Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 1151–1163 | Cite as

Evaluation of Violence Prevention Approaches Among Early Adolescents: Moderating Effects of Disability Status and Gender

  • Terri N. Sullivan
  • Kevin S. Sutherland
  • Albert D. Farrell
  • Katherine A. Taylor
  • Sarah T. Doyle
Original Paper
  • 609 Downloads

Abstract

High prevalence rates of aggression during adolescence and associated adjustment difficulties for perpetrators and victims highlight the need for effective violence prevention programs. School-based prevention programs are advantageous as they occur in a key setting for youths' social and emotional development. The current study compared the efficacy of a combined universal violence prevention approach that included individual-level skill-building (i.e., lessons from Second Step) and school environment (i.e., Olweus Bullying Prevention Program; OBPP) interventions to OBPP alone. Participants were 231 sixth, seventh, and eighth graders (ages 11–15; M = 12.6, SD = 1.0) in middle school (48 % male, 67 % African American). A total of 14 classrooms were randomly assigned to the combined intervention (seven) or OBPP only comparison (seven) condition, split evenly across grades. Intervention effects were moderated by disability status and gender. Among students without disabilities those who received the combined intervention reported greater increases in anger regulation coping skills than those in the comparison condition. In contrast, among youth with disabilities greater increases in teacher-rated social skills were found for students in the combined intervention than students in the comparison condition at posttest. Gender-moderated effects included greater decreases in teacher ratings of externalizing problems and bullying behaviors for boys in the combined intervention versus the comparison condition at posttest. Study results inform school-based violence prevention programs and are discussed along with implications.

Keywords

Violence prevention Aggression Early adolescents Middle school 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer, N. S., Lozano, P., & Rivara, F. P. (2007). The effectiveness of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program in public middle schools: A controlled trial. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(3), 266–274. doi:10.1016/j. jadohealth.2006.10.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Black, S. A., & Jackson, E. (2007). Using bullying incident density to evaluate the Olweus Bullying Prevention Programme. School Psychology International, 28, 623–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowllan, N. M. (2011). Implementation and evaluation of a comprehensive, school-wide bullying prevention program in an urban/suburban middle school. Journal of School Health, 81(4), 167–173.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723 –742. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C. B., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). The importance of bonding to school for healthy development: Findings from the Social Development Research Group. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 252–261. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08281.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2011. MMWR, Surveillance Summaries 2012; 61(no. SS-4). Available from www.cdc.govmmwr/pdf/ss/ss6104.pdf.
  8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Committee for Children. (1997). Second step: A violence prevention curriculum: Middle school/junior high. Seattle, WA: Committee for Children. Level 1 foundation lessons.Google Scholar
  10. Committee for Children. (2008). Second Step: Student success through prevention program. Seattle, WA: Committee for Children.Google Scholar
  11. Domitrovich, C. E., Bradshaw, C. P., Greenberg, M. T., Embry, D., Poduska, J., & Ialongo, N. S. (2010). Integrated models of school-based prevention: Theory and logic. Psychology in the Schools, 47(1), 71–88. doi: 10.1002/pits.20452.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Durlak, J. (2010). The importance of doing well in whatever you do: A commentary on the special section: “Implementation research in early childhood education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(3), 348–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Durlak, J. A., & Dupre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 327–350. doi: 10.1007/s10464-0089165-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Elliott, S. N., & Gresham, F. M. (2008). SSIS intervention guide. Minneapolis, MN: NC: Pearson.Google Scholar
  15. Espelage, D. L. (2002). Bullying in early adolescence: The role of the peer group. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED471912).Google Scholar
  16. Espelage, D. L., Low, S., Polanin, J. R., & Brown, E. C. (2013). The impact of a middle school program to reduce aggression, victimization, and sexual violence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53, 180–186. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.02.021.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Espelage, D. L., Rose, C. A., & Polanin, J. R. (2015). Social-emotional learning program to reduce bullying, fighting, and victimization among middle school students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farrell, A. D., & Camou, S. (2006). School-based interventions for youth violence prevention. In J. R. Lutzker (Ed.), Preventing violence: Research and evidence-based intervention strategies (pp. 125–145). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farrell, A. D., Henry, D. B., & Bettencourt, A. (2013). Methodological challenges examining subgroup differences: Examples from universal school-based youth violence prevention trials. Prevention Science, 14(2), 121–133. doi: 10.1007/s11121-011-0200-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Farrell, A. D., Meyer, A. L., Kung, E. M., & Sullivan, T. N. (2001). Development and evaluation of school-based violence prevention programs. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30(2), 207–220. doi: 10.1207/S15374424JCCP3002_8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Farrell, A. D., Sullivan, T. N., Esposito, L. E., Meyer, A. L., & Valois, R. F. (2005). A latent growth curve analysis of the structure of aggression, drug use, and delinquent behaviors and their interrelations over time in urban and rural adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 15, 179–204. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2005.00091.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Farrell, A. D., Sullivan, T. N., Goncy, E. A., & Le, A. H. (2015). Assessment of adolescents’ victimization, aggression, and problem behaviors: Evaluation of the problem behavior frequency scale. Psychological Assessment, 28, 702–714.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Farrell, A. D., & Vulin-Reynolds, M. (2007). Violent behavior and the science of prevention. In D. J. Flannery, & A. T. Vazsonyi (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 767–786). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Forman, S. G., Shapiro, E. S., Codding, R. S., Gonzales, J. E., Reddy, L. A., & Rosenfield, S. A., et al. (2013). Implementation science and school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(2), 77–100. doi: 10.1037/spq0000019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gumpel, T. P., & Sutherland, K. S. (2010). The relation between emotional and behavioral disorders and school-based violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 349–356. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2010.06.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henry, D. B., & Farrell, A. D., Multisite Violence Prevention Project. (2004). The study designed by a committee: Design of the Multisite Violence Prevention Program. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 26(1), 12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Howard, T., Dresser, S. G., & Dunklee, D. R. (2009). Poverty is not a learning disability: Equalizing opportunities for low SES students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1996). Social skill deficits and learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 226–237. doi: 10.1177/002221949602900.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kavale, K. A., & Mostert, M. P. (2004). Social skills interventions for individuals with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 31–43. doi: 10.2307/1593630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kenward, M. G., & Roger, J. H. (1997). Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics, 53, 983–997. doi: 10.2307/2533558.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lerner, R. M., & Castellino, D. R. (2002). Contemporary developmental theory and adolescence: Developmental systems and applied developmental science. Journal of Adolescent Health, 31(Suppl6), 122–135.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Matjasko, J. L., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Massetti, G. M., Holland, K. M., Holt, M. K., & Cruz, J. D. (2012). A systematic meta-review of evaluations of youth violence prevention programs: Common and divergent findings from 25 years of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 540–552. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McMahon, S. D., & Washburn, J. J. (2003). Violence prevention: An evaluation of program effects with urban African American students. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 24(1), 3–62. doi: 10.1023/A:1025075617356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Melton, G. B., Limber, S. P., Cunningham, P., Osgood, D. W., Chambers, J., & Flerx, V., et al. (1998). Violence among rural youth. Final report. Washington: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  35. Mishna, F. (2003). Learning disabilities and bullying: Double jeopardy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 336–347. doi: 10.1177/00222194030360040501.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: Teacher guide. Center City, MN: Hazelden.Google Scholar
  37. Orpinas, P., Parcel, G. S., McAlister, A., & Frankowski, R. (1995). Violence prevention in middle schools: A pilot evaluation. Journal of Adolescent Health, 17, 360–371. doi: 10.1016/1054-139X(95)00194-W.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., Boelen, P. A., van der Schoot, M., & Telch, M. J. (2011). Prospective linkages between peer victimization and externalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 37, 215–222. doi: 10.1002/ab.20374.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Rose, C. A., Monda-Amaya, L. E., & Espelage, D. L. (2011). Bullying perpetration and victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 114–130. doi: 10.1177/0741932510361247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schroeder, B. A., Messina, A., Schroeder, D., Good, K., Barto, S., Saylor, J., & Masiello, M. (2012). The implementation of a statewide bullying prevention program: Preliminary findings from the field and the importance of coalitions. Health Promotion Practice, 13(4), 489–495. doi: 10.1177/1524839910386887.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sprague, J., Walker, H., Golly, A., White, K., Myers, D. R., & Shannon, T. (2001). Translating research into effective practice: The effects of a universal staff and student intervention on indicators of discipline and school safety. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 495–511.Google Scholar
  42. Sullivan, A. L., & Sadeh, S. S. (2014). Is there evidence to support the use of social skills interventions for students with emotional disabilities? Journal of Applied School Psychology, 30(2), 107–131. doi: 10.1080/15377903.2014.888528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sullivan, T. N., Sutherland, K. S., Farrell, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2015). An evaluation of Second Step: What are the benefits for youth with and without disabilities? Remedial and Special Education, 36, 286–298. doi: 10.1177/0741932515575616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vallance, D. D., Cummings, R. L., & Humphries, T. (1998). Mediators of the risk for problem behavior in children with language learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(2), 160–171. doi: 10.1177/002221949803100206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Schoiack-Edstrom, L., Frey, K. S., & Beland, K. (2002). Changing adolescents´ attitudes about relational and physical aggression: An early evaluation of a school based intervention. School Psychology Review, 31, 201–216.Google Scholar
  46. Zeman, J., Shipman, K., & Penza-Clyve, S. (2001). Development and initial validation of the children’s sadnessmanagement scale. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25(3), 187–205. doi: 10.1023/A:1010623226626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). Building academic success through social. Emotional learning: What does the research say? New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terri N. Sullivan
    • 1
  • Kevin S. Sutherland
    • 2
  • Albert D. Farrell
    • 3
  • Katherine A. Taylor
    • 3
  • Sarah T. Doyle
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  2. 2.School of Education, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations