The main aim of this article is to investigate whether there is a significant long-term association between bullying at school and drug use later in life. A meta-analysis is presented based on results from major prospective longitudinal studies with available unadjusted and adjusted effect sizes. Results are based on thorough systematic searches of the literature across 19 databases and 63 journals. The unadjusted summary effect size suggests that youth who bully are at least twice as likely compared with noninvolved students to use drugs later in life (OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.60-3.07). The adjusted summary effect size is markedly reduced to an OR of 1.41 (95% CI: 1.20-1.66) suggesting that a lot of variation in the final model is explained by other contributing factors, while bullying has a significant yet small effect over and above the contribution of these factors. Contributing factors include childhood risks falling within the individual, family, and school domains that are significantly associated with both the predictor and the outcome. It is concluded that school bullying, drug use, and other problem behaviors are intercorrelated; thus, highlighting the need to create a meaningful holistic framework for the prevention of drug problems and other associated mental, emotional, and behavioral maladies. Implications for policy and practice arising from these findings are discussed.

Aim The main aim of this article is to compare prevalence and frequency, ages of onset and desistance, and criminal career duration, according to self-reports and convictions. Method In the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, 411 London males have been followed up from age 8 to age 48, in interviews and criminal records. Results Virtually all males admitted at least one of eight offences, compared with about one third who were convicted. In self-reports, the number of offences was over 30 times greater, the age of onset was earlier and the career duration was longer, compared with convictions. However, the age of desistance was generally later according to convictions. Conclusions Self-reported ages of desistance may be affected by increasing concealment with age. The gap between the first self-reported offence and the first conviction provides an opportunity for early intervention.

Purpose The main aim of this article is to investigate to what extent the relationships between risk factors and offending by males are similar from one generation to the next. Methods The Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development is a prospective longitudinal survey of 411 London males who were originally studied at age 8. This article compares these males (generation 2 or G2) with their biological parents (generation 1 or G1) and biological children (generation 3 or G3). Ninety-four per cent of G2 males were interviewed at age 32, while 85 % of G3 males were interviewed at an average age of 25. Results Up to age 21, 34 % of G2 males were convicted, compared with 20 % of G3 males. Eleven risk factors were significant predictors of both G2 and G3 offending: a convicted father and mother, harsh discipline, poor parental supervision, a disrupted family, low family income, large family size, poor housing, low school attainment, daring/risk-taking and antisocial child behaviour. The findings were markedly different for only three risk factors: parental conflict, low social class and hyperactivity/attention problems. Over 20 risk factors, G2 effect sizes correlated .80 with G3 effect sizes. Conclusions G2 results were similar to G3 results. While risk factors were not exactly comparable between generations, most of the findings in one generation were replicated in the next generation.

No abstract