Predicting Aggressive and Disruptive Behavior in Referred 6- to 12-Year-Old Boys

The linkage between childhood bullying behaviour and future offending

AIM

To examine the linkage between bullying behaviour in early childhood and any subsequent contact with the criminal justice system.

METHODS

A Canadian sample (570 boys and 379 girls) was derived from clients who participated in the evidenced-based programme, SNAP (STOP NOW AND PLAN), between 2001 and 2009. A court order was obtained to access any criminal record data on participants. The Early Assessment Risk Lists (EARL-20B and EARL-21G) and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) were used to identify level of risk and bullying behaviour. Outcome variables included age the child first came in contact with the criminal justice system and frequency.

RESULTS

Logistic and Cox regression analyses indicate that the risk of onset of criminal offence for bullies was significantly higher than for non-bullies. The hazard of criminal offence for bullies is 1.9 times (95% CI: 1.1-3.2) than that of non-bullies. This holds true even when adjusted for age, gender and other risk factors.

CONCLUSION

We found a strong linkage between bullying behaviour during childhood and subsequent criminal offending after the age of 12. Criminal convictions for bullies were nearly twice as high for non-bullies up to the child's 18th birthday. EARLs were effective in differentiating risk associated with bullying.

Gender differences in risk factors for violence: an examination of the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth

The research literature on predicting violence is particularly lacking in specifying risk factors for violence in adolescent girls. The recently developed Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth [SAVRY; Borum et al., 2006] shows promise as it is empirically derived and incorporates dynamic factors in its assessment of risk. To date, there exists little information attesting to the reliability and validity of the SAVRY, and few investigations of the SAVRY's utility across gender. This study investigated the SAVRY in a sample of 144 high-risk adolescents (80 males and 64 females), focusing on gender discrepancies in the predictive utility of the measure. Results indicate that the SAVRY moderately predicts violent and non-violent reoffending in the entire sample, and also suggest that the SAVRY operates comparably across gender. Although not precluding the existence of gender-specific domains of risk, current results suggest that validated risk factors in boys hold relevance for the prediction of violence and delinquency in girls.

Global risk factors and the prediction of recidivism rates in a sample of first-time misdemeanant offenders

This article examines the prediction of recidivism using the Global Risk Assessment Device (GRAD), a reliable and valid measure of dynamic factors associated with family characteristics, peers, mental health, substance abuse, trauma exposure, educational concerns, accountability, and health risks. Using a sample of adult caregivers of first-time misdemeanant offenders, two factors-education and accountability-were significantly associated with recidivistic behavior, supporting the use of GRAD data in correctly identifying first-time offenders who have the greatest and the least likelihood for future offending behavior. Additional analyses utilizing parent reports on African American males indicate that the GRAD provides discrimination in the prediction of recidivism in a group typically seen as being high risk simply because of their gender and race. The assessment drives intervention approach of the GRAD is discussed in terms of using reports from adults to accurately place youth into appropriate levels of supervision and treatment.

Assessment of interpersonal aggression and violence: introduction to the special issue

Violence and interpersonal aggression are considered major public health problems throughout the world. Yet there is considerable variability in how these terms are operationalized, measured, and studied in the social sciences, which can lead to ambiguity and confusion in the field. In this introduction to the special issue, the authors highlight some of the difficulties inherent in studying interpersonal aggression and violence and briefly review the heterogeneous nature of the research conducted in this area. The authors conclude with a summary of the key findings of the articles that appear in this special issue.