Patterns and Precursors of Teenage Antisocial Behaviour

1
Patterns and Precursors ofTeenage Antisocial
Behaviour
Diana Smart Australian Institute of Family
Studies Suzanne Vassallo Australian Institute
of Family Studies Ann Sanson Australian
Institute of Family Studies Inez Dussuyer Crime
Prevention Victoria Presented at 16th Australian
and New Zealand Society of Criminology
Conference, Brisbane, 1-3 October, 2002
Australian Institute of Family Studies
2
Teenage Antisocial Behaviour

• Models of antisocial behaviour describe
  developmental pathways
• A typology approach emphasises differences in the
  timing and frequency of antisocial behaviours. A
  prominent distinction is between
• experimenters and persisters
• Previous research
• - cross-sectional/ restricted age-spans
• - conducted in other countries
• - employed disadvantaged samples
• - focused on males

3
Questions Addressed

• At what age/stage of development do differences
  between persistent, experimental and low/no
  antisocial groups first emerge?
• In what domains of functioning do these
  differences appear?
• Are there differences between males and females?

4
The Australian Temperament Project

• A longitudinal study of childrens development
  from infancy onwards
• Representative sample of over 2400 children and
  families from urban and rural areas of Victoria
• 12 waves of data since 1983 collected at 1-2
  yearly intervals by mail surveys
• Domains assessed temperament, behaviour
  problems, school adjustment, health, social
  competence, family functioning, peer
  relationships, parenting style and family
  environment, substance use and antisocial
  behaviour

5
Frequency of Antisocial Acts

• 10-20 of participants reported engaging in
  property offences (e.g theft, vandalism)
• Cigarette and alcohol use were also common (39
  and 85 respectively at 17-18 years)
• Authority conflict problems and violent
  antisocial acts were much less common, with the
  exception of skipping school (43 at 17-18 years)
  and involvement in physical fights (approximately
  1/3 at 13-14 and 15-16 years)
• About one-in-ten participants had been in contact
  with the police for offending. However, very few
  had been charged (2-3), appeared in court (1),
  or been convicted of an offence (lt1)

6
Definition

• High antisocial behaviour 3 of the
  following behaviours on at least one occasion
  during the past 12 months
• been in physical fights with others
• damaged something in a public place on purpose
• stolen something (from a person or a house)
• driven a car without permission
• been suspended or expelled from school
• engaged in graffiti in public places
• carried a weapon (for example, gun, knife)
• shoplifted
• run away from home and stayed away overnight or
  longer
• sold illegal drugs
• attacked someone with the idea of seriously
  harming them
• used marijuana (within the past month)
• used hard drugs e.g. amphetamines, cocaine,
  designer drugs or opiates (within the past
  month).

7
Formation of Groups

• Examined patterns of antisocial behaviour over
  three timepoints (13-14, 15-16, 17-18 years)
• Identified 3 groups-
• (1) Low/non antisocial group (n844, 40.9
  male)
• ? low levels of antisocial behaviour (lt3) at all
  three timepoints.
• (2) Experimental group (n88, 43.2 male)
• ? high levels of antisocial behaviour (3) at
  only one timepoint in early to mid adolescence.
• (3) Persistent group (n131, 64.9 male)
• ? high levels of antisocial behaviour (3) at
  two or more timepoints.

8
Firstly, when did group differences emerge?

• As the next slide shows pictorially,
• There were no differences in the earliest years
  of life (from infancy until 3-4 years).
• Differences between the persistent and low/non
  antisocial groups were found from 5-6 years
  onwards.
• The experimental and low/non antisocial groups
  did not differ significantly until the beginning
  of secondary school, in early adolescence.
• Group differences were most powerful during
  adolescence. The peak age at which differences
  were most frequent and powerful was 15-16 years.
• Towards the end of adolescence, the pattern
  appeared to change, with the experimental group
  becoming more similar to the low/non antisocial
  group

9
Group Differences Over Time
10
Differences between groups across domains of
functioning

• Separate Multivariate Analyses of Variance were
  used to compare the groups at each data
  collection wave and for each source of report
  (parent, teacher, or child/teen). This strategy
  enabled us to pinpoint the age and stage of
  development at which significant group
  differences first began to emerge. We also used
  effect sizes to assess the strength of group
  differences across the various domains.
• The following slides show the domains of
  functioning on which group differences were
  found. For readability, we have grouped together
  aspects that were assessed over multiple
  timepoints and sources of report. Colour coding
  is used to increase interpretability. Differing
  backgrounds are used to separate different
  aspects of functioning, and effect sizes are
  colour coded so that small effects are shown in
  dark blue, medium effects in purple, and large
  effects in red. For some variables, there were
  significant differences which were weaker than a
  small effect, and these are shown in grey.

11
Temperament / Personality Style
12
Behaviour Problems
13
Social Skills
14
School Adjustment
15
Peer Relationships
16
Family Relationships
17
Civic Mindedness
18
Coping Strategies
19
Future Orientation
20
Gender Differences

• Analyses revealed a similar, although weaker,
  pattern of results

21
Conclusions and Implications

• Some engagement in teenage antisocial behaviour
  is normal
• Early intervention aimed at diverting children
  from pathways to persistent antisocial behaviour
  appears most appropriate during the primary
  school years
• Persistent antisocial youth exhibit a clear
  profile
• Interventions targeting experimental antisocial
  behaviour should be multi-faceted and focus on
  the early secondary school years.

22
Conclusions and Implications (cont.)

• Precursors of antisocial behaviour were similar
  for males and females
• Peer relationships, especially associations with
  other antisocial youth, were a powerful influence
• The role of family environment, especially
  parent-child relationship and parenting style
• The role of school adjustment - low attachment to
  school a prominent risk