Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth

Can protection offset risk?

Linda H Bearinger, Sandra L Pettingell, Michael D Resnick, Carol L. Skay, Sandra J Potthoff, John Eichhorn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)270-277
Number of pages8
JournalArchives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
Volume159
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2005

Fingerprint

North American Indians
Violence
Odds Ratio
Health Surveys
Decision Making
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Protective Factors

Cite this

Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth : Can protection offset risk? / Bearinger, Linda H; Pettingell, Sandra L; Resnick, Michael D; Skay, Carol L.; Potthoff, Sandra J; Eichhorn, John.

In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 159, No. 3, 01.03.2005, p. 270-277.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bearinger, Linda H ; Pettingell, Sandra L ; Resnick, Michael D ; Skay, Carol L. ; Potthoff, Sandra J ; Eichhorn, John. / Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth : Can protection offset risk?. In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 2005 ; Vol. 159, No. 3. pp. 270-277.
@article{649c8d8dea8d469cb03613e1aa5bf056,
title = "Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth: Can protection offset risk?",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Bearinger, {Linda H} and Pettingell, {Sandra L} and Resnick, {Michael D} and Skay, {Carol L.} and Potthoff, {Sandra J} and John Eichhorn",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/archpedi.159.3.270",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "159",
pages = "270--277",
journal = "JAMA Pediatrics",
issn = "2168-6203",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Violence perpetration among urban American Indian youth

T2 - Can protection offset risk?

AU - Bearinger, Linda H

AU - Pettingell, Sandra L

AU - Resnick, Michael D

AU - Skay, Carol L.

AU - Potthoff, Sandra J

AU - Eichhorn, John

PY - 2005/3/1

Y1 - 2005/3/1

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

VL - 159

SP - 270

EP - 277

JO - JAMA Pediatrics

JF - JAMA Pediatrics

SN - 2168-6203

IS - 3

ER -