Ayala VH, Pedroza CF, Morales CS, Chaparro Caso-López A, Barragán TN

Language: Spanish
References: 44
Page: 27-40
PDF size: 466.20 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Aggressive behavior in childhood has become a socially relevant problem demanding special attention from researchers, as a sharp increase has been reported in the aggressive and antisocial behavior of children and adolescents. Especially disturbing is the high participation of underage individuals in crimes such as robbery, drug trafficking and homicide, while numerous studies have shown that aggressive behavior evolves into more severe antisocial behaviors in adolescence and young adulthood.
Research studies conducted on childhood aggressiveness has shown that these behaviors tend to become habits across time, and furthermore to progress into more complex and serious behaviors such as delinquency. For example, a high correlation has been reported between childhood aggressive behavior and antisocial behavior in adolescence and early adulthood. In an effort to prevent and stop the evolution of childhood aggressive behavior, efforts have been made to identify and describe those factors associated with the emergence of these behaviors in the developmental stages that comprise childhood and adolescence. Some researchers have coined terms such as risk and protective factors, reporting that it is highly probable that an individual might develop problem behaviors as the number of risk factors increases and exceeds the number of protective factors.
It has been suggested that risk factors may be classified into four large groups: 1) the child’s characteristics, 2) the parent’s characteristics, 3) the contextual factors, and 4) the parent-child interaction. In a similar fashion, the protective factors that seem to ameliorate the occurrence of antisocial behaviors are classified into 5 main types: 1) parent-child support relations, 2) positive disciplinary styles, 3) monitoring and supervisory skills, 4) childcentered families, and 5) parents seeking information and support.
Based on the identification of risk and protective factors associated to antisocial behavior in children, other indicators that explain the progression and generalization of these behaviors across settings have been reported though they are less reliable. In particular, it has been reported that aggressive behavior develops within the family unit, however, it has been also reported that as the child comes into contact with other settings and agents, his aggressive behavior generalizes.
The generalization of aggressive behaviors in other settings seems appears to be the antecedent of its progression to antisocial behavior through developmental stages ending in adulthood. It has been reported that before this behavior progresses toward a more severe type, antisocial behavior generalizes across settings and agents. Furthermore, lack of control of the new agents promotes the increase and maintenance of antisocial behavior.
Based on the results of numerous studies conducted in other countries that have identified and described those factors associated to aggressiveness in children, and the relative absence of longitudinal research studies in Mexico that might shed reliable information on this topic, it is necessary to conduct research for identifying the existing relationships between those factors described in the bibliography and the development, evolution and maintenance of antisocial behavior in Mexican children. With these considerations in mind, the purpose of the present study is to identify and describe those factors that are associated with the occurrence and maintenance of aggressive behaviors in a sample of school Mexican children, as well as to attempt to describe the process of generalization of these behaviors to other settings, specially the school environment (the classroom and the playground). A group of 345 children from seven public grammar schools in Mexico City were studied through a three year longitudinal cohort design. The sample was divided into two main groups: those whose reported level of occurrence of aggressive behaviors fell below the 25th percentile (non-aggressive) and those whose level of reported aggressive behaviors was above the 75th percentile (aggressive), based on the use of an Aggressive Behavior Checklist. The primary data for this study was gathered by using a direct observation system to record and classify parentchild interactions in the home setting, teacher-child interactions in the classroom, as well as child-peer interaction in the playground. Additional data was gathered through the application of a series of psychological assessment instruments that measured childrearing processes such as: parental stress, disciplinary styles and family social environment as well as the child’s anger control, peer preference, and types of friends maintained by the child. Results seem to identify those risk factors associated to the children’s aggressive behavior, as well as those risk factors that are predictive of the aggressive behavior of the parents such as the use of an explosive irritable disciplinary style. Additional protective factors associated to reduced rates of aggressive behaviors by the child were also identified, as well as factors that seem to promote the generalization of childhood aggressive behaviors to other settings.
In other words, the data shows that certain risk factors are related to the child’s or parent’s characteristics, while others are related to the type and quality of the parent-child interaction. The most important child characteristics were inadaptability, high levels of physical anger and disobedience, all of which predicted higher rates of aggressive behaviors in those children.
In relation to parental characteristics, results seem to indicate that when parents perceive themselves as barely competent in childrearing, there are more probabilities of showing higher rates of aggressive behavior in their interactions with their offsprings. In a similar fashion, higher rates of aggressive behavior in the parents seem to be associated to their perception of their restricted parental role.
The type of parent-child interaction which has been emphasized by other researchers, appears in the results of this study to confirm the findings that lack of childrearing skills is a risk factor significantly associated with the child’s aggressive behavior. In particular, the use of unspecified instructional commands by the parents, an explosive irritable disciplinary style, as well as higher rate of their aggressive behavior, are reliable predictors of the child’s aggressive behaviors. In a similar fashion, results appear to indicate that within family interactions, the parents’ aggressive behavior predicts their child’s aggressive behavior in concordance with Patterson’s Coercion Theory, which states that coercive parent-child interactions increase the overall level of aggressive behavior in those families.
Other risk factors were identified as a product of the analysis of the longitudinal data. They were those that reliably predict the parents’ aggressive behavior, and which can also be classified into three general categories: child’s characteristics, parental characteristics, and parent-child interaction. In terms of the child’s characteristics, data shows that child’s aggression and disobedience at home promote parental aggressive behavior. The parents’ perception of certain child characteristics (problems in adaptability, demandness, distractibility and hyperactivity) is a risk factor that predicts parental aggressive behavior towards the child. Another risk factor were the parents vague and nonspecific instructions to the child with no opportunity for his compliance. Both risk factors reliably predict parental aggressiveness. Parental perception of his highly restricted parenting role is also reliably associated with higher levels of parental aggressive behavior. One of the identified risk factors in this study refers to parental disciplinary styles, specifically of an explosive irritable type.
Results indicate that when a child is perceived by the parent as distracted, hyperactive, demanding, humorless, with adaptability problems, and non reinforcing for the parent, there is a significant increase of the probability that the parent will use an explosive irritable disciplinary style which, in turn, will be significantly associated with the child’s aggressive behavior. Parental characteristics are also predictive of the parent’s explosive irritable disciplinary style, in particular low childrearing competency, social isolation, reduced parental bonding family health problems, perceived parental role restriction, depression, and low levels of spousal support.
The findings also identified those factors associated with reduced levels of childhood aggression which seem to protect them against other child behavior problems. These factors include certain family characteristics and parental disciplinary styles that are reliably associated with reduced levels of childhood aggression, specifically, family environment with adequate levels of organization, goal orientation, religiousness and cohesiveness linked to a consistent and flexible disciplinary style not affected by emotional states. Appropriate levels of supervision of the child’s activities outside the home setting favor the child’s social and family development.
The identification of these risk and protective factors points towards the relevance and need of developing specific interventions geared not only at the reduction of risk factors, but also towards the development of intervention strategies that promote the development of familial protective factors such as parent training in skills such as: childrearing, communication, supervision, social interaction, planned activities and incidental teaching. Additionally child-focused interventions in social skills, anger management and problem solving skills are also required along with setting-based intervention packages such as classroom and playground behavior management.
Due to its longitudinal nature, the results of the study trace the progression and generalization of childhood aggressive behavior from the home environment, where it originates, to other settings. Specifically it was found that childhood aggressive behavior is related significantly with aggressive behavior at the school environment and, in particular, to that in the classroom and in the playground. These findings on the generalization and progression of aggressive behavior from the home setting could work as a precedent model for explaining the evolution of childhood’s aggressive behavior towards antisocial behavior in adolescence.

REFERENCES

1. ABIDIN RR: Parenting Stress Index: Manual. Pediatric Psychology Press, Charlottesville, 1996.

2. AYALA H, CHAPARRO A, FULGENCIO M, PEDROZA F, PACHECO A, MENDOZA B, ORTIZ A, VARGAS E, GARCIA B, BARRAGAN N: Tratamiento de agresión infantil: Desarrollo y evaluación de programas de intervención conductual multi-agente. Rev Mex Análisis Conducta, 27:1-31, 2001.

3. AYALA H, FULGENCIO M, CHAPARRO A, PEDRO-ZA F: Resultados preliminares del proyecto estudio longitudinal del desarrollo de la conducta agresiva en niños y su relación con el establecimiento de conducta antisocial en la adolescencia. Rev Mex Análisis Conducta, 26:65-89, 2000.

4. BARKLEY RA: Defiant Children. A Clinician’s Manual for Assessment and Parent Training. The Guilford Press. Nueva York, 1997.

5. CAVELL TA: Working with Parents of Aggressive Children. A Practitioner’s Guide. American Psychological Association. Washington, 2000.

6. DISHION TJ, MCMAHON R: Parental monitoring and the prevention of problem behavior: A conceptual and empirical reformulation. Research Monography, NAIDA, 1998.

7. DUMAS JE, WAHLER RG: Indiscriminate mothering as a contextual factor in aggressive–oppositional child behavior: “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.” J Abnorm Child Psychol, 13(1):1-17, 1985.

8. DUNST CJ, TRIVETTE CM: Methodological considerations and strategies for studying the long-term followup of early interventions. En: Friedman S, Haywood H (eds). Developmental Follow-up: Concepts, Domains and Methods. Academic Press, 277-313, San Diego, 1994.

9. FARRINGTON DP: The twelfth Jack Tizard memorial lecture. The development of offendeing and antisocial behavior from childhood: Key findings from the Cambridge study in delinquent development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 360:929-964, 1995.

10. FARRINGTON DP: Childhood aggression and adult violence: Early precursors and life outcome. En: Pepler D, Rubin K (eds). Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression. Earlbum, Hillsdale, 1991.

11. FOREHAND R, MCMAHON RJ: Helping the Noncompliant Child: a Clinician’s Guide to Parent Training. Guilford Press, Nueva York, 1981.

12. FRICK PJ, LAHEY BB, LOEBER R, STOUTHAMERLOEBER M, CHRIST MA, HANSON K: Familial risk factors to oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder: Parental psychopathology and maternal parenting. J Consult Clin Psychol, 60:49-55, 1992.

13. GARY LE, BEATTY LA, BERRY GI, PRICE MD: Stable Black Families: Final Report. Institute of Urbane Affairs Research, Howard University, Washington, 1983.

14. HUESMAN L, ERON L, LEFKOWITZ M, WALDER L: Stability of aggression over time and generations. Dev Psychol, 20:1120-1134, 1984.

15. HUIZINGA D, LOEBER R, THORNBERRY TP: Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse: Recent Findings from the Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Washington, 1995.

16. KAZDIN AE: Adolescent mental health, prevention and treatment programs. Am Psychol, 48:127-141, 1993.

17. KAZDIN AE: Treatment of antisocial behavior in children: Future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 102:187-203, 1987.

18. KUMPFER KL, ALVARADO R: Effective Family Strengthening Interventions. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Washington, 1998.

19. LAHEY BB, LOEBER R: Framework for a developmental model of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder. En: Routh DK (ed.). Disruptive Behavior Disorders in Childhood. Plenum Press, pp. 139-180, Nueva York, 1994.

20. LOCHMAN JE, COIE JD, UNDERWOOD MK, TERRY R: Effectiveness of a social relations intervention program for aggressive and non-aggressive rejected children. J Consulting Clin Psychol, 60:1053-1058, 1993.

21. LOEBER R: Developmental and risk factors of juvenile antisocial behavior and delinquency. Clin Psychol Rev, 10:1-42, 1990.

22. LUTHAR SS: Annotation: Methodological and conceptual issues in research on childhood resilience. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 34:441-453, 1993.

23. McCORD J: A forty year perspective on effects of child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Negl, 7:265-270, 1983.

24. McCORD J, TREMBLAY RE, VITARO F, DESMARAISGERVAIS L: Boy’s disruptive behavior, school adjustment, and delinquency: The Montreal prevention experiment. Inter J Behav Devel, 17:739-752, 1994.

25. MENDOZA B, ORTIZ A, AYALA H: Indice de enojo infantil. Instrumento elaborado para el programa Estudio Longitudinal del Desarrollo de la Conducta Agresiva en Niños y su Relación con la Evolución de la Conducta Antisocial en la Adolescencia. Proyecto PAPIME No. IN301297. UNAM, México, 1997.

26. MOOS RH: Combined Preliminary Manual: Family Work and Group Environment Scales Manual. Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, 1974.

27. OLWEUS D: Stability of aggressive behavior patterns in make a review. Psychol Bull, 86:852-875, 1979.

28. PATTERSON GR: A Social Learning Approach, 3, Coercive Family Process. Castalia Publishing Company. Eugene, 1982.

29. PATTERSON G R: Living with Children: New Methods for Parents and Teachers. Research Press, Champaign, 1976.

30. PATTERSON GR, CROSBY L, VUCHINICH S: Predicting risk for early police arrest. J Quantitative Criminology, 8:335-355, 1992.

31. PATTERSON GR, REID J, DISHION T: Antisocial Boys. Castalia Publishing Company, Eugene, 1992.

32. POE-YAMAGATA E: Serious violent offending rates by youths ages 12-17. 1980-1996. OJJDP Statistical Briefing Box. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington, 1998.

33. ROBINS LN: Changes in conduct disorders over time. En: Farran DC, McKinney JD (eds). Risk in Intellectual and Psychosocial Development. Academic Press, 227- 259, Nueva York, 1986.

34. ROBINS LN: Study childhood predictors of adults antisocial behavior: replications from longitudinal studies. Psychol Med, 8:611-622, 1979.

35. RUTTER M: Resilience: Some conceptual considerations. J Adolesc Health, 14:626-631, 1993.

36. RUTTER M: Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanism. Am Orthopsychiatry, 57:316-331, 1990.

37. SCHACHAR R, WACHSMUTH R: Oppositional disorder in children: A validation study comparing conduct disorder, oppositional disorder and normal control children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 31:1089-1102, 1990.

38. SNYDER J, PATTERSON GR: Individual differences in social aggression: A test of the reinforcement model of socialization in the natural environment. Beha Therapy, 26:371-391, 1995.

39. SPELTZ ML, DEKLYEN M, GREENBERG MT, DRYDEN M: Clinical referral for oppositional defiant disorder: Relative significance of attachment and behavioral variables. J Abnorm Child Psychol, 23:487-507, 1995.

40. SYNDER H: Youth Crime in US and Canada Differ More Among Violent Crime than Property Crime Offenses. National Center for Juvenile Justice, Pittsburgh, 1994.

41. WAHLER RG: The insular mother: Her problems in parent-child treatment. J Appl Behav Anal, 13:207-219, 1980.

42. WERNER EE: Resilient offspring of alcoholics: A longitudinal study from birth to age 18. J Stud Alcohol, 47:34- 40, 1986.

43. WEST DJ, FARRINGTON DP: Who Becomes Delinquent? Heinmann, Londres, 1973.

44. WHITE KJ, JONES K, SHERMAN MD: Reputation information and teacher feedback: Their influences on children’s perceptions of behavior problem peer. J Soc Clin Psychol, 17:11-37, 1998.