The role of environmental characteristics in changing the pathways to adolescent antisocial behaviour of high- and low-risk children

1
The role of environmental characteristics in
changing the pathways to adolescent antisocial
behaviour of high- and low-risk children

• Nick Richardson, Diana Smart, Suzanne Vassallo
  and Ann Sanson
• Australian Institute of Family Studies
• Inez Dussuyer
• Crime Prevention Victoria
• Websites
• www.aifs.gov.au/atp/
• www.crimeprevention.vic.gov.au

2
The Australian Temperament Project 1983-2004

• A longitudinal study of a large representative
  sample of children and families from the state of
  Victoria
• Ann Sanson
• Margot Prior
• Frank Oberklaid
• Diana Smart
• John Toumbourou
• ..and many others
• See Prior, Sanson, Smart Oberklaid (2000)
  Pathways from infancy to adolescence Australian
  Temperament Project 1983-2000.

3
The Australian Temperament Project

• A longitudinal study of childrens development
  from infancy to adulthood
• Representative sample of over 2400 children and
  families from urban and rural areas of Victoria
• 13 waves of data since 1983 collected at 1-2
  yearly intervals by mail survey

4
The ATP, continued

• Domains assessed temperament, behaviour
  problems, school adjustment, health, social
  competence, family functioning, peer
  relationships, parenting style and family
  environment, adolescent antisocial behaviour and
  substance use
• Parents, MCH nurses, teachers and
  children/teenagers have acted as informants
• These findings are based on a sample of 1286 ATP
  participants (51 male)

5
Issues investigated regarding teenage antisocial
behaviour

• what are the across-time patterns of adolescent
  antisocial behaviour?
• what are the risk factors and precursors of
  adolescent antisocial behaviour?
• at what age do differences between antisocial and
  non-antisocial groups emerge?
• are there gender differences in levels of
  antisocial behaviour, and pathways to such
  behaviour?

6
Developmental pathways to antisocial behaviour

• Previous research has focused on across time
  patterns adolescent antisocial behaviour.
• Identified developmental pathways and precursors
  of antisocial behaviour.
• Less is known about changes in development
  pathways.
• Resilience bouncing back at risk at Time 1,
  but avoid poor outcome at Time 2 how/why?
• Low risk at Time 1 but problematic at Time 2
  how/why?

7
Changing pathways to adolescent
antisocial behaviour - questions explored

• Can developmental pathways of resilient and low
  risk but antisocial children be identified?
• Are there sensitive ages and developmental stages
  where pathways are particularly modifiable?
• What personal or environmental characteristics
  differentiate between resilient and antisocial
  children, which may have a protective role?
• Which personal or environmental characteristics
  play a role in diverting those progressing well
  onto problematic pathways?

8
Frequent antisocial behaviour definition

• High antisocial behaviour THREE or more of the
  following on one or more occasions 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
• graffiti drawing 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

9
Across-time patterns of antisocial behaviour from
13 to 18 years

• Focused on 3 groups-
• (1) Low/non antisocial group
• (n844, 73 of sample, 40.9 male)
• ? low levels of antisocial behaviour (lt3) at all
  three time points
• (2) Persistentantisicial group
• (n131, 11 per cent of sample, 64.9 male)
• ? high levels of antisocial behaviour (3) at
  two or more time points,
• including 17-18 years of age

10
Pathways of persistent and experimental
antisocial groups over time
11
Differences between groups on -

• temperament style especially negativity,
  volatility and low persistence
• aggressive, acting out, hyperactive behaviour
  problems
• lower social competence, e.g. self control,
  cooperation
• friendships with antisocial peers
• school attachment and adjustment (during
  adolescence)
• sensation seeking attraction to risk taking
• parenting practices and style e.g. lower
  supervision, harsh discipline, less warmth
• poorer parent-child relationship quality
• less cohesive family environment, higher rates of
  marital break-up during childs lifetime

12
Rationale for development or risk index

• 11-12 years an important threshold point - the
  earliest age of appearance of powerful and
  widespread differences between the Persistent and
  Low/non antisocial groups
• therefore selected as the time point at which to
  identify children as being at risk
• individual characteristics are believed to lay
  the foundation for subsequent antisocial
  behaviour, placing a child at-risk
• environmental characteristics (such as family,
  peer and school environments) may reduce or
  accentuate this risk in vulnerable individuals

13
Risk Index

• At-risk within the most problematic 25 of
  the ATP cohort on THREE or more of the following
  characteristics at 11-12 years
• highly active temperament style (parent)
• highly reactive temperament style (parent)
• low task persistent temperament style (parent)
• low task orientation temperament style (teacher)
• high aggression (parent, teacher, child)
• high hyperactivity (parent, teacher, child)
• low cooperativeness (parent, teacher, child)
• low self-control (parent, teacher, child)

14
Formation of risk groups

• at-risk antisocial (n78, 72 male 6.5 risks)
• 3 risks at 11-12 yrs and persistently
  antisocial in adolescence
• at-risk resilient (n100, 60 male 5.8 risks)
• randomly selected from 286 children with 3
  risks at 11-12 yrs little or no antisocial
  behaviour in adolescence
• low risk antisocial (n42, 57 male 1.6 risks)
• lt3 risks at 11-12 yrs and persistently
  antisocial in adolescence
• exploratory examination
• low risk comparison group (n880, 49 male 1.3
  risks)
• the remainder of the sample

15
Developmental pathways - resilient group

• the resilient and at-risk antisocial groups were
  similar to each other and more problematic than
  the comparison group during toddlerhood and
  childhood
• But
• there was a marked improvement in the resilient
  group over the early adolescent years which
  continued throughout adolescence
• So that
• by 17-18, the resilient group resembled the
  comparison group on many characteristics

16
Aggression
difference between resilient at-risk
antisocial groups difference between both
at-risk groups and comparison group
17
Temperament Style
difference between resilient at-risk
antisocial groups difference between both
at-risk groups and comparison group
18
Parent-child relationship
difference between resilient at-risk
antisocial groups difference between both
at-risk groups and comparison group
19
Parenting Style
difference between resilient at-risk
antisocial groups difference between both
at-risk groups and comparison group
20
School Adjustment/Achievement
difference between resilient antisocial
groups difference between both at-risk groups
and comparison group
21
Protective factors
difference between resilient antisocial
groups
22
Protective factors
difference between resilient antisocial groups
23
Protective factors

• difference between resilient antisocial groups
• difference between both at-risk groups and
  comparison group

24
Differences between antisocial and resilient
groups in adolescence

• No differences in childhood, but
• Numerous differences during ADOLESCENCE,
• during which the Resilient group was
  consistently
• less difficult temperamentally
• less aggressive, depressed and hyperactive
• more cooperative and self-controlled
• less sensation-seeking
• had more positive parent-child relationships
• received more parental supervision
• received less harsh discipline from parents
• were more strongly attached to school
• had fewer friendships with antisocial peers
• were less involved with peers
• had less positive peer relationships

25
Low risk, but persistently antisocial, adolescents

• the low-risk antisocial groups resembled the
  comparison group over childhood and appeared to
  developing well
• But
• The low-risk antisocial individuals became more
  problematic in several areas over adolescence

26
Aggression
27
School adjustment and achievement
28
Association with antisocial peers
29
Low-risk but persistently antisocial Summary

• the low risk persistently antisocial group
  appeared to change over early to mid adolescence
• this group was generally less problematic than
  the high risk persistently antisocial group
• friendships with antisocial peers again emerged
  as a powerful influence, as well as lower school
  attachment and adjustment, aggressiveness, and
  poorer social skills
• In late adolescence this group became more
  difficult temperamentally, more attracted to
  risk taking, coped with stress less effectively,
  and received less parental supervision

30
Conclusions and Implications

• Developmental pathways can change in late
  childhood so intervention may still be successful
  at this age
• The early adolescent years appear to be a crucial
  transition point in pathways to adolescent
  antisocial behaviour
• The powerful role of peer relationships

31
Implications, continued

• The influence of school bonding and adjustment in
  the early secondary school years
• Flexibility of pathways - the important role of
  environmental factors