Identifying direct protective factors for nonviolence

Dustin Pardini, Rolf Loeber, David P. Farrington, Magda Stouthamer-Loeber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The CDC recently organized a panel to examine whether a series of constructs consistently acted as risk and/or direct protective factors for youth violence across four longitudinal studies. Analyses first examined constructs commonly assessed across all four studies and then included constructs unique to each study. Purpose: This paper describes findings from the Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) as part of this supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine documenting the findings from the project. Methods: Participants were boys in the youngest cohort of the PYS (N=503), which was initiated in 1987-1988. Constructs measured at age 12 years were trichotomized to test whether they acted as risk and/or direct protective factors in predicting violence (i.e., assault, rape, robbery) across ages 13-14 years and 15-18 years. Results: Multivariate logistic regressions with predictors present across studies indicated that depressed mood (OR=1.96) and low religious observance (OR=1.88) were risk factors for violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas peer delinquency acted as both a risk (OR=2.34) and direct protective factor (OR=0.44). Low peer delinquency was also a direct protective factor (OR=0.41) for violence at ages 15-18 years. Analyses including predictors specific to the PYS indicated that negative attitude toward delinquency (OR=0.50) was protective against violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas the risk factors of low perceived likelihood of being caught (OR=1.81) and high neighborhood disorder/crime (OR=1.77) predicted violence at ages 15-18 years. Conclusions: Some factors may be best conceptualized as direct protective factors for nonviolence, whereas other constructs act primarily as risk factors that increase the probability of adolescent violence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine
Volume43
Issue number2 SUPPL. 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Violence
Preventive Medicine
Rape
Crime
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.)
Protective Factors
Longitudinal Studies
Logistic Models

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Epidemiology

Cite this

Identifying direct protective factors for nonviolence. / Pardini, Dustin; Loeber, Rolf; Farrington, David P.; Stouthamer-Loeber, Magda.

In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 43, No. 2 SUPPL. 1, 08.2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pardini, Dustin ; Loeber, Rolf ; Farrington, David P. ; Stouthamer-Loeber, Magda. / Identifying direct protective factors for nonviolence. In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2012 ; Vol. 43, No. 2 SUPPL. 1.
@article{d5d82cddd104410fbcb14c7693aaa033,
title = "Identifying direct protective factors for nonviolence",
abstract = "Background: The CDC recently organized a panel to examine whether a series of constructs consistently acted as risk and/or direct protective factors for youth violence across four longitudinal studies. Analyses first examined constructs commonly assessed across all four studies and then included constructs unique to each study. Purpose: This paper describes findings from the Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) as part of this supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine documenting the findings from the project. Methods: Participants were boys in the youngest cohort of the PYS (N=503), which was initiated in 1987-1988. Constructs measured at age 12 years were trichotomized to test whether they acted as risk and/or direct protective factors in predicting violence (i.e., assault, rape, robbery) across ages 13-14 years and 15-18 years. Results: Multivariate logistic regressions with predictors present across studies indicated that depressed mood (OR=1.96) and low religious observance (OR=1.88) were risk factors for violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas peer delinquency acted as both a risk (OR=2.34) and direct protective factor (OR=0.44). Low peer delinquency was also a direct protective factor (OR=0.41) for violence at ages 15-18 years. Analyses including predictors specific to the PYS indicated that negative attitude toward delinquency (OR=0.50) was protective against violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas the risk factors of low perceived likelihood of being caught (OR=1.81) and high neighborhood disorder/crime (OR=1.77) predicted violence at ages 15-18 years. Conclusions: Some factors may be best conceptualized as direct protective factors for nonviolence, whereas other constructs act primarily as risk factors that increase the probability of adolescent violence.",
author = "Dustin Pardini and Rolf Loeber and Farrington, {David P.} and Magda Stouthamer-Loeber",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.024",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
journal = "American Journal of Preventive Medicine",
issn = "0749-3797",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2 SUPPL. 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying direct protective factors for nonviolence

AU - Pardini, Dustin

AU - Loeber, Rolf

AU - Farrington, David P.

AU - Stouthamer-Loeber, Magda

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Background: The CDC recently organized a panel to examine whether a series of constructs consistently acted as risk and/or direct protective factors for youth violence across four longitudinal studies. Analyses first examined constructs commonly assessed across all four studies and then included constructs unique to each study. Purpose: This paper describes findings from the Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) as part of this supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine documenting the findings from the project. Methods: Participants were boys in the youngest cohort of the PYS (N=503), which was initiated in 1987-1988. Constructs measured at age 12 years were trichotomized to test whether they acted as risk and/or direct protective factors in predicting violence (i.e., assault, rape, robbery) across ages 13-14 years and 15-18 years. Results: Multivariate logistic regressions with predictors present across studies indicated that depressed mood (OR=1.96) and low religious observance (OR=1.88) were risk factors for violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas peer delinquency acted as both a risk (OR=2.34) and direct protective factor (OR=0.44). Low peer delinquency was also a direct protective factor (OR=0.41) for violence at ages 15-18 years. Analyses including predictors specific to the PYS indicated that negative attitude toward delinquency (OR=0.50) was protective against violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas the risk factors of low perceived likelihood of being caught (OR=1.81) and high neighborhood disorder/crime (OR=1.77) predicted violence at ages 15-18 years. Conclusions: Some factors may be best conceptualized as direct protective factors for nonviolence, whereas other constructs act primarily as risk factors that increase the probability of adolescent violence.

AB - Background: The CDC recently organized a panel to examine whether a series of constructs consistently acted as risk and/or direct protective factors for youth violence across four longitudinal studies. Analyses first examined constructs commonly assessed across all four studies and then included constructs unique to each study. Purpose: This paper describes findings from the Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) as part of this supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine documenting the findings from the project. Methods: Participants were boys in the youngest cohort of the PYS (N=503), which was initiated in 1987-1988. Constructs measured at age 12 years were trichotomized to test whether they acted as risk and/or direct protective factors in predicting violence (i.e., assault, rape, robbery) across ages 13-14 years and 15-18 years. Results: Multivariate logistic regressions with predictors present across studies indicated that depressed mood (OR=1.96) and low religious observance (OR=1.88) were risk factors for violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas peer delinquency acted as both a risk (OR=2.34) and direct protective factor (OR=0.44). Low peer delinquency was also a direct protective factor (OR=0.41) for violence at ages 15-18 years. Analyses including predictors specific to the PYS indicated that negative attitude toward delinquency (OR=0.50) was protective against violence at ages 13-14 years, whereas the risk factors of low perceived likelihood of being caught (OR=1.81) and high neighborhood disorder/crime (OR=1.77) predicted violence at ages 15-18 years. Conclusions: Some factors may be best conceptualized as direct protective factors for nonviolence, whereas other constructs act primarily as risk factors that increase the probability of adolescent violence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863684975&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863684975&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.024

DO - 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.024

M3 - Article

C2 - 22789956

AN - SCOPUS:84863684975

VL - 43

JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

SN - 0749-3797

IS - 2 SUPPL. 1

ER -