B K Elizabeth Kim1, Amanda B Gilman2, Karl G Hill3, J David Hawkins3. 1. University of California, Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, University of Washington. 2. Washington State Center for Court Research, University of Washington. 3. Social Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This paper examined proximal and distal effects of protective factors specified in the social development model (SDM) on youth violence among high-risk youth. METHODS: Data come from the Seattle Social Development Project, a longitudinal study of development from childhood into adulthood. A community sample of 808 participants from the Seattle Public School District was surveyed from the 5th grade through adulthood. This paper uses data from participants' adolescent years, ages 10-18. RESULTS: Higher levels of protective factors in early and middle adolescence reduced the odds of violence during late adolescence in the full sample and in two different risk groups (high cumulative risk and low SES). Although risk exposure increased the odds of violence, protective factors in middle adolescence predicted lower odds of violence during late adolescence. Importantly, protective factors had a greater effect in reducing violence among youth exposed to high levels of cumulative risk than among youth exposed to lower levels of cumulative risk. This difference was not observed between youth from higher and lower SES families. CONCLUSION: Protective factors specified in the SDM appear to reduce violence in late adolescence even among youth from low SES families and youth exposed to high levels of cumulative risk.
PURPOSE: This paper examined proximal and distal effects of protective factors specified in the social development model (SDM) on youth violence among high-risk youth. METHODS: Data come from the Seattle Social Development Project, a longitudinal study of development from childhood into adulthood. A community sample of 808 participants from the Seattle Public School District was surveyed from the 5th grade through adulthood. This paper uses data from participants' adolescent years, ages 10-18. RESULTS: Higher levels of protective factors in early and middle adolescence reduced the odds of violence during late adolescence in the full sample and in two different risk groups (high cumulative risk and low SES). Although risk exposure increased the odds of violence, protective factors in middle adolescence predicted lower odds of violence during late adolescence. Importantly, protective factors had a greater effect in reducing violence among youth exposed to high levels of cumulative risk than among youth exposed to lower levels of cumulative risk. This difference was not observed between youth from higher and lower SES families. CONCLUSION: Protective factors specified in the SDM appear to reduce violence in late adolescence even among youth from low SES families and youth exposed to high levels of cumulative risk.
Authors: Susan M Sawyer; Rima A Afifi; Linda H Bearinger; Sarah-Jayne Blakemore; Bruce Dick; Alex C Ezeh; George C Patton Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-04-25 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Jeffrey E Hall; Thomas R Simon; James A Mercy; Rolf Loeber; David P Farrington; Rosalyn D Lee Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Christopher M Fleming; Nicole Eisenberg; Richard F Catalano; Rick Kosterman; Christopher Cambron; J David Hawkins; Tim Hobbs; Ilene Berman; Tammi Fleming; Jessie Watrous Journal: Prev Sci Date: 2019-07
Authors: Bo-Kyung Elizabeth Kim; Amanda B Gilman; Kevin P Tan; Rick Kosterman; Jennifer A Bailey; Richard F Catalano; J David Hawkins Journal: Crim Behav Ment Health Date: 2020-06-02