Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resilience and Vulnerability in Adolescents: Genetic Influences on Differential Response to Risk for Delinquency

Journal of Youth and Adolescence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cite this article

Abstract

Prior research has identified a vast number of correlates for delinquent behavior during adolescence, yet a considerable number of errors in prediction remain. These errors suggest that behavioral development among a portion of youths is not well understood, with some exhibiting resilience and others a heightened vulnerability to risks. Examining cases that do not confirm prediction outcomes provides an opportunity to achieve a greater understanding of the relationships between risk factors and delinquency, which can be used to improve theoretical explanations of behavior. This study explores the contribution of genetic and environmental factors to differences in individual responses to cumulative risk for delinquency among a sample of adolescent twins (N = 784 pairs, 49 % female) in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. The results indicate that additive genetic and unique environmental factors significantly contribute to variation in responses to cumulative risk across 14 risk factors spanning individual, familial, and environmental domains. When analyzed separately, the majority of the difference between vulnerable youths and the overall population was attributed to genetic influences, while differences between resilient youths and the population were primarily attributed to environmental influences. The findings illustrate the importance of examining both genetic and environmental influences in order to enhance explanations of adolescent offending.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleyard, K., Egeland, B., van Dulmen, M. H. M., & Sroufe, L. A. (2005). When more is not better: The role of cumulative risk in child behavior outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 235–245.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. A., Bezdjian, S., & Raine, R. (2006). Behavioral genetics: The science of antisocial behavior. Law and Contemporary Problems, 69, 7–46.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., Pijlman, F. T. A., Mesman, J., & Juffer, F. (2008). Experimental evidence for differential susceptibility: Dopamine D4 receptor polymorphism (DRD4 VNTR) moderates intervention effects on toddlers’ externalizing behavior in a randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 44, 293–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, J. C., & Boutwell, B. B. (2013). A demonstration of the generalizability of twin-based research on antisocial behavior. Behavioral Genetics, 43, 120–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, S. R. H., Brody, G. H., Philibert, R. A., & Lei, M. (2010). Differential susceptibility to parenting among African American youths: Testing the DRD4 hypothesis. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 513–521.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M. (2008). Biosocial criminology: A primer. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M., Eagle Schutt, J., Boutwell, B. B., Ratchford, M., Roberts, K., & Barnes, J. C. (2009). Genetic and environmental influences on levels of self-control and delinquent peer affiliation: Results from a longitudinal sample of adolescent twins. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 41–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M., Wright, J. P., DeLisi, M., & Vaughn, M. G. (2008). Genetic influences on the stability of low self-control: Results from a longitudinal sample of twins. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 478–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsky, J. (1997). Theory testing, effect-size evaluation, and differential susceptibility to rearing influence: The case of mothering and attachment. Child Development, 64, 598–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsky, J. (2005). Differential susceptibility to rearing influence: An evolutionary hypothesis and some evidence. In B. Ellis & D. Bjorklund (Eds.), Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and child development (pp. 139–163). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdjian, S., Baker, L. A., & Tuvblad, C. (2011). Genetic and environmental influences on impulsivity: A meta-analysis of twin, family and adoption studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 1209–1233.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, J. D., Blalock, C. L., & Button, T. M. (2008). Sex differences in heritability of resilience. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 11, 12–27.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boisvert, D., Wright, J. P., Knopik, V., & Vaske, J. (2012). Genetic and environmental overlap between low self-control and delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28, 477–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce, W. T., & Ellis, B. J. (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary–developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 271–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brody, G. H., Beach, S. R., Philibert, R. A., Chen, Y., & McBride Murry, V. (2009). Prevention effects moderate the association of 5-HTTLPR and youth risk behavior initiation: Gene × environment hypotheses tested via a randomized prevention design. Child Development, 80, 645–661.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buehler, C., & Gerard, J. M. (2013). Cumulative family risk predicts increases in adjustment difficulties across early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 905–920.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, G. (2003). Human genetics for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., et al. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297, 851–854.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cherny, S. S., DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1992). Multiple regression analysis of twin data: A model-fitting approach. Behavior Genetics, 22, 489–497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (1996). Equifinality and multifinality in developmental psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 597–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deary, I. J., Spinath, F. M., & Bates, T. C. (2006). Genetics of intelligence. European Journal of Human Genetics, 14, 690–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1985). Multiple regression analysis of twin data. Behavior Genetics, 15, 467–473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1988). Multiple regression analysis of twin data: Etiology of deviant scores versus individual differences. Acta Geneticae Medicae et Gemellologiae, 37, 205–216.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deković, M. (1999). Risk and protective factors in the development of problem behavior during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 667–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elder, G. H., & Caspi, A. (1990). Studying lives in a changing society: Sociological and personological explorations. In A. I. Rabin, R. A. Zucker, & S. Frank (Eds.), Studying persons and lives (pp. 201–247). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, B. J., Boyce, W. T., Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2011). Differential susceptibility to the environment: An evolutionary–neurodevelopmental theory. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 7–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, G. W. (2003). A multimethodological analysis of cumulative risk and allostatic load among rural children. Developmental Psychology, 39, 924–933.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, G. W., Kim, P., Ting, A. H., Tesher, H. B., & Shannis, D. (2007). Cumulative risk, maternal responsiveness, and allostatic load among young adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 43, 341–351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Genetic and environmental contributions to individual differences: The three major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality, 58, 245–261.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farrington, D. P., & Tarling, R. (1985). Criminological prediction: An introduction. In D. P. Farrington & R. Tarling (Eds.), Prediction in criminology (pp. 2–33). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington, D. P., & Welsh, B. C. (2007). Saving children from a life of crime: Early risk factors and effective interventions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerard, J. M., & Buehler, C. (2004). Cumulative environmental risk and youth problem behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 702–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, D. A. (1989). Twins reared together: Minimizing shared environmental effects. Behavior Genetics, 19, 593–604.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. M., Halpern, C. T., Smolen, A., & Haberstick, B. C. (2006). The national longitudinal study of adolescent health (add health) twin data. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9, 988–997.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, J. D., Herrenkohl, T. I., Farrington, D. P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R. F., & Harachi, T. W. (1998). A review of predictors of youth violence. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 106–146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynie, D. L. (2001). Delinquent peers revisited: Does network structure matter. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1013–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynie, D. L. (2002). Friendship networks and delinquency: The relative nature of peer delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 99–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedström, P. (2005). Dissecting the social: On the principles of analytical sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, T. I., Maguin, E., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Abbott, R. D., & Catalano, R. F. (2000). Developmental risk factors for youth violence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 26, 176–186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. E., & Price, J. M. (2010). Understanding psychopathology: The role of vulnerability. In R. E. Ingram & J. M. Price (Eds.), Vulnerability to psychopathology (2nd ed., pp. 3–17). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim-Cohen, J., Caspi, A., Taylor, A., Williams, B., Newcombe, R., Craig, I. W., et al. (2006). MAOA, maltreatment, and gene–environment interaction predicting children’s mental health new evidence and a meta-analysis. Molecular Psychiatry, 11, 903–913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim-Cohen, J., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., & Taylor, A. (2004). Genetic and environmental processes in young children’s resilience and vulnerability to socioeconomic deprivation. Child Development, 75, 651–668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler, H., & Rodgers, J. L. (2001). DF-analyses of heritability with double-entry twin data: Asymptotic standard errors and efficient estimation. Behavior Genetics, 31, 179–191.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Labuda, M. C., DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1986). Multiple regression analysis of twin data obtained from selected samples. Genetic Epidemiology, 3, 425–433.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loeber, R., & Dishion, T. (1983). Early predictors of male delinquency: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 68–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 7, 543–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthar, S. S., & Cushing, G. (1999). Measurement issues in the empirical study of resilience: An overview. In M. D. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations (pp. 129–160). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luthar, S. S., & Zelazo, L. B. (2003). Research on resilience: An integrative review. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of child adversities (pp. 510–549). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, M. R. (1964). How to build better theories, tests, and therapies: The off-quadrant approach. American Psychologist, 19, 793–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masten, A. S., & Powell, J. L. (2003). A resilience framework for research, policy, and practice. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of child adversities (pp. 1–25). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, T. E. (2005). The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene–environment interplay in antisocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 533–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neale, M. C., & Cardon, L. R. (1992). Methodology for genetic studies of twins and families. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, C. A., Bond, L., Burns, J. M., Vella-Brodrick, D. A., & Sawyer, S. M. (2003). Adolescent resilience: A concept analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, S., & Sham, P. C. (2003). A model-fitting implementation of the DeFries–Fulker model for selected twin data. Behavior Genetics, 33, 271–278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raine, A. (2002). Biosocial studies of antisocial and violent behavior in children and adults: A review. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 311–326.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhee, S. H., & Waldman, I. D. (2002). Genetic and environmental influences on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis of twin and adoption studies. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 490–529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ribeaud, D., & Eisner, M. (2010). Risk factors for aggression in pre-adolescence: Risk domains, cumulative risk and gender differences–Results from a prospective longitudinal study in a multi-ethnic urban sample. European Journal of Criminology, 7, 460–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, J. L., & McGue, M. (1994). A simple algebraic demonstration of the validity of DeFries–Fulker analysis in unselected samples with multiple kinship levels. Behavior Genetics, 24, 259–262.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, D. C., & Jacobson, K. C. (1998). National longitudinal study of adolescent health: Pairs code book. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M. (1988). Longitudinal data in the study of causal processes: Some uses and some pitfalls. In M. Rutter (Ed.), Studies of psychosocial risk: The power of longitudinal data (pp. 1–28). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M., & Redshaw, J. (1991). Annotation: Growing up as a twin. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 885–895.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M., Simonoff, E., & Silberg, J. (1993). How informative are twin studies of child psychopathology? In T. J. Bouchard & P. Propping (Eds.), Twins as a tool of behavioral genetics (pp. 179–194). Chichester, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sameroff, A. J., Bartko, W. T., Baldwin, C., & Siefer, R. (1998). Family and social influences on the development of child competence. In M. Lewis & C. Feiring (Eds.), Families, risk, and competence (pp. 161–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (2005). A life-course view of the development of crime. The Annals of the American Academy, 602, 12–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoon, I., & Bynner, J. (2003). Risk and resilience in the life course: Implications for interventions and social policies. Journal of Youth Studies, 6, 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. L., Lei, M. K., Beach, S. R., Brody, G. H., Philibert, R. A., & Gibbons, F. X. (2011). Social environment, genes, and aggression: Evidence supporting the differential susceptibility perspective. American Sociological Review, 76, 883–912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. L., Lei, M. K., Stewart, E. A., Beach, S. R., Brody, G. H., Philibert, R. A., et al. (2012). Social adversity, genetic variation, street code, and aggression: A genetically informed model of violent behavior. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 10, 3–24.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spear, L. (2009). Heightened stress responsivity and emotional reactivity during pubertal maturation: Implications for psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 87–97.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, K. B., Vadum, A. C., & Sarbin, T. R. (1970). Socialization and delinquency: A study of false negatives and false positives in prediction. The Psychological Record, 20, 353–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoddard, S. A., Zimmerman, M. A., & Bauermeister, J. A. (2012). A longitudinal analysis of cumulative risks, cumulative promotive factors, and adolescent behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 542–555.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Wikström, P. H., & Wei, E. (2002). Risk and promotive effects in the explanation of persistent serious delinquency in boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 111–123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, C. J. (2011). The utility of the deviant case in the development of criminological theory. Criminology, 49, 905–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolan, P., & Guerra, N. (1994). What works in deducing adolescent violence: An empirical review of the field. Boulder, CO: Institute of Behavioral Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Laan, A. M., Veenstra, R., Bogaerts, S., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2010). Serious, minor, and non-delinquents in early adolescents: The impact of cumulative risk and promotive factors. The TRAILS study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 339–351.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waaktaar, T., & Torgersen, S. (2012). Genetic and environmental causes of variation in trait resilience in young people. Behavior Genetics, 42, 366–377.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd, D., & Piquero, A. R. (2008). How well do criminologists explain crime? Statistical modeling in published studies. Crime and Justice, 37, 453–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widom, C. S., & Brzustowicz, L. M. (2006). MAOA and the “cycle of violence”: Childhood abuse and neglect, MAOA genotype, and risk for violent and antisocial behavior. Biological Psychology, 60, 684–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström, P. H. (2008). In search of cause and explanations of crime. In R. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing research on crime and justice (2nd ed., pp. 117–139). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research uses data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and funded by Grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies and foundations. Special acknowledgment is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health Data Files is available on the Add Health website (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth). No direct support was received from Grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis.

Author Contributions

J.N. conceived of the study, participated in developing the research design, analyzed the data, and was involved in the preparation of the manuscript. C.S. participated in the development of the measures, the interpretation of the results, and assisted in preparing the manuscript. Both authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, 78207, USA

    Jamie Newsome

  2. School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45221, USA

    Christopher J. Sullivan

Authors
  1. Jamie Newsome
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher J. Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jamie Newsome.

Appendix: Description of Risk and Delinquency Measures

Appendix: Description of Risk and Delinquency Measures

School Performance

  1. 1.

    At the most recent grading period, what was your grade in English or language arts?

  2. 2.

    And what was your grade in mathematics?

  3. 3.

    And what was your grade in history or social studies?

  4. 4.

    And what was your grade in science?

Attachment to School

Since the school year started, how often did you have trouble:

  1. 1.

    Getting along with your teachers?

  2. 2.

    Paying attention in school?

  3. 3.

    Getting your homework done?

  4. 4.

    Getting along with other students?

How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

  1. 5.

    You feel close to people at your school.

  2. 6.

    You feel like you are part of your school.

  3. 7.

    You are happy to be at your school.

  4. 8.

    The teachers at your school treat students fairly.

  5. 9.

    You feel safe in your school.

Problem Solving Skills

  1. 1.

    When you have a problem to solve, one of the first things you do is get as many facts about the problem as possible.

  2. 2.

    When you are attempting to find a solution to a problem, you usually try to think of as many different ways to approach the problem as possible.

  3. 3.

    When making decisions, you generally use a systematic method for judging and comparing alternatives.

  4. 4.

    After carrying out a solution to a problem, you usually try to analyze what went right and what went wrong.

Coping Skills

  1. 1.

    You usually go out of your way to avoid having to deal with problems in your life.

  2. 2.

    Difficult problems make you very upset.

  3. 3.

    When making decisions, you usually go with your “gut feelings” without thinking too much about the consequences of each alternative.

Attachment to Parents

  1. 1.

    How close do you feel to your mother?

  2. 2.

    How much do you think she cares about you?

  3. 3.

    How close do you feel to your father?

  4. 4.

    How much do you think he cares about you?

Parental Involvement

Which of the following have you done with your mother/father in the past 4 weeks?

  1. 1.

    Gone shopping

  2. 2.

    Played a sport?

  3. 3.

    Gone to religious or church-related event?

  4. 4.

    Talked about someone you’re dating or a party you went to?

  5. 5.

    Gone to a movie, play, museum, concert, or sports event?

  6. 6.

    Had a talk about a personal problem you were having?

  7. 7.

    Had a serious argument about your behavior?

  8. 8.

    Talked about your school work or grades?

  9. 9.

    Worked on a project for school?

  10. 10.

    Talked about other things you’re doing in school?

Parental Engagement

  1. 1.

    Most of the time, your mother is warm and loving toward you.

  2. 2.

    Your mother encourages you to be independent.

  3. 3.

    When you do something wrong that is important, your mother talks about it with you and helps you understand why it is wrong.

  4. 4.

    You are satisfied with the way you and your mother communicate with each other.

  5. 5.

    Overall, you are satisfied with your relationship with your mother.

  6. 6.

    Most of the time, your father is warm and loving toward you.

  7. 7.

    You are satisfied with the way you and your father communicate with each other.

  8. 8.

    Overall, you are satisfied with your relationship with your father.

Parental Supervision

  1. 1.

    How often is she [mother] home when you leave for school?

  2. 2.

    How often is she home when you return from school?

  3. 3.

    How often is he [father] home when you leave for school?

  4. 4.

    How often is he home when you return from school?

Delinquent Peers

  1. 1.

    Of your 3 best friends, how many smoke at least 1 cigarette a day?

  2. 2.

    Of your 3 best friends, how many drink alcohol at least once a month?

  3. 3.

    Of your 3 best friends, how many use marijuana at least once a month?

Social Support

  1. 1.

    How much do you feel that adults care about you?

  2. 2.

    How much do you feel that your teachers care about you?

  3. 3.

    How much do you feel that your parents care about you?

  4. 4.

    How much do you feel that your friends care about you?

  5. 5.

    How much do you feel that people in your family understand you?

  6. 6.

    How much do you feel that you and your family have fun together?

  7. 7.

    How much do you feel that your family pays attention to you?

Delinquency

In the past 12 months, how often did you:

  1. 1.

    Paint graffiti or signs on someone else’s property or in a public place?

  2. 2.

    Deliberately damage property that did not belong to you?

  3. 3.

    Take something from a store without paying for it?

  4. 4.

    Get into a serious physical fight?

  5. 5.

    Hurt someone badly enough to need bandages or care from a doctor or nurse?

  6. 6.

    Drive a car without its owner’s permission?

  7. 7.

    Steal something worth more than $50?

  8. 8.

    Go into a house or building to steal something?

  9. 9.

    Use or threaten to use a weapon to get something from someone?

  10. 10.

    Sell marijuana or other drugs?

  11. 11.

    Steal something worth less than $50?

  12. 12.

    Take part in a fight where a group of your friends was against another group?

During the past 12 months, how often did each of the following things happen?

  1. 1.

    You pulled a gun or knife on someone.

  2. 2.

    You shot or stabbed someone.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Newsome, J., Sullivan, C.J. Resilience and Vulnerability in Adolescents: Genetic Influences on Differential Response to Risk for Delinquency. J Youth Adolescence 43, 1080–1095 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0108-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0108-9

Keywords

search

Navigation