The genesis of vandalism: From childhood to adolescence

Abstract

This study was developed because vandal behavior is an increasing threat in the world. Countries, commercial companies, and individuals experience great damage to property as a result of individual vandal acts. In addition, vandalism threatens not only "tangible assets" but also the cultural and historical heritage of modern humanity. Despite the threatening spread of vandalism, the study of its psychological foundations, including its origins, in the context of individual life courses is in many ways terra incognita. The objective of the present study was to investigate the genesis of vandal behavior and the sociopsychological and individual personality factors in the formation of readiness to destroy public property and the property of others. A comprehensive study of children, adolescents, and young adults (N=1522), as well as of their social environment, revealed mechanisms of the readiness to commit vandal acts that were present since childhood. The study was conducted by examining four age groups: preschoolers (4-6 years), primary school pupils (7-9 years), adolescents (12-15 years), and young adults (17-22 years); the instruments used were specific-age batteries, observation, expert techniques, and questionnaires. We found that the characteristics of parent-child relationship are is the basis for forming the boundaries of the permissible activity of the child; disturbance in the parent-child relationship can lead to the development of forms of vandalism in children. We describe the specificity and intensity of the vandal activity of adolescents and young adults in the context of their environment, and we look at the individual characteristics that promote deviant behavior. Thus, vandal activity is not only a specific characteristic of adolescents and young adults, and it is not always very destructive. Basic vandal activity originates in the early stages of ontogenesis as a result of a deformation in social interaction that becomes fixed and converted into the destructive actions of people trying through this form of activity to understand themselves in social space.

Primary School Children’s Vandalism : The Problem of Upbringing and Interaction in Russian Families

“…We suppose that a substantial part of the children may have already formed a 'subject-object' interaction strategy, as they performed not random acts of vandalism, but repeated them over and over again. This statement is confirmed by the results of the analysis of vandal behaviour among primary school children: the teachers' expert assessment showed that at least 10% of the pupils demonstrate vandal behaviour systematically (VOROBYEVA et al 2015). They often break toys and other objects for different reasons: from 'spontaneous splashes of negative emotions' to 'focusing on the destruction or damage in order to achieve some personal goals'.…”

“…In compliance with the findings of the teachers' survey, nearly 27% of primary school children made destructive or transforming actions towards the school environment (VOROBYEVA et al 2015 children vandalism is a tactical action aimed at setting up relationships with the external environment. It can be a form of emotional displacement against certain forms of social influence (school discipline, homework etc.).…”

Setting fisik graffiti tagging sebagai bentuk vandalisme di Kota Yogyakarta

“…Vandalisme mengancam tidak hanya "aset berwujud" tetapi juga warisan budaya dan sejarah kemanusiaan modern. Sebuah studi terhadap anak-anak, remaja, dan dewasa, serta lingkungan sosial mereka, mengungkapkan mekanisme kesiapan untuk melakukan tindakan perusak yang hadir sejak kecil (Vorobyeva, Kruzhkova, and Krivoshchekova 2015).…”

The Model of Prevention of Vandal Behavior Provided by the Deformations and Destructions of Valuable Sphere of Youth

“…В результате диагностики 832 подростков и юношей с использованием ценностного опросника Ш. Шварца [9], ав-торского опросника «Мотивы вандального поведения» [2] нами были выделе-ны четыре специфических группы респондентов, имеющих сущностные раз-личия в структуре и содержании системы ценностных ориентаций.…”