Summary / Abstract

Title: Addiction-risk and aggressive/criminal behaviour in adolescence: influence of family, school and peers

Synopsis: In this study, data from 2814 15- and 16-year-old secondary school students were analysed to investigatethe collective influence of family, school and peers on behavioural problems in adolescence. Adolescents with addiction-risk and/oraggressive/criminal behaviour were compared to those who did not display such behaviour. Adolescents with behavioural problems werecharacterized by having a more negative perception of the environment with regard to most of the variables related with family,school and peers. Clearly behavioural problems are associated with problems in multiple environments. Some differences were foundbetween boys and girls: multiple regression analyses showed that for boys, problems at school were the most important predictor ofbehavioural problem scores, while for girls, this applied to problems at home. school, peers, addiction risk, adolescents, aggressive criminal behaviour, family school, girls, boys, influence, environment, multiple regression analyses, Garnefski, secondary school students, secondary school, Okma, regard, negative feelings, total sample, predictors, delinquency, negative perception, regular quarrels, social environment, peer group, child psychology, significant independent effect, confidence intervals, quarrelling, variables relating, self report,

Related links for: Addiction-risk and aggressive/criminal behaviour in adolescence: influence of family, school and peers

Additional keywords for: Addiction-risk and aggressive/criminal behaviour in adolescence: influence of family, school and peers

journal adolescence 1996 19 503 512 addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour adolescence influence family school peers nadia garnefski sjoukje okma study data 2814 15 16 year old secondary school students analysed investigate collective influence family school peers behavioural problems adolescence adolescents addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour compared display behaviour adolescents behavioural problems characterized negative perception environment regard variables related family school peers clearly behavioural problems associated problems multiple environments differences found boys girls multiple regression analyses showed boys problems school important predictor behavioural problem scores girls applied problems home 1996 association professionals services adolescents introduction number recent publications authors expressed concern deterioration mental health adolescent youth netherlands western societies past 50 years garnefski diekstra 1993 drugs delinquent behaviour impose heavy emotional financial burdens society victims course adolescents researchers support idea developmental progression relatively minor involvement problem behaviour minor offending serious offending kandel 1978 elliott et al 1989 addition empirical evidence indicated aggressive behaviour delinquency substance relatively stable behaviours time jessor et al 1991 white 1992 western societies efforts made devise methods strategies counteract development increase behaviours adolescent population evident complex interaction large number personal situational factors underly problem behaviours addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviours elliott et al 1985 hoge et al 1994 despite disagreement exact nature directions relationships growing number studies emphasized connection presence relational risk factors social environment severe conflicts poor communications family friends reprint requests correspondence addressed n garnefski m sc department clinical health psychology university leiden p o box 9555 2300 rb leiden netherlands 0140 1971 96 06050310 25 00 0 1996 association professionals services adolescents 504 n garnefski okma development addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviours adolescence scholte 1992 general three main socialization areas distinguished i e family school peer group relationships relational risk factors specific social environments problem behaviour documented e g elliott et al 1985 loeber stouthamer loeber 1986 first studies shown relationship family factors addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour relational risk factors frequently identified family poor negative family communication weak family bonds ineffective parenting style rutter 1985 loeber stouthamer loeber 1986 hoge et al 1994 known parents play model role development addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour general role family functioning explanations development addiction risk behaviour found importance role explanations development aggressive criminal behaviour rutter 1985 fergusson et al 1994 second school appears strong relationship problem behaviour empirical evidence suggests school direct causal influence development problem behaviour poor school functioning appears correlate behavioural problems scholte 1992 tremblay et al 1992 third majority researchers adolescent peer group major influence development problem behaviours involvement antisocial delinquent peer group coincides problem behaviour risk associated leisure activities elliott et al 1985 1989 fagan et al 1990 hoge et al 1994 authors found adolescents negative peer associations inclined involved delinquent activities strong bonds family school elliott et al 1989 farrell et al 1992 empirical findings delineated important main limitation studies restricted separate environment family specific outcome criminal behaviour shown division separate problem behaviours considered artificial conceptually statistically co occurrence interrelatedness behaviours rule exception applies division separate environments reality relationships family school peers tend strong direct indirect influences elliott et al 1989 scholte 1992 hoge et al 1994 clearly need studies designed explore joint contributions family school peer group relationships addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviours adolescent populations aim study investigate influence three environments i e family school peers shed light relative importance help extend knowledge development problem behaviour contribute important leads prevention intervention efforts study quality relationships family school peers adolescents displayed addiction risk behaviour aggressive criminal behaviour compared adolescents display behaviour large representative community sample contrast studies delinquency drug sample comprising respondents conviction drug criminal activities limited students two schools 505 influence family school peers problem behaviour method subjects sample comprised 2814 15 16 year old secondary school students 51 6 boys 48 2 girls subjects form subset large general population sample consisted 15 245 adolescents 212 randomly selected secondary schools netherlands 49 7 boys 50 1 girls varying age 11 23 years m 15 years 5 months d 1 year 8 months grades levels available dutch secondary school system represented i e lower general secondary education higher general secondary education pre university education lower vocational education intermediate vocational education subset 2814 adolescents obtained follows original sample tested effects age gender reporting behavioural problems appeared strong age effect analyses variance showed youngsters aged 15 16 differ regard average number behavioural problems reported age groups differed significantly 15 16 yearolds differences existed males females behavioural problems reported males females order control influence differences results decided select 15 16 year old youngsters n 2814 present results boys girls separately procedure present study describes results subsidiary analysis data larger project central aim project called monitoring future behavior health high school students obtain information trends life styles attitudes health status emotional behavioural characteristics regular i e biannual basis secondary school student population netherlands framework long term project carried three bodies national institute budget information hague leiden university university rotterdam subjects filled extensive self report questionnaire normal school hours supervision teacher period october 1992 january 1993 measurements original self report questionnaire constructed basis monitoringthe future questionnaire bachman et al 1987 covered number areas physical mental health life style behavioural patterns risk behaviours attitudes social political topics income consumption pattern leisure activities paper deals data addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour relationships family school peers operationalization addiction risk behaviour aggressive criminal behaviour perceived relationships described detail problem behaviour addiction risk behaviour addiction risk behaviours measured self report checklist comprising four criteria interested addiction risk behaviour 506 n garnefski okma mild form i e symptom reporting two behaviours taken criterium existence addiction risk behaviour smoked average 10 cigarettes day past month drunk 25 glasses alcohol past month drunk twice past month soft drugs i e hash marijuana past year i e occasions aggressive criminal behaviour aggressive criminal behaviours measured self report checklist comprising four criteria interested moderate severe forms aggressive criminal behaviour reporting two behaviours taken criterium existence aggressive criminal behaviour initiated physical quarrels inflicted physical injuries people i e occasions past year deliberately destroyed people property i e occasions past year stolen items value 50 dutch guilders 1 i e occasions past year involved police done i e occasions past year data addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour available continuous form decided items dichotomized form order distinguish adolescents reporting problem behaviour adolescents reporting behaviour adolescents drugs cut scores determined approximately five 20 adolescents fell category reporting specific behavioural problem percentage based existing research prevalence rates disturbance suggesting approximately 20 adolescents general population appears kind behavioural problem see offer schonert reichl 1992 total numbers aggressive criminal addiction risk behaviours determined negative social environment variables relating family negative feelings home i e answered affirmatively two statements i dislike home i don t get father i don t get mother serious problems parents past year i e answered affirmatively statement i serious problems parents past year serious incidents quarrelling parents past year i e seven occasions variables relating school negative feelings school i e answered affirmatively two statements i dislike go school i feel uncomfortable school i feel school worth effort serious problems teachers past year i e answered affirmatively statement i serious problems teachers past year serious incidents quarrelling teachers past year i e two occasions variables relating peers negative feeling peers i e answered 1 50 dutch guilders equal 20 english pounds 507 influence family school peers problem behaviour affirmatively statements i don t get peers difficult make friends serious problems peers past year i e answered affirmatively statement i serious problems peers past year serious incidents quarrelling peers past year i e two occasions regard variables relating family school peers units analyses separate variables total numbers family school peer problems results table 1 shows percentages reported addiction risk behaviour aggressive behaviour total sample boys girls separately 18 5 total sample reported aggressive criminal behaviour 18 7 total sample reported addiction risk behaviour percentages types problem behaviour higher boys girls co occurrence aggressive criminal addiction risk behaviours reported 8 7 total sample 12 5 boys 4 6 girls table 2 presents data concerning variables relating home school peers table 1 prevalence aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour total sample boys girls n 2814 n 1453 n 1355 aggressive criminal behaviour 18 5 26 4 9 9 addiction risk behaviour 18 7 23 6 13 4 aggressive criminal addiction risk 8 7 12 5 4 6 table 2 interrelations problems home school peers addiction risk behaviour addiction risk behaviour chi square odds ratio df 1 home negative feelings home 16 4 8 7 24 11 1 88 serious problems parents 37 4 21 4 51 45 1 75 quarrelling parents 31 3 17 8 42 55 1 76 school negative feelings school 15 3 6 5 39 62 2 35 serious problems teachers 21 1 8 4 57 58 2 50 quarrelling teachers 45 2 17 2 171 09 2 64 peers negative feelings peers 23 8 28 8 4 84 0 83 b serious problems peers 27 5 17 3 23 51 1 59 quarrelling peers 24 4 15 4 21 44 1 58 p 0 001 p 0 01 p 0 05 odds ratio significantly 1 00 95 confidence intervals b odds ratio significantly 1 00 95 confidence intervals 508 n garnefski okma table 3 interrelations problems home school peers aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour chi square odds ratio df 1 home negative feelings home 17 0 8 1 33 15 2 11 serious problems parents 36 2 21 1 43 96 1 72 regular quarrels parents 33 4 16 6 65 13 2 01 school negative feelings school 16 3 6 4 47 62 2 55 serious problems teachers 25 8 7 2 119 90 3 56 regular quarrels teachers 46 2 15 9 200 58 2 90 peers negative feelings peers 22 9 28 5 5 64 0 80 b serious problems peers 28 3 17 0 27 57 1 66 regular quarrels peers 31 3 13 4 84 59 2 33 p 0 001 p 0 01 p 0 05 odds ratio significantly 1 00 95 confidence intervals b odds ratio significantly 1 00 95 confidence intervals adolescents addiction risk behaviour possible differences two groups tested means chi square analysis calculating odds ratios table 3 presents comparable results aggressive criminal behaviour 2 differences found significant chi square values odds ratios significant 95 confidence interval adolescents addiction risk behaviour reported twice negative feelings home serious problems parents regular quarrels addiction risk behaviour twice students addiction risk behaviour found negative feelings school serious problems school regular quarrels teachers addiction risk behaviour reported serious problems peers twice quarrels peers table 2 adolescents aggressive criminal behaviour reported twice negative feelings home serious problems home regular quarrels parents three times negative feelings school serious problems school regular quarrels teachers significantly serious problems regular quarrels peers exceptions found negative feelings peers students addiction risk behaviour aggressive criminal behaviour appeared report significantly negative feelings peers behaviour 2 bivariate results chi square analyses corresponding conclusions appeared fundamentally invariant sex results total sample presented 509 influence family school peers problem behaviour table 4 multiple regression analyses home school peers predictors aggressive criminal addiction risk behaviour scores b effects aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour boys girls boys girls b b b b home 0 16 0 27 0 03 0 31 school 0 34 0 23 0 32 0 24 peers 0 08 0 02 0 00 0 02 variance explained 0 20 0 15 0 11 0 19 p 0 0001 p 0 01 multiple regression analyses multiple regression analyses method enter performed consider measures number problems home school peers made independent contributions variance aggressive criminal addiction risk behaviour 3 table 4 presents results boys girls separately firstly differences percentages explained variance boys girls variables relating home school peers 20 variance aggressive criminal behaviour explained boys vs 15 girls 19 variance addiction risk behaviour explained girls vs 11 boys boys problems school appeared strongest relative independent relationship aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour b 0 34 0 32 respectively explaining scores male addiction risk behaviour appeared significant independent effect explaining scores male aggressive criminal behaviour significant independent effect found problems home girls problems home appeared strongest relative independent effect aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour b 0 27 0 31 respectively problems school significant independent relationship types female problem behaviour problems peers appear significant independent effect male female scores problem behaviour table 4 discussion nature study permit draw conclusions causality results suggest strong relationship reporting behavioural problems problems social environment exception adolescents addiction risk aggressive criminal behaviour scored significantly higher i e unfavourably variables indicated negative quality 3 central limit theorem permits parametric methods requiring normal distribution large sample obtained population concern decidedly nonnormal robustness multiple regression analyses deviations true interval scale measurement largely demonstrated kazmier pohl 1987 510 n garnefski okma relationship family school peers indicates adolescents drink alcohol drugs engaged aggressive criminal acts characterized frequent quarrels problems significant multiple environments regard negative feelings peers adolescents aggressive criminal behaviour adolescents addiction risk behaviour reported slightly positive perception adolescents problem behaviour clearly problem behaviour related problems parents school necessarily case regard peers possibly peer group degree problem behaviour accepted supports results reported hurrelmann 1990 suggested adolescent problem behaviour specific social personal situation provide defining public image achieving social status suggested stage adolescence characterized experimentation exploration risk taking rebellion stage empirical evidence indicated categories deviance tend decrease years secondary school individuals engage fairly serious types problems criminal acts heavy drinking marijuana adolescence likely continue adulthood see sprinthall collins 1995 order prevent continuation aggravation behavioural problems paramount importance identify children risk early stage intervene early possible finding youngsters behavioural problems experience problems family school situation suggests family school suitable locations identification prevention parents teachers involved preventive intervention programmes results clearly suggest behavioural problems male female adolescents associated negative perception social support systems suggest important differences boys girls boys problems school appeared strongest relationship aggressive criminal behaviour addiction risk behaviour girls problems home appeared strongest relationship types problem behaviour argued school best place identify boys behavioural problems best place identify girls behavioural problems behavioural problems girls manifesting class behaviour manifest home study large representative community sample increased generalizability results limitations first unclear extent findings generalizable samples adolescents ethnic backgrounds dropouts school institutionalized importance reach latter youngsters future research studies indicated dropouts youngsters different ethnic background carry higher risk substance abuse criminal behaviour second argued riskfactor domains ought personality traits academic attainment third retrospective design concluded causal direction relationships longitudinal research development problem behaviour performed investigate influential factors different developmental stages child limitation data obtained self report questionnaire independent ratings relevant objective methods measure social problems prevalence behavioural problems argued relevant extend future research 511 influence family school peers problem behaviour identification protective factors delay stop development problem behaviour large samples different methods data collection opinion despite limitations value study first focus complex relationships behavioural problems hand perceived family school peer group support systems exploratory character makes replication necessary results confirmed carry important implications focus content preventive interventions adolescence references bachman j g johnston l d o malley p m 1987 monitoring future questionnaire responses nation high school seniors 1986 ann arbor michigan university michigan institute social research elliott d huizinga d ageton 1985 explaining delinquency drug beverly hills sage elliott d huizinga d menard 1989 multiple problem youth delinquency substance mental health problems new york springer verlag fagan j weis j g cheng y t 1990 delinquency substance abuse inner city students journal drug issues 20 351 402 farrell d danish j howard c w 1992 relationship drug problem behaviours urban adolescents journal consulting clinical psychology 60 705 712 fergusson d m horwood l j lynskey m 1994 childhoods multiple problem adolescents 15 year longitudinal study journal child psychology psychiatry 35 1123 1140 garnefski n diekstra r f w 1993 scholierenonderzoek 1992 gedrag en gezondheid national schoolchildren survey 1992 behaviour health leiden state university hoge r d andrews d leschied w 1994 tests three hypotheses regarding predictors delinquency journal abnormal child psychology 22 547 559 hurrelmann k 1990 health promotion adolescents preventive corrective strategies problem behaviour journal adolescence 13 251 263 jessor r donovan j e costa f m 1991 adolescence problem behaviour young adult development new york cambridge university press kandel d b 1978 antecedents adolescent initiation stages drug developmental analysis longitudinal research drug kandel d b ed new york john wiley sons kazmier l j pohl n f 1987 basic statistics business economics new york mcgrawhill inc loeber r stouthamer loeber m 1986 family factors correlates predictors juvenile conduct problems delinquency crime justice vol 7 tonry m morris n eds chicago university chicago press offer d schonert reichl k 1992 debunking myths adolescence findings recent research journal american academy child adolescent psychiatry 31 1003 1014 rutter m 1985 family school influences behavioural development journal child psychology psychiatry 26 349 368 scholte e m 1992 prevention treatment juvenile problem behaviour proposal socio ecological approach journal abnormal child psychology 20 247 262 sprinthall n collins w 1995 adolescent psychology developmental view new york mcgraw hill inc 512 n garnefski okma tremblay r e masse b perron d leblanc m 1992 early disruptive behaviour poor school achievement delinquent behaviour delinquent personality longitudinal analyses journal consulting clinical psychology 60 64 72 white h r 1992 early problem behaviour drug problems journal research crime delinquency 29 412 429, com_apnet_jado_jado_1996_0049, KnowledgeStor, Knowledge-Stor,