External Assets as Predictors of Positive Emotions Among At‐Risk Youth in Malaysia

Abstract

The present study is among the first to examine external assets as predictors of positive emotions among at-risk youth. The study aims to examine the associations of external assets with positive emotions, determine external assets as a predictor of positive emotions in phase 1, and see if these predictors were consistently established in phase 2. At first contact, 403 participants from lowincome apartments in the suburbs of Kuala Lumpur, aged 13-25 years were asked to complete the 25 Developmental Assets, Malaysian version. The participants were also invited to participate in social activities organized by the PERMATA community. The same participants were approached four months later to examine the stability of measures. Multiple regression analysis revealed support is the most significant predictor of positive emotions at phase 1 whilst positive peer influence, family boundaries and caring neighborhood are the significant predictors at phase 2. Results suggested that the presence of other external assets can enhance the positive development of at-risk youth, however, the support must be present to some extent in the first place.

Malaysian adolescent students' needs for enhancing thinking skills, counteracting risk factors and demonstrating academic resilience

“…In 2010, the Malaysian adolescent population (10–19 years old) was estimated to be 5.5 million (UNICEF, 2010 ), while the Malaysian youth demography (15–25 years old) was numbered around 5.2 million (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2010 ), which is approximately 19% of the total population. Relying on the World Youth Report, Abdul Kadir et al ( 2012b ) estimated that 25% of the population would be classified as at-risk youth. According to the Malaysian Youth Report (Hamzah, 2007 ), substance abuse and underage sexual intercourse are the most prevalent risk behaviour among the adolescents and youths.…”

“…An effective way to foster the internal resilience is to provide at-risk students with a caregiving relationship (Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990 ). Abdul Kadir et al ( 2012b ) argued that Malaysian adolescent students who are at risk (e.g. educational failure, delinquency), require a caregiving relationship with an individual who helps them with love, care and attention.…”

“…Caregiving relationships with significant individuals in family (siblings or parents), school (peers or teachers) and community (neighbours or friends) environments are potential external resilience assets, as evidenced by a growing body of literature (e.g. Abdul Kadir et al, 2012a , 2012b ; Benard, 2004 ; Benson, Leffert, Scales, & Blyth, 2012 ; Doll et al, 2011 ; Flouri et al, 2010 ; Garmezy, 1985 ; Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000 ; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998 ; Masten et al, 1990 ; Rutter, 1987 ; Werner & Smith, 1992 ). According to these literatures, in contrast to the risk factors, the external protective factors are related to positive aspects of the same variables: (a) the individuals themselves – effective social skills, satisfactory academic achievement and secure attachment to family; (b) their family background – caring parents and parental employment; (c) their exposure in school – a sense of belonging, achievement recognition and opportunities for success; and (d) the environment in their community – access to a social support, social networks.…”

Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to Predict Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties on Positive and Negative Affect Among Adolescents in Disadvantaged Communities

“…First, the majority of apartment dwellers were once squatters before they were relocated to the apartments as part of the government redevelopment program (Rahim, Abdul Kadir, Wan Mahmud, Mohamed & Kee, ). Second, the parents' economic hardship was shown to be significantly related to the developmental assets (Abdul Kadir et al., ). Third, the resources provided for the adolescents were limited (Abdul Kadir et al., , ).…”

“…Second, the parents' economic hardship was shown to be significantly related to the developmental assets (Abdul Kadir et al., ). Third, the resources provided for the adolescents were limited (Abdul Kadir et al., , ). Using a systematic technique of data collection, the door‐to‐door approach was used to collect data from March to June 2012.…”