The Predictive Influence of Family and Neighborhood Assets on Fighting and Weapon Carrying from Mid- to Late Adolescence

Abstract

Using a developmental, social-ecological approach to understand the etiology of health risk behavior and inform primary prevention efforts, we assess the predictive effects of family and neighborhood social processes on youth physical fighting and weapon carrying. Specifically, we focus on relationships among youth and their parents, family communication, and parental monitoring, as well as sense of community and neighborhood informal social control, support, concerns, and disorder. This study advances knowledge through its investigation of family and neighborhood structural factors and social processes together, employment of longitudinal models that estimate effects over adolescent development, and use of self-report and observational measures. Data from 1,093 youth/parent pairs were analyzed from the Youth Assets Study using a Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) approach; family and neighborhood assets and risks were analyzed as time-varying and lagged. Similar family assets affected physical fighting and weapon carrying, whereas different neighborhood social processes influenced the two forms of youth violence. Study findings have implications for the primary prevention of youth violence, including the use of family-based approaches that build relationships and parental monitoring skills, and community-level change approaches that promote informal social control and reduce neighborhood concerns about safety.

Physical Fighting and Social Correlates among In-School Adolescents in the Caribbean

“…This finding stresses the role of parental support in the prevention of adolescent violence. Family-based approaches that build relationships and parental monitoring skills may be indicated for the prevention of youth violence (Haegerich, Oman, Vesely, Aspy & Tolma, 2013).…”

The influence of assets and environmental factors on gender differences in adolescent drug use

“…Previous research by Sampson (R. Sampson, et al, 1997) and Bursik (Bursik, 1988) suggested that social disorganization theory was important for understanding youth risk behaviors, specifically crime and violence(Haegerich, Oman, Vesely, Aspy, & Tolma, 2013). Given the purposive sampling of both high and low socio-economic groups in this study, it is possible that there were insufficient numbers in the sub-samples to detect such a relationship.…”

The Predictive Influence of Youth Assets on Drinking and Driving Behaviors in Adolescence and Young Adulthood

“…Findings from the positive youth development field illustrate that youth assets—that is, skills, competencies, relationships, and opportunities—can help youth overcome challenges, successfully transition into adulthood, and reduce problem behavior (Oman, Vesely, Tolma, Aspy, & Marshall, 2010). Similarly to the manner in which assets have been conceptualized in other areas of adolescent injury (e.g., violent injury; Haegerich, Oman, Vesely, Aspy, & Tolma, 2014), a variable can be considered to be an asset when it directly decreases the likelihood of a motor vehicle crash (exerting a direct protective effect), or when it decreases the likelihood of motor vehicle crash in the presence of risk factors (a buffering protective effect; Lo¨sel & Farrington, 2012). For example, positive peer role models, parental monitoring, and school connectedness have been found to predict nonuse of alcohol (Oman et al, 2004).…”