Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005 Mar;159(3):270-7.

Violence perpetration among urban american Indian youth: can protection offset risk?

Author information

1
Center for Adolescent Nursing, School of Nursing, Department of Pediatrics, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 55455, USA. beari001@umn.edu

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.

PMID:
15753272
DOI:
10.1001/archpedi.159.3.270
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
Loading ...
Support Center