TY - JOUR
T1 - Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth
T2 - Can protection offset risk?
AU - Bearinger, Linda H.
AU - Pettingell, Sandra
AU - Resnick, Michael D.
AU - Skay, Carol L.
AU - Potthoff, Sandra J.
AU - Eichhorn, John
PY - 2005/3
Y1 - 2005/3
N2 - Objective: To predict the likelihood of violence perpetration given various combinations of the most statistically salient risk and protective factors related to violence perpetration. Design: Urban Indian Youth Health Survey, conducted from October 9, 1995, to March 30, 1998, consisting of 200 forced-choice items exploring values, cultural identity, relationships, decision-making skills, and health and well-being. Setting: Urban schools and an after-school youth development program at an urban American Indian center. Participants: Five hundred sixty-nine urban American Indian youth enrolled in grades 3 through 12. Main Outcome Measures: Violence perpetration dichotomized in 2 ways: (1) level of violence perpetration (ie, hitting someone 1-2 times in the past year vs picking fights, hitting repeatedly, participating in group fights, or shooting or stabbing someone in the past year) and (2) having shot and/or stabbed someone during the past year. Results: In the final multivariate models with age as a covariate, most protective against violence perpetration were connections to school (odds ratio [OR], 0.17), positive affect (OR, 0.29), and peer prosocial behavior norms against violence (OR, 0.35). School connectedness (OR, 0.01) and positive affect (OR, 0.46) were also protective against shooting and/or stabbing someone, as was parental prosocial behavior norms against violence (OR, 0.23). The strongest risk factors for violence perpetration were substance use (OR, 2.60) and suicidal thoughts/ behaviors (OR, 2.71); for shooting and/or stabbing, it was substance use (OR, 5.26). The likelihood of violence perpetration increased markedly (from 10% to 85%) as the exposure to risk factors increased and protective factors decreased. For shooting or stabbing someone, the probabilities ranged from 3% (0 risks and 3 protective factors) to 64% (1 risk and 0 protective factors). Conclusion: The dramatic reduction in the likelihood of violence involvement when risk was offset with protective factors in the probability profiles suggests the utility of a dual strategy of reducing risk while boosting protection.
AB - Objective: To predict the likelihood of violence perpetration given various combinations of the most statistically salient risk and protective factors related to violence perpetration. Design: Urban Indian Youth Health Survey, conducted from October 9, 1995, to March 30, 1998, consisting of 200 forced-choice items exploring values, cultural identity, relationships, decision-making skills, and health and well-being. Setting: Urban schools and an after-school youth development program at an urban American Indian center. Participants: Five hundred sixty-nine urban American Indian youth enrolled in grades 3 through 12. Main Outcome Measures: Violence perpetration dichotomized in 2 ways: (1) level of violence perpetration (ie, hitting someone 1-2 times in the past year vs picking fights, hitting repeatedly, participating in group fights, or shooting or stabbing someone in the past year) and (2) having shot and/or stabbed someone during the past year. Results: In the final multivariate models with age as a covariate, most protective against violence perpetration were connections to school (odds ratio [OR], 0.17), positive affect (OR, 0.29), and peer prosocial behavior norms against violence (OR, 0.35). School connectedness (OR, 0.01) and positive affect (OR, 0.46) were also protective against shooting and/or stabbing someone, as was parental prosocial behavior norms against violence (OR, 0.23). The strongest risk factors for violence perpetration were substance use (OR, 2.60) and suicidal thoughts/ behaviors (OR, 2.71); for shooting and/or stabbing, it was substance use (OR, 5.26). The likelihood of violence perpetration increased markedly (from 10% to 85%) as the exposure to risk factors increased and protective factors decreased. For shooting or stabbing someone, the probabilities ranged from 3% (0 risks and 3 protective factors) to 64% (1 risk and 0 protective factors). Conclusion: The dramatic reduction in the likelihood of violence involvement when risk was offset with protective factors in the probability profiles suggests the utility of a dual strategy of reducing risk while boosting protection.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=14644389435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=14644389435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/archpedi.159.3.270
DO - 10.1001/archpedi.159.3.270
M3 - Article
C2 - 15753272
AN - SCOPUS:14644389435
SN - 1072-4710
VL - 159
SP - 270
EP - 277
JO - Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
JF - Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
IS - 3
ER -