that could act as predictors of aggression in adolescence.
METHODOLOGY:
The author employed a quasi-experimental cross-sectional design with a non-probability sample of three groups of adolescents who had once participated in a residential treatment program for emotionally disturbed children. The first group, the Aggressive Group, contained 26 adolescents who had been classified as violent and aggressive, with serious emotional, neurological or mental handicaps. Evidence of violence had to be present within the previous six months, and included one or more of a number of behaviors: physical attacks against people, property or animals; self-injurious behavior; threats with a weapon; or use of sexual force. The second group of adolescents, the Follow-up Group, consisted of 28 subjects who had completed the treatment program and who had maintained the gains that they had achieved. Group III, the Random Group, was comprised of 28 randomly selected individuals from the total treatment population (n=560) over the years 1970 to 1980. This group was included to offer a representative sample of the entire treatment program. Most of the subjects in all three groups were males, with approximately even numbers of white and black participants. Four predictive risk indicators were examined, and included measures of both individual and environmental factors that might be related to aggression. The first measure was an organic indicator that measured some of the physical problems of childhood, including signs of physical abnormality, of central nervous system problems, and of developmental abnormalities. A family problem indicator measured family problems related to alcohol and drug abuse, child abuse and neglect and physical family violence, involvement of other family members in the justice system due to violent behavior, mental illness in the family and family disintegration. The behavior problem indicator examined a number of behaviors associated with conduct disorder. Behaviors included temper tantrums, physical attacks with and without a weapon, public sexual activities, arson, cruelty to animals, self-injurious behaviors, vandalism, verbal aggression, stealing, alcohol and drug abuse and running away. The final indicator was one of academic achievement, composed of three variables that measured academic problems. Included in this indicator were measures of the child's rate of learning, the parent's report of academic difficulties in the first grade, and whether the child was held back to repeat this grade. Variables were considered to be present if they had occurred before the age of nine years. Records of each child's case, including behavior checklists, social and family history, life charts, medical history and physical, psychological and educational assessments, were examined by two reviewers, who each entered the relevant information onto a prepared form, and whose two forms were then combined to provide a composite record for each child. Ten per cent of these composite records were then recoded, and good reliability was established for each of the four indicators. Analysis included examination of frequencies and discriminant function analysis.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The author found that the Aggressive Group showed significantly more behavior problems, organic indicators and academic difficulties than did children in either of the two comparison groups - the Follow-up Group or the Random Group. For the family problem measure, the Aggressive Group was only differentiated from the Follow-up Group, with no significant difference between the aggressive children and the Random Group subjects. The discriminant function analysis found that the four indicators were very effective predictors of membership in the Aggressive Group, with 85% of this group's cases being accurately classified. The standardized coefficients of the four discriminating indicators, representing the relative contributions of each of the indicators to the discriminant function, were .60 for behavior problems, .54 for academic achievement, .34 for the organic indicator and .32 for family problems. The author concluded that aggressive youth were different in their childhoods to their behavior disordered peers. Despite treatment interventions, children who had a high frequency of organic problems, who came from a violent and aggressive family and who were also exhibiting aggression and having difficulties in school, were at high risk for later developing aggressive and violent behavior in adolescence. The author suggested that these findings point to a process of learning of aggressive behaviors through modeling of family relationships. Children who either witnessed or were victims of family aggression and violence were more likely to exhibit aggressive behaviors in their relationships with others.
AUTHOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS:
The author suggested that the primary implication of this study was related to the identification and treatment of aggressive children. Since aggressive behavior patterns seemed to have become an integral part of the aggressive child's behavioral repertoire before the age of ten years, an integrated and coordinated effort must be established to change such children's behaviors. A one-dimensional intervention would seem to be ineffective; rather, an ecological and organized family intervention program could address issues of family interaction and modeling to reduce aggressive behaviors in children.
EVALUATION:
The author presents an interesting and valuable examination of childhood predictors of adolescent aggression. Whilst the small sample size suggests caution in generalizing to other treatment groups, the use of the three samples, one whose subjects remained aggressive, one for whom the program was a success, and one random, representative group, does allow for more confidence in the results. A more thorough discussion of the indicators would have been helpful, as would have a more detailed examination of the implications. Nonetheless, the study provides a good basis for further research and for prevention and intervention planning. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - Childhood Predictors
KW - Childhood Risk Factors
KW - Violence Causes
KW - Violence Predictors
KW - Violence Risk Factors
KW - Physical Aggression
KW - Aggression Causes
KW - Aggression Predictors
KW - Aggression Risk Factors
KW - Individual Risk Factors
KW - Family Environment
KW - Family Risk Factors
KW - Environmental Factors
KW - Biological Factors
KW - Child Development
KW - Juvenile Development
KW - Youth Development
KW - Juvenile Aggression
KW - Juvenile Violence |