L Wichstrøm1, K Skogen, T Oia. 1. Research Council of Norway's Centre for Youth Research, Dragvoll. larwic@alfa.avh.unit.no
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of conduct problems (CP) according to level of urbanization and to determine which factors account for the potential difference in prevalence rates. METHOD: Study 1 used a questionnaire survey of a nationally representative sample of 10,462 Norwegian adolescents. Study 2 used a questionnaire survey of a representative sample of 1,346 adolescents living in Oslo. Self-reported CP included most DSM-III-R criteria for conduct disorder. RESULTS: CP rates were similar in all levels of urbanization, except for the only semimetropolitan city in the country, the capital Oslo, which had CP rates twice those of the rest of the country. This increase rate could not be explained by a series of commonly advocated explanations: family structure and parental practices, social network, socioeconomic status, integration in community activities, religious involvement, and race. However, involvement in "soft" drugs and associating with antisocial peers could explain the statistically differential rates. Furthermore, in the Oslo study, adolescents' CP did not vary according to density of population or region within the city. CONCLUSIONS: The results support previous studies showing increased rates of CP in urban areas. However, urbanization must pass a certain threshold before it has this effect. Moreover, the lack of support for commonly advocated explanations for the difference between urban and nonurban areas suggests that investigations specifically addressing potential explanations for this difference should be conducted. The results indicate that the increased rates of substance use in highly urbanized areas may account for the difference in CP rates by prolonging and aggravating CP.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of conduct problems (CP) according to level of urbanization and to determine which factors account for the potential difference in prevalence rates. METHOD: Study 1 used a questionnaire survey of a nationally representative sample of 10,462 Norwegian adolescents. Study 2 used a questionnaire survey of a representative sample of 1,346 adolescents living in Oslo. Self-reported CP included most DSM-III-R criteria for conduct disorder. RESULTS: CP rates were similar in all levels of urbanization, except for the only semimetropolitan city in the country, the capital Oslo, which had CP rates twice those of the rest of the country. This increase rate could not be explained by a series of commonly advocated explanations: family structure and parental practices, social network, socioeconomic status, integration in community activities, religious involvement, and race. However, involvement in "soft" drugs and associating with antisocial peers could explain the statistically differential rates. Furthermore, in the Oslo study, adolescents' CP did not vary according to density of population or region within the city. CONCLUSIONS: The results support previous studies showing increased rates of CP in urban areas. However, urbanization must pass a certain threshold before it has this effect. Moreover, the lack of support for commonly advocated explanations for the difference between urban and nonurban areas suggests that investigations specifically addressing potential explanations for this difference should be conducted. The results indicate that the increased rates of substance use in highly urbanized areas may account for the difference in CP rates by prolonging and aggravating CP.
Authors: K Paige Harden; Brian M D'Onofrio; Carol Van Hulle; Eric Turkheimer; Joseph L Rodgers; Irwin D Waldman; Benjamin B Lahey Journal: J Child Psychol Psychiatry Date: 2009-03-31 Impact factor: 8.982