community influences your behavior essay

Community Watch Paper

How community influences your behavior.

A human mind and body are extremely adaptable to come under the influence of an environment that we live in. Even though each person is different from others, we cannot deny the effects of community influence on behavior of individuals. It is the era where we unknowingly fall into various traps and ignore how society impacts on individual person.

It is high time when people need to be well-aware of what to believe and what is merely a trap. Here, we will discuss how the community influences you in various ways. It has both positive and negative influences and hits each person differently.

What Is A Community?

A group of individuals sharing the same identity, passions, or objectives and possessing a subtle power is known as community. It shows a sense of belonging and optimism.

You shouldn’t have heard someone claim that “community” is something to be avoided or feared. To understand it well, we have listed a few examples of the community below.

• Business Community
• Religious Community
• Social Community
• Volunteer Community
• Rural Community

We can describe it as a group of people who share the same identity, interests, or goals.

Community Influence On Behavior

It is human nature that each needs to stay with others. We all have a silent fear of being left alone if we do not follow certain practices. The environment in which we live and the people in our surroundings strongly impact us.

Community influence on behavior can be positive or negative at times. Of course, there is always some gray area in anything, and nothing is completely black or white. Community influence on behavior can be positive or negative depending on various factors discussed below.

Positive Impact Of Community

Do you want to know how society impact on individual ? The community impacts both positively and negatively on an individual’s life. Here we will discuss how community positively influences behavior.

Strong Identity

It is usual for people who share a common sense of identity to form communities. Ethnic communities share components of their culture and tradition. On the other hand, people can link themselves with other communities according to their interests, such as sports communities, volunteering communities, etc.

Common Goals

Common goals or the pursuit of mutually beneficial outcomes bind some communities together. Some organizations have similar goals, such as accumulating new possessions or profiting from those no longer needed.

Ease In Succeeding

Communities can hold members accountable for certain actions and achieve specific goals. When a person commits to attaining a personal goal, they are less likely to succeed. There will be no one to keep them accountable if they start veering from their goal.

When a person expresses their goals to others in a community, there is a social expectation that they will accomplish them.

Self-determination

A community comforts the members when it comes to speaking their opinions and expressing opinions. Individuals feel encouraged to provide their opinions on a topic. Also, it feels good to be heard when a person is more likely to feel a sense of belonging in their society.

Distribution Of Responsibilities

Strong communities always have defined norms and expectations to influence their members’ behavior. As a result, there will be as little uncertainty as possible about what is and is not acceptable, and misunderstandings will be reduced.

Ensuring Well Being

Positive communities are highly concerned about members’ well-being and respond to issues promptly and sensitively. For community leaders, this involves paying attention to any concerns voiced and taking the appropriate steps to assess risks and undertake additional investigations as needed.

Builds Confidence

When other people in the community have similar goals and ideals, it becomes even more powerful. Seeing them do something makes you believe that your actions will even more closely accord with those ideas than before. It means that communities can have a significant impact on not only how people think but also what they choose to do

Negative Impact Of Community

Have you ever thing how does the community influence you ? Along with all the good, a community has several negative influences on human behavior. Have a look at those discussed below.

Discrimination

Those who live in depressed places are more likely to miss out on the beneficial benefits that communities can provide. They are also more prone to be affected by the unfavorable characteristics of their communities. To positively impact inequality, funding should be prioritized in the poorest communities.

There can be judgmental conduct toward particular groups of individuals often encouraged by communities in some cases. Individuals within these groups find it difficult to deviate from the norm and communicate their ideas when they know their community would negatively evaluate them.

Builds Pressure

Some people are more sensitive to peer pressure than others for several reasons. Others more easily influence these people because they are more impressionable and weaker. Others may lack a strong sense of self-worth or identity, so they rely on the judgments of their peers to define themselves.

Inhibits Creativity

When everyone in a place has the same point of view, groupthink inhibits originality and creativity. Individuals are also less prone to criticize decisions made by leaders, especially if the entire group backs those judgments.

Social Influences

Communities leave strong social influences on human behavior and somehow reshape a person. Individuals adapt their views and acts to suit the community’s perceived authority demands. It can either be a social role or a minority within a group having power over the majority.

Also, it can be referred to as social influence from a community on individuals. This type of social influence can be bad because it encourages conformity and social proof by doing what everyone else will think rather than thinking for yourself. According to sociology how is human behavior influenced by the community can vary depending on person to person?

Mental Health

A community can positively impact your health by offering moral and emotional support. On the other hand, it can also bring your health down. If you spend enough time with those who don’t care about your emotions and well-being, you’re more likely to experience a crucial aspect of mental health.

Isolation Threat

When it comes to difficulties, community influences might lead to withdrawal or isolation. However, humans cannot thrive or function in solitude; thus, this can be harmful. Working and connecting with others helps reduce stress, impacting mental and physical health.

Let’s look at the frequently asked questions about how community influences your behavior.

Is it true that people linked with communities are more courteous and happy?

The community provides patterns of realization, action, socializing, and a platform for them. People react and develop traits based on what they encounter. Certain situations necessitate specific reactions and features from each individual, which we sharpen through operant training.

Other conditions de-emphasize other features, causing us to discard or dismiss them as insignificant and latent. Environmental and social influences heavily influence our personality chemistry.

Are there any advantages to early childhood community involvement?

Early childhood community building becomes the supporting and uplifting foundation of a child’s life. It assists them in discovering more about themselves. It teaches children how to overcome obstacles, gain knowledge, and prosper.

As an individual, what does the community offer you?

A person feels a sense of being in the right place when part of a vibrant community. It allows individuals to connect personally and support each other’s, our own, and our environment’s ongoing progress. On the other hand, you can also feel too low instead of being supported if you feel no freedom to express your true self.

Can there be inequality in members of the same community?

Of course! Inequality is everywhere. Unfortunately, we have to witness discrimination due to various reasons everywhere. The same goes for the members of communities where one person can be given more importance than another due to any reason.

What impact does a healthy community have on you?

A positive community is defined as one in which all individuals get the same treatment as others. On the other side, stress and depression can be linked to unhealthy communities.

Do members of a community have to follow any obligations and policies?

Strong communities usually have defined norms and expectations to influence their members’ behavior. As a result, there will be as little uncertainty as possible about what is and is not acceptable, and misunderstandings will be reduced.

The people who stay with us have a big influence on our well-being. It’s crucial to note that, depending on the situation, social influence can be both helpful and detrimental. If you feel your sense of self is being challenged by what others say or do around you.

It would be best to recognize how your community affects you to make good judgments about who you wish to spend more time with based on their principles. The realization of positive/negative impact will help you be happier and less stressed in your life. CWP

Community Watch Paper posts:

What Influences The Criminal Behavior?

Best Ways To Build Social Sustainability And Its Importanc e In A Community

• https://positivepsychology.com/10-traits-positive-community/#:~:text=Positive%20experiences%20with%20communities%20allow,they%20require%20encouragement%20or%20help .
• https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/what-community-disadvantage-understanding-issues-ov
• https://education.seattlepi.com/peers-schools-communities-affect-personal-health-1813.html
• https://kindlingzing.com/does-community-influence-your-behavior-social-influence-and-the-mind/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=does-community-influence-your-behavior-social-influence-and-the-mind#:~:text=Community%20can%20also%20have%20negative,wielding%20influence%20over%20the%20majority .

Recent Posts

Advantages and Disadvantages of installing alarm security systems

Home security is the top priority of every homeowner. That is why they do their best to protect their houses. Hiring security guards and using strong locks is the traditional and most used way that...

Law Enforcement Versus Private Security

Both public and private security agencies aim to ensure the public's safety, but they accomplish this objective in very different ways. Both aim to maintain the general public's safety, but they...

The Importance of Cultivating Community

Why we need each other..

Posted August 20, 2021 | Reviewed by Davia Sills

• Living in a community promotes our health and well-being.
• Our minds are relational and affected by the quality of our social connections.
• Community is built through acts of intentionality, vulnerability, and creativity.

Our relationships, more than anything else, set the stage for our health, happiness , and well-being. Research indicates that the quality of our social relationships affects a range of health outcomes, such as our mental health, physical health, and mortality risk (Umberson & Montez, 2010). These relational effects start in early childhood and lead to cascading effects throughout life, which can either positively or negatively impact our health and development.

We are relational beings in nature, and when we’re isolated or detached from a community, our health and mental health can quickly take a toll. Life is hard enough on its own. We’re not meant to go about it alone.

Research within the field of interpersonal neurobiology sheds light on our biological need for community. Thanks to the work of Dan Siegel and others, we learn the degree to which our minds themselves are both embodied and relational . In other words, what we experience in our minds is highly influenced by our relationships and shared connections with others. Our network of social supports serves as the most profound predictor of our health and well-being.

In other words, our diet , how often we journal, or the number of daily positive affirmations we repeat isn't nearly as important as the community we surround ourselves in. The social connections we have (or don’t have) can literally shape the physical structure and development of our brains, leading to integrated or disintegrated mental states. As Siegel notes in Aware , “Relationships are not icing on the cake; they are the cake. In fact, they are the main course as well as the dessert."

Here are some tips on ways to cultivate a community:

In order to benefit from a community, we have to be intentional about creating and maintaining one. This includes all of us introverts , too. For even we need regular social interaction with others. This means stepping out and starting new conversations, joining a new group, going out to lunch with co-workers, or re-connecting with old acquaintances. Although COVID-19 precautions can make this challenging, we can still further our connections virtually.

One of the best ways to do this, it seems, is through the phone. According to a study with the University of Texas at Austin, phone calls produced feelings of connectedness between two people, more so than emails or texts. Try calling an old friend or family member who lives far away. Our community doesn't have physical limits; distance doesn't need to separate us.

Embrace vulnerability.

In addition, the quality of our relationships often depends on how willing we are to be vulnerable with others and the degree to which we can respect others' vulnerabilities. According to Brene Brown, vulnerability refers to the feeling we experience during times of uncertainty, risk, or emotional exposure. And genuine, authentic friendships and relationships often require these emotional risks.

If we want to experience deeper relationships and shared connections with others, we have to be willing to share our struggles, hopes, and needs with those we come to know and trust. The vulnerability arises when we let our most authentic selves be truly seen and known by others, which is both the antidote to shame and bedrock for trust and connection.

Take the small steps.

Building a community doesn't mean we have to befriend every new person we see or fill up all our weekends with social encounters. A sense of community can be nurtured by taking small steps, like starting a conversation with your neighbor, checking in on a new co-worker, or stopping to say "hi" to a custodian. Building a sense of community starts with small, intentional acts of kindness and acknowledgment.

With feelings of isolation and mental health problems on the rise, now, more than ever, it's important to be intentional about connecting with our community. If indeed our relationships serve as the foundation for our health, happiness, and well-being, they deserve the time, energy, creativity , and sacrifice needed to strengthen and maintain them.

Umberson, D., & Montez, J. K. (2010). Social relationships and health: a flashpoint for health policy. Journal of health and social behavior, 51 Suppl(Suppl), S54–S66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510383501

Elizabeth Dixon is a clinical social worker supporting child, family, and community resilience and well-being.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Are you seeking one-on-one college counseling and/or essay support? Limited spots are now available. Click here to learn more.

How to Write the Community Essay – Guide with Examples (2023-24)

September 6, 2023

Students applying to college this year will inevitably confront the community essay. In fact, most students will end up responding to several community essay prompts for different schools. For this reason, you should know more than simply how to approach the community essay as a genre. Rather, you will want to learn how to decipher the nuances of each particular prompt, in order to adapt your response appropriately. In this article, we’ll show you how to do just that, through several community essay examples. These examples will also demonstrate how to avoid cliché and make the community essay authentically and convincingly your own.

Emphasis on Community

Do keep in mind that inherent in the word “community” is the idea of multiple people. The personal statement already provides you with a chance to tell the college admissions committee about yourself as an individual. The community essay, however, suggests that you depict yourself among others. You can use this opportunity to your advantage by showing off interpersonal skills, for example. Or, perhaps you wish to relate a moment that forged important relationships. This in turn will indicate what kind of connections you’ll make in the classroom with college peers and professors.

Apart from comprising numerous people, a community can appear in many shapes and sizes. It could be as small as a volleyball team, or as large as a diaspora. It could fill a town soup kitchen, or spread across five boroughs. In fact, due to the internet, certain communities today don’t even require a physical place to congregate. Communities can form around a shared identity, shared place, shared hobby, shared ideology, or shared call to action. They can even arise due to a shared yet unforeseen circumstance.

What is the Community Essay All About?             

In a nutshell, the community essay should exhibit three things:

• An aspect of yourself, 2. in the context of a community you belonged to, and 3. how this experience may shape your contribution to the community you’ll join in college.

It may look like a fairly simple equation: 1 + 2 = 3. However, each college will word their community essay prompt differently, so it’s important to look out for additional variables. One college may use the community essay as a way to glimpse your core values. Another may use the essay to understand how you would add to diversity on campus. Some may let you decide in which direction to take it—and there are many ways to go!

To get a better idea of how the prompts differ, let’s take a look at some real community essay prompts from the current admission cycle.

Sample 2023-2024 Community Essay Prompts

1) brown university.

“Students entering Brown often find that making their home on College Hill naturally invites reflection on where they came from. Share how an aspect of your growing up has inspired or challenged you, and what unique contributions this might allow you to make to the Brown community. (200-250 words)”

A close reading of this prompt shows that Brown puts particular emphasis on place. They do this by using the words “home,” “College Hill,” and “where they came from.” Thus, Brown invites writers to think about community through the prism of place. They also emphasize the idea of personal growth or change, through the words “inspired or challenged you.” Therefore, Brown wishes to see how the place you grew up in has affected you. And, they want to know how you in turn will affect their college community.

“NYU was founded on the belief that a student’s identity should not dictate the ability for them to access higher education. That sense of opportunity for all students, of all backgrounds, remains a part of who we are today and a critical part of what makes us a world-class university. Our community embraces diversity, in all its forms, as a cornerstone of the NYU experience.

We would like to better understand how your experiences would help us to shape and grow our diverse community. Please respond in 250 words or less.”

Here, NYU places an emphasis on students’ “identity,” “backgrounds,” and “diversity,” rather than any physical place. (For some students, place may be tied up in those ideas.) Furthermore, while NYU doesn’t ask specifically how identity has changed the essay writer, they do ask about your “experience.” Take this to mean that you can still recount a specific moment, or several moments, that work to portray your particular background. You should also try to link your story with NYU’s values of inclusivity and opportunity.

3) University of Washington

“Our families and communities often define us and our individual worlds. Community might refer to your cultural group, extended family, religious group, neighborhood or school, sports team or club, co-workers, etc. Describe the world you come from and how you, as a product of it, might add to the diversity of the UW. (300 words max) Tip: Keep in mind that the UW strives to create a community of students richly diverse in cultural backgrounds, experiences, values and viewpoints.”

UW ’s community essay prompt may look the most approachable, for they help define the idea of community. You’ll notice that most of their examples (“families,” “cultural group, extended family, religious group, neighborhood”…) place an emphasis on people. This may clue you in on their desire to see the relationships you’ve made. At the same time, UW uses the words “individual” and “richly diverse.” They, like NYU, wish to see how you fit in and stand out, in order to boost campus diversity.

Writing Your First Community Essay

Begin by picking which community essay you’ll write first. (For practical reasons, you’ll probably want to go with whichever one is due earliest.) Spend time doing a close reading of the prompt, as we’ve done above. Underline key words. Try to interpret exactly what the prompt is asking through these keywords.

Next, brainstorm. I recommend doing this on a blank piece of paper with a pencil. Across the top, make a row of headings. These might be the communities you’re a part of, or the components that make up your identity. Then, jot down descriptive words underneath in each column—whatever comes to you. These words may invoke people and experiences you had with them, feelings, moments of growth, lessons learned, values developed, etc. Now, narrow in on the idea that offers the richest material and that corresponds fully with the prompt.

Lastly, write! You’ll definitely want to describe real moments, in vivid detail. This will keep your essay original, and help you avoid cliché. However, you’ll need to summarize the experience and answer the prompt succinctly, so don’t stray too far into storytelling mode.

How To Adapt Your Community Essay

Once your first essay is complete, you’ll need to adapt it to the other colleges involving community essays on your list. Again, you’ll want to turn to the prompt for a close reading, and recognize what makes this prompt different from the last. For example, let’s say you’ve written your essay for UW about belonging to your swim team, and how the sports dynamics shaped you. Adapting that essay to Brown’s prompt could involve more of a focus on place. You may ask yourself, how was my swim team in Alaska different than the swim teams we competed against in other states?

Once you’ve adapted the content, you’ll also want to adapt the wording to mimic the prompt. For example, let’s say your UW essay states, “Thinking back to my years in the pool…” As you adapt this essay to Brown’s prompt, you may notice that Brown uses the word “reflection.” Therefore, you might change this sentence to “Reflecting back on my years in the pool…” While this change is minute, it cleverly signals to the reader that you’ve paid attention to the prompt, and are giving that school your full attention.

What to Avoid When Writing the Community Essay  

• Avoid cliché. Some students worry that their idea is cliché, or worse, that their background or identity is cliché. However, what makes an essay cliché is not the content, but the way the content is conveyed. This is where your voice and your descriptions become essential.
• Avoid giving too many examples. Stick to one community, and one or two anecdotes arising from that community that allow you to answer the prompt fully.
• Don’t exaggerate or twist facts. Sometimes students feel they must make themselves sound more “diverse” than they feel they are. Luckily, diversity is not a feeling. Likewise, diversity does not simply refer to one’s heritage. If the prompt is asking about your identity or background, you can show the originality of your experiences through your actions and your thinking.

Community Essay Examples and Analysis

Brown university community essay example.

I used to hate the NYC subway. I’ve taken it since I was six, going up and down Manhattan, to and from school. By high school, it was a daily nightmare. Spending so much time underground, underneath fluorescent lighting, squashed inside a rickety, rocking train car among strangers, some of whom wanted to talk about conspiracy theories, others who had bedbugs or B.O., or who manspread across two seats, or bickered—it wore me out. The challenge of going anywhere seemed absurd. I dreaded the claustrophobia and disgruntlement.

Yet the subway also inspired my understanding of community. I will never forget the morning I saw a man, several seats away, slide out of his seat and hit the floor. The thump shocked everyone to attention. What we noticed: he appeared drunk, possibly homeless. I was digesting this when a second man got up and, through a sort of awkward embrace, heaved the first man back into his seat. The rest of us had stuck to subway social codes: don’t step out of line. Yet this second man’s silent actions spoke loudly. They said, “I care.”

That day I realized I belong to a group of strangers. What holds us together is our transience, our vulnerabilities, and a willingness to assist. This community is not perfect but one in motion, a perpetual work-in-progress. Now I make it my aim to hold others up. I plan to contribute to the Brown community by helping fellow students and strangers in moments of precariousness.    

Brown University Community Essay Example Analysis

Here the student finds an original way to write about where they come from. The subway is not their home, yet it remains integral to ideas of belonging. The student shows how a community can be built between strangers, in their responsibility toward each other. The student succeeds at incorporating key words from the prompt (“challenge,” “inspired” “Brown community,” “contribute”) into their community essay.

UW Community Essay Example

I grew up in Hawaii, a world bound by water and rich in diversity. In school we learned that this sacred land was invaded, first by Captain Cook, then by missionaries, whalers, traders, plantation owners, and the U.S. government. My parents became part of this problematic takeover when they moved here in the 90s. The first community we knew was our church congregation. At the beginning of mass, we shook hands with our neighbors. We held hands again when we sang the Lord’s Prayer. I didn’t realize our church wasn’t “normal” until our diocese was informed that we had to stop dancing hula and singing Hawaiian hymns. The order came from the Pope himself.

Eventually, I lost faith in God and organized institutions. I thought the banning of hula—an ancient and pure form of expression—seemed medieval, ignorant, and unfair, given that the Hawaiian religion had already been stamped out. I felt a lack of community and a distrust for any place in which I might find one. As a postcolonial inhabitant, I could never belong to the Hawaiian culture, no matter how much I valued it. Then, I was shocked to learn that Queen Ka’ahumanu herself had eliminated the Kapu system, a strict code of conduct in which women were inferior to men. Next went the Hawaiian religion. Queen Ka’ahumanu burned all the temples before turning to Christianity, hoping this religion would offer better opportunities for her people.

Community Essay (Continued)

I’m not sure what to make of this history. Should I view Queen Ka’ahumanu as a feminist hero, or another failure in her islands’ tragedy? Nothing is black and white about her story, but she did what she thought was beneficial to her people, regardless of tradition. From her story, I’ve learned to accept complexity. I can disagree with institutionalized religion while still believing in my neighbors. I am a product of this place and their presence. At UW, I plan to add to campus diversity through my experience, knowing that diversity comes with contradictions and complications, all of which should be approached with an open and informed mind.

UW Community Essay Example Analysis

This student also manages to weave in words from the prompt (“family,” “community,” “world,” “product of it,” “add to the diversity,” etc.). Moreover, the student picks one of the examples of community mentioned in the prompt, (namely, a religious group,) and deepens their answer by addressing the complexity inherent in the community they’ve been involved in. While the student displays an inner turmoil about their identity and participation, they find a way to show how they’d contribute to an open-minded campus through their values and intellectual rigor.

What’s Next

For more on supplemental essays and essay writing guides, check out the following articles:

• How to Write the Why This Major Essay + Example
• How to Write the Overcoming Challenges Essay + Example
• How to Start a College Essay – 12 Techniques and Tips
• College Essay

Kaylen Baker

With a BA in Literary Studies from Middlebury College, an MFA in Fiction from Columbia University, and a Master’s in Translation from Université Paris 8 Vincennes-Saint-Denis, Kaylen has been working with students on their writing for over five years. Previously, Kaylen taught a fiction course for high school students as part of Columbia Artists/Teachers, and served as an English Language Assistant for the French National Department of Education. Kaylen is an experienced writer/translator whose work has been featured in Los Angeles Review, Hybrid, San Francisco Bay Guardian, France Today, and Honolulu Weekly, among others.

• 2-Year Colleges
• Application Strategies
• Best Colleges by Major
• Best Colleges by State
• Big Picture
• Career & Personality Assessment
• College Search/Knowledge
• College Success
• Costs & Financial Aid
• Data Visualizations
• Dental School Admissions
• Extracurricular Activities
• Graduate School Admissions
• High School Success
• High Schools
• Homeschool Resources
• Law School Admissions
• Medical School Admissions
• Navigating the Admissions Process
• Online Learning
• Outdoor Adventure
• Private High School Spotlight
• Research Programs
• Summer Program Spotlight
• Summer Programs
• Teacher Tools
• Test Prep Provider Spotlight

“Innovative and invaluable…use this book as your college lifeline.”

— Lynn O'Shaughnessy

Nationally Recognized College Expert

College Planning in Your Inbox

Join our information-packed monthly newsletter.

Social Influences on Behavior Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Social influences are things that alter or influence an individual’s feelings, conduct, opinions, or actions. Both sociologists and psychologists find this concept of great value, for example, social influence is a pivotal tool for marketing, smoking and many more.

Among the very many things under focus when handling the concept of social influence is how external factors affect behavior of certain faction or discrete individuals. In other words, nobody is exclusive of social influence as it can occur in any social condition. For instance, let us take prejudice, attraction and love as examples of social influences. It is quite apparent that prejudice develops feelings of misery or hate.

On the other hand, love and attraction brings feelings that an individual can help one up. Whether positive or negative, these conditions can light a rollercoaster ride in the brain and make an individual change from being irate to blissful or from cheerful to fuming, within a split second. Thus, undoubtedly, love and prejudice remains two paramount circumstances that induce sturdy feelings in humans-the chieftains of human behavior in society (Ainette & Carmella, 2011, p.1).

According to Kowalski and Westen (2009), schemas are the vital blueprint of thoughts, which systematize experience and direct the processing of information about human beings and situation. They go on saying that for this to occur, an impression of a person is necessary before anything else. Their work shows people that develop the first impression by observing the behavior of outgoing and attractive individuals.

Thus, if a person appears shy and reticent, the observer will have a shoddier first impression. In short, the first impression, either good or bad, forms the source of social behaviors. For instance, prejudice can make people behave imperfectly bearing in mind many people do not like the idea of becoming outcasts due to stereotype. It is thus important to note that the first impressions are the antecedent from where love and prejudice emanate.

Ordinarily, prejudice comes when a certain faction of people discriminate an individual either by race or color. Interestingly, the group has a leader who forces others to believe in discrimination. Although some members may be aware that what they are doing is wrong, they find themselves in a sorry state, as any resistance to what the group believes will makes them outcasts. Additionally, it is important to note that the group has an influencing power to facilitate socially how every member conducts himself or herself.

At the same time, no member of the group risks being an outcast by opposing others. Such cases are more common in children as compared to adults. As Kowalski and Westen notes, no substantive amount of salutary intercession can stop people from practicing prejudice and stereotyping. This is because many people follow the crowd irrespective of whether he crowd is doing the right thing or not. Perhaps this is the reason why in the contemporary world; altruism is something hard to come across (pp. 8-27).

Another component of social influence is the sensation of attraction and falling in love. The two, love and attraction, can develop as a first impression, in this case, directed towards a certain individual.

Noticeably, the foremost thing that a person keenly observes in a person of the opposite sex is of course, the physical appearance of that individual. Depending on personal preferences and even culture, each person has different assertions on the characteristics that attract him or her most. Nevertheless, it is important to note that at first sight, the first impression about someone is the paramount thing.

Any behavior of the sensation of attraction or love towards someone comes later. Undoubtedly, social researchers quickly assert that love is brings out the feeling of contentment and self-assurance in human beings. In most cases, where love exists, altruism comes into action, since the persons involved ends up being happy and better than they were (Schueler, 1997, p.1).

Studies show that love as complex as it is, exhibits itself as evolutionary and biological. In most cases, the studies explain the genesis of love as biological. However, it is important to note that due to social interactions, social groupings, social loafing and groupthink; the nature of love has made it easier to modify it into an assortment of cultures.

On the other hand, love exhibits itself when human beings protect their progeny. Nevertheless, some instances can make love plummet amid its disassociation from intervention of any type. For example, if one person becomes abusive due to stress or jealousy, then the concept of love as an ingredient of social influence ceases.

Captivatingly, some people may choose to remain in an abusive relationship just because they love their partners. Apparently, such situations require a certain therapy to deal with. In other words, love and prejudice are paramount circumstances that we cannot do without, simply because each one of them tries to accomplish various genuses of biological and evolutionary demands. For instance, prejudice pleads for inclusivity in major social groupings.

On the other hand, no human being likes being alone. All human being desires to associate with other people hence, the concept of love. It is also important to note that love is a fundamental necessitate for reproduction and survival. Perhaps this is the reason why people appear to care for others and making sure that the lineage survives (Kowalski & Westen, 2009, pp. 31-76).

In conclusion, so far, love and prejudice remain the strongest social influences on how human beings conduct themselves. From the two emanate an assortment of motions that range from irritation to hopelessness to self-assurance and happiness. Without any doubt, the behavior of people can affect the attitude and self-esteem of other people in social loafing. Social influence can also affect individual personality and behavior, and sometimes lead to discrimination.

Reference List

Ainette, M. & Carmella, W. (2011). Social Influence. Behavioral Research . Web.

Kowalski, R., & Westen, D. (2009). Psychology . (5th ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley and Sons.

Schueler, G. (1997). Social Influence on Behavior. Web.

• Media Violence and Altruism
• Altruism and social behavior
• Leadership Style: Reflection and Analysis
• Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection
• Social Imagination Theory
• Towards Evaluating the Relationship Between Gender Stereotypes & Culture
• Psychological Aspect of Generosity Acts
• Muammar Gaddafi's Personality Matrix
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, February 20). Social Influences on Behavior. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-influences-on-behavior/

"Social Influences on Behavior." IvyPanda , 20 Feb. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/social-influences-on-behavior/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Social Influences on Behavior'. 20 February.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Social Influences on Behavior." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-influences-on-behavior/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social Influences on Behavior." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-influences-on-behavior/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social Influences on Behavior." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-influences-on-behavior/.

• Media Center

How Does Society Influence One's Behavior?

Behavioral economics and nudge theory gets a bad reputation. Sometimes vilified as dark marketing, government interference, or self-serving paternalism, fears arise around the notion that such interventions infringe on individual rights.

Yet, the fact is that we very rarely make choices in isolation of outside influences.

"We are social beings, and thus, our choices are made in the context of social connections, personal relationships, and physical environments — all of which will have been influenced by other people."

Indeed, the very concept of behaviorally-influenced public policies, and the extent to which these can be effective, demonstrates how individuals respond to outside agency. Behavioral economics harnesses these human insights, and works on the premise that — both to help people individually and to have a positive impact on the widest number of people — individuals’ behavior can be influenced without restricting their liberties.

Behavioral Science, Democratized

We make 35,000 decisions each day, often in environments that aren’t conducive to making sound choices.  At TDL, we work with organizations in the public and private sectors—from new startups, to governments, to established players like the Gates Foundation—to debias decision-making and create better outcomes for everyone.

For example, when it comes to taxes on alcohol or sugar consumption, some argue that their body is their own, and thus they should be left to make their own decisions. To be sure, public health policy aims to provide the individuals with the utmost freedom in cases where the negative consequences of their behaviors can be internalized. However, it also holds that if there are externalities, or public costs, to these behaviors (as there often are), the government is justified in campaigning to reduce the incidence of such behaviors. Thus, it is not only that social forces influence our behaviors, but that, in turn, our behaviors impact societal outcomes.

The UK’s Behavioral Insights Team (BIT) use the framework MINDSPACE to aid the application of behavioral science to the policymaking process. They argue that the ideas captured in the mnemonic are ‘nine of the most robust influences on our behavior.’ These are as follows:

Whether it is acting in line with social norms, seeking ways to act that make us look good to others, or relying on category and perception to form our opinions of those with whom we interact, it is clear that these social components have an outsized impact on our individual behaviors. Let’s look at a few examples:

Messenger – interaction with others

In another classic example, the UK’s BIT worked with  HMRC  (the UK’s tax collection agency) to increase tax payments by sending out reminder letters stating that most people in the recipient’s area had paid their tax. The impetus for this intervention is the simple insight that no one wants to be the naughty individual in their community, and that reframing tax payment as not only a legal obligation but a social norm would increase compliance. The letters emphasizing the positive social norms produced a 15% higher response rate than the standard letter, and it has been estimated that if the approach was taken across the country, it could help to collect £160m extra tax revenues per year.

Norms – peer pressure

Commitment – a public declaration.

Similarly, facilitating the creation of social norms is part of UNICEF’s approach to challenging the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) in some African villages. According to the NGO  Tostan , a key factor leading to the abandonment of the practice was addressing collective rather than individual behaviors. Public condemnation of FGM and declarations against it were found to have a significant symbolic value.

The AI Governance Challenge

Defaults – tipping point.

The Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) analysed vast quantities of data to identify the  tipping point  at which a marginal belief becomes the majority opinion. Their estimate suggests that at least 10% of people have to hold an opinion for it to have a chance of being adopted more widely.  Thus, they argue, a small group can create change — so long as they are committed and consistent in their belief. Perhaps the most effective way to achieve widespread modification of behavior is to reach those 10%. If word of mouth is the best form of advertising, obvious and clear actions could be the best form of encouraging social change.

What these results all suggest is that, though we like to think of our choices as our own, in fact, they are often profoundly impacted by the choices and views of our peers. In that way,  John Donne  was right — no man is an island. Especially when it comes to behavior.

About the Author

Francesca Baker-Brooker

Francesca Baker is fascinated by people, and their experience of the world. A researcher with 9 years’ experience, she is highly curious, and combines this with a sense of creativity and communication skills to explore the world and tell the stories that matter.

Beating Bias: Debiasing Strategies for Everyday Decisions

Debiasing may not be a one-size fits all solution — but used in the right contexts, it can have a significant impact on how we make decisions.

The Sound of Silence: How the Absence of Noise Affects Your Decisions

Through decades of research on noise, scientists have discovered that excessive noise competes with our ability to think clearly, while silence can improve our decision-making processes and might even keep us in good health.

Taking a Hard Look at Democracy

Tom Spiegler, Co-Founder and Managing Director at The Decision Lab, joins Nathan Collett to talk about what behavioral science can tell us about the 2020 US election and the state of democracy more generally.

Escaping the Echo Chamber: How to Build Safe Peer-to-Peer Mental Health Platforms

Online mental health echo-chambers emerge from a genuine need for connection. Learn here how they become dangerous and how we can fix them.

Eager to learn about how behavioral science can help your organization?

Get new behavioral science insights in your inbox every month..

Frontiers for Young Minds

• Download PDF

How Does Social Context Influence Our Brain and Behavior?

When we interact with others, the context in which our actions take place plays a major role in our behavior. This means that our understanding of objects, words, emotions, and social cues may differ depending on where we encounter them. Here, we explain how context affects daily mental processes, ranging from how people see things to how they behave with others. Then, we present the social context network model. This model explains how people process contextual cues when they interact, through the activity of the frontal, temporal, and insular brain regions. Next, we show that when those brain areas are affected by some diseases, patients find it hard to process contextual cues. Finally, we describe new ways to explore social behavior through brain recordings in daily situations.

Introduction

Everything you do is influenced by the situation in which you do it. The situation that surrounds an action is called its context. In fact, analyzing context is crucial for social interaction and even, in some cases, for survival. Imagine you see a man in fear: your reaction depends on his facial expression (e.g., raised eyebrows, wide-open eyes) and also on the context of the situation. The context can be external (is there something frightening around?) or internal (am I calm or am I also scared?). Such contextual cues are crucial to your understanding of any situation.

Context shapes all processes in your brain, from visual perception to social interactions [ 1 ]. Your mind is never isolated from the world around you. The specific meaning of an object, word, emotion, or social event depends on context ( Figure 1 ). Context may be evident or subtle, real or imagined, conscious or unconscious. Simple optical illusions demonstrate the importance of context ( Figures 1A,B ). In the Ebbinghaus illusion ( Figure 1A ), rings of circles surround two central circles. The central circles are the same size, but one appears to be smaller than the other. This is so because the surrounding circles provide a context. This context affects your perception of the size of the central circles. Quite interesting, right? Likewise, in the Cafe Wall Illusion ( Figure 1B ), context affects your perception of the lines’ orientation. The lines are parallel, but you see them as convergent or divergent. You can try focusing on the middle line of the figure and check it with a ruler. Contextual cues also help you recognize objects in a scene [ 2 ]. For instance, it can be easier to recognize letters when they are in the context of a word. Thus, you can see the same array of lines as either an H or an A ( Figure 1C ). Certainly, you did not read that phrase as “TAE CHT”, correct? Lastly, contextual cues are also important for social interaction. For instance, visual scenes, voices, bodies, other faces, and words shape how you perceive emotions in a face [ 3 ]. If you see Figure 1D in isolation, the woman may look furious. But look again, this time at Figure 1E . Here you see an ecstatic Serena Williams after she secured the top tennis ranking. This shows that recognizing emotions depends on additional information that is not present in the face itself.

• Figure 1 - Contextual affects how you see things.
• A,B. The visual context affects how you see shapes. C. Context also plays an important role in object recognition. Context-related objects are easier to recognize. “THE CAT” is a good example of contextual effects in letter recognition (reproduced with permission from Chun [ 2 ]). D,E. Context also affects how you recognize an emotion [by Hanson K. Joseph (Own work), CC BY-SA 4.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 ), via Wikimedia Commons].

Contextual cues also help you make sense of other situations. What is appropriate in one place may not be appropriate in another. Making jokes is OK when studying with your friends, but not OK during the actual exam. Also, context affects how you feel when you see something happening to another person. Picture someone being beaten on the street. If the person being beaten is your best friend, would you react in the same way as if he were a stranger? The reason why you probably answered “no” is that your empathy may be influenced by context. Context will determine whether you jump in to help or run away in fear. In sum, social situations are shaped by contextual factors that affect how you feel and act.

Contextual cues are important for interpreting social situations. Yet, they have been largely ignored in the world of science. To fill this gap, our group proposed the social context network model [ 1 ]. This model describes a brain network that integrates contextual information during social processes. This brain network combines the activity of several different areas of the brain, namely frontal, temporal, and insular brain areas ( Figure 2 ). It is true that many other brain areas are involved in processing contextual information. For instance, the context of an object that you can see affects processes in the vision areas of your brain [ 4 ]. However, the network proposed by our model includes the main areas involved in social context processing. Even contextual visual recognition involves activity of temporal and frontal regions included in our model [ 5 ].

• Figure 2 - The parts of the brain that work together, in the social context network model.
• This model proposes that social contextual cues are processed by a network of specific brain regions. This network is made up of frontal (light blue), temporal (orange), and insular (green) brain regions and the connections between these regions.

How Does Your Brain Process Contextual Cues in Social Scenarios?

To interpret context in social settings, your brain relies on a network of brain regions, including the frontal, temporal, and insular regions. Figure 2 shows the frontal regions in light blue. These regions help you update contextual information when you focus on something (say, the traffic light as you are walking down the street). That information helps you anticipate what might happen next, based on your previous experiences. If there is a change in what you are seeing (as you keep walking down the street, a mean-looking Doberman appears), the frontal regions will activate and update predictions (“this may be dangerous!”). These predictions will be influenced by the context (“oh, the dog is on a leash”) and your previous experience (“yeah, but once I was attacked by a dog and it was very bad!”). If a person’s frontal regions are damaged, he/she will find it difficult to recognize the influence of context. Thus, the Doberman may not be perceived as a threat, even if this person has been attacked by other dogs before! The main role of the frontal regions is to predict the meaning of actions by analyzing the contextual events that surround the actions.

Figure 2 shows the insular regions, also called the insula, in green. The insula combines signals from within and outside your body. The insula receives signals about what is going on in your guts, heart, and lungs. It also supports your ability to experience emotions. Even the butterflies you sometimes feel in your stomach depend on brain activity! This information is combined with contextual cues from outside your body. So, when you see that the Doberman breaks loose from its owner, you can perceive that your heart begins to beat faster (an internal body signal). Then, your brain combines the external contextual cues (“the Doberman is loose!”) with your body signals, leading you to feel fear. Patients with damage to their insular regions are not so good at tracking their inner body signals and combining them with their emotions. The insula is critical for giving emotional value to an event.

Lastly, Figure 2 shows the temporal regions marked with orange. The temporal regions associate the object or person you are focusing on with the context. Memory plays a major role here. For instance, when the Doberman breaks loose, you look at his owner and realize that it is the kind man you met last week at the pet shop. Also, the temporal regions link contextual information with information from the frontal and insular regions. This system supports your knowledge that Dobermans can attack people, prompting you to seek protection.

To summarize, combining what you experience with the social context relies on a brain network that includes the frontal, insular, and temporal regions. Thanks to this network, we can interpret all sorts of social events. The frontal areas adjust and update what you think, feel, and do depending on present and past happenings. These areas also predict possible events in your surroundings. The insula combines signals from within and outside your body to produce a specific feeling. The temporal regions associate objects and persons with the current situation. So, all the parts of the social context network model work together to combine contextual information when you are in social settings.

When Context Cannot be Processed

Our model helps to explain findings from patients with brain damage. These patients have difficulties processing contextual cues. For instance, people with autism find it hard to make eye contact and interact with others. They may show repetitive behaviors (e.g., constantly lining up toy cars) or excessive interest in a topic. They may also behave inappropriately and have trouble adjusting to school, home, or work. People with autism may fail to recognize emotions in others’ faces. Their empathy may also be reduced. One of our studies [ 6 ] showed that these problems are linked to a decreased ability to process contextual information. Persons with autism and healthy subjects performed tasks involving different social skills. Autistic people did poorly in tasks that relied on contextual cues—for instance, detecting a person’s emotion based on his gestures or voice tone. But, autistic people did well in tasks that didn’t require analyzing context, for example tasks that could be completed by following very general rules (for example, “never touch a stranger on the street”). Thus, the social problems that we often see in autistic people might result from difficulty in processing contextual cues.

Another disease that may result from problems processing contextual information is called behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia . Patients with this disease exhibit changes in personality and in the way they interact with others, after about age 60. They may do improper things in public. Like people with autism, they may not show empathy or may not recognize emotions easily. Also, they find it hard to deal with the details of context needed to understand social events. All these changes may reflect general problems processing social context information. These problems may be caused by damage to the brain network described above.

Our model can also explain patients with damage to the frontal lobes or those who have conditions such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder [ 7 ]. Schizophrenia is a mental disorder characterized by atypical social cognition and inability to distinguish between real and imagined world (as in the case of hallucinations). Similar but milder problems appear in patients with bipolar disorder, which is another psychiatric condition mainly characterized by oscillating periods of depression and periods of elevated mood (called hypomania or mania).

In sum, the problems with social behavior seen in many diseases are probably linked to poor context processing after damage to certain brain areas, as proposed by our model ( Figure 2 ). Future research should explore how correct this model is, adding more data about the processes and regions it describes.

New Techniques to Assess Social Behavior and Contextual Processing

The results mentioned above are important for scientists and doctors. However, they have a great limitation. They do not reflect how people behave in daily life! Most of the research findings came from tasks in a laboratory, in which a person responded to pictures or videos. These tasks do not really represent how we act every day in our lives. Social life is much more complicated than sitting at a desk and pressing buttons when you see images on a computer, right? Research based on such tasks doesn’t reflect real social situations. In daily life, people interact in contexts that constantly change.

Fortunately, new methods allow scientists to assess real-life interactions. Hyperscanning is one of these methods. Hyperscanning allows measurement of the brain activity of two or more people while they perform activities together. For example, each subject can lie inside a separate scanner (a large tube containing powerful magnets). This scanner can detect changes in blood flow in the brain while the two people interact. This approach is used, for example, to study the brains of a mother and her child while they are looking at each other’s faces ( Figure 3A ).

• Figure 3 - New techniques to study processing of contextual cues.
• A. A mother and her infant look at each others’ facial expression while their brain activity is recorded (reproduced with permission from Masayuki et al. [ 8 ]). B. Hyperscanning of people interacting with each other during a game of Jenga (reproduced with permission from Liu et al. [ 9 ]). C. A new method of studying brain activity, called mobile brain/body imaging (MoBI) (reproduced with permission from Makeig et al. [ 10 ]). D. Virtual reality simulations of a virtual train at the station and a virtual train carriage (reproduced with permission from Freeman et al. [ 11 ]).

Hyperscanning can also be done using electroencephalogram equipment. Electroencephalography measures the electrical activity of the brain. Special sensors called electrodes are attached to the head. They are hooked by wires to a computer which records the brain’s electrical activity. Figure 3B shows an example of the use of electroencephalogram hyperscanning. This method has been used to measure the brain activity in two individuals while they are playing Jenga. Future research should apply this technique to study the processing of social contextual cues.

One limitation of hyperscanning is that it typically requires participants to remain still. However, real-life interactions involve many bodily actions. Fortunately, a new method called mobile brain/body imaging (MoBI, Figure 3C ) allows the measurement of brain activity and bodily actions while people interact in natural settings.

Another interesting approach is to use virtual reality . This technique involves fake situations. However, it puts people in different situations that require social interaction. This is closer to real life than the tasks used in most laboratories. As an example, consider Figure 3D . This shows a virtual reality experiment in which participants traveled through an underground tube station in London. Our understanding of the way context impacts social behavior could be expanded in future virtual reality studies.

In sum, future research should use new methods for measuring real-life interactions. This type of research could be very important for doctors to understand what happens to the processing of social context cues in various brain injuries or diseases. These realistic tasks are more sensitive than most of the laboratory tasks that are usually used for the assessment of patients with brain disorders.

Empathy : ↑ The ability to feel what another person is feeling, that is, to “place yourself in that person’s shoes.”

Autism : ↑ A general term for a group of complex disorders of brain development. These disorders are characterized by repetitive behaviors, as well as different levels of difficulty with social interaction and both verbal and non-verbal communications.

Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia : ↑ A brain disease characterized by progressive changes in personality and loss of empathy. Patients experience difficulty in regulating their behavior, and this often results in socially inappropriate actions. Patients typically start to show symptoms around age 60.

Hyperscanning : ↑ A novel technique to measure brain activity simultaneously from two people.

Virtual Reality : ↑ Computer technologies that use software to generate realistic images, sounds, and other sensations that replicate a real environment. This technique uses specialized display screens or projectors to simulate the user’s physical presence in this environment, enabling him or her to interact with the virtual space and any objects depicted there.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by grants from CONICYT/FONDECYT Regular (1170010), FONDAP 15150012, and the INECO Foundation.

[1] ↑ Ibanez, A., and Manes, F. 2012. Contextual social cognition and the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia. Neurology 78(17):1354–62. doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182518375

[2] ↑ Chun, M. M. 2000. Contextual cueing of visual attention. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4(5):170–8. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01476-5

[3] ↑ Barrett, L. F., Mesquita, B., and Gendron, M. 2011. Context in emotion perception. Curr. Direct Psychol. Sci. 20(5):286–90. doi:10.1177/0963721411422522

[4] ↑ Beck, D. M., and Kastner, S. 2005. Stimulus context modulates competition in human extrastriate cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 8(8):1110–6. doi:10.1038/nn1501

[5] ↑ Bar, M. 2004. Visual objects in context. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 5(8):617–29. doi:10.1038/nrn1476

[6] ↑ Baez, S., and Ibanez, A. 2014. The effects of context processing on social cognition impairments in adults with Asperger’s syndrome. Front. Neurosci. 8:270. doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00270

[7] ↑ Baez, S, Garcia, A. M., and Ibanez, A. 2016. The Social Context Network Model in psychiatric and neurological diseases. Curr. Top. Behav. Neurosci. 30:379–96. doi:10.1007/7854_2016_443

[8] ↑ Masayuki, H., Takashi, I., Mitsuru, K., Tomoya, K., Hirotoshi, H., Yuko, Y., and Minoru, A. 2014. Hyperscanning MEG for understanding mother-child cerebral interactions. Front Hum Neurosci 8:118. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00118

[9] ↑ Liu, N., Mok, C., Witt, E. E., Pradhan, A. H., Chen, J. E., and Reiss, A. L. 2016. NIRS-based hyperscanning reveals inter-brain neural synchronization during cooperative Jenga game with face-to-face communication. Front Hum Neurosci 10:82. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00082

[10] ↑ Makeig, S., Gramann, K., Jung, T.-P., Sejnowski, T. J., and Poizner, H. 2009. Linking brain, mind and behavior: The promise of mobile brain/body imaging (MoBI). Int J Psychophys 73:985–1000

[11] ↑ Evans, N., Lister, R., Antley, A., Dunn, G., and Slater, M. 2014. Height, social comparison, and paranoia: An immersive virtual reality experimental study. Psych Res 218(3):348–52. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2013.12.014

• Teaching Resources
• Upcoming Events
• On-demand Events

How Social Environments Shape Behavior

• facebook sharing
• email sharing

At a Glance

• Social Studies
• Culture & Identity

We live in a great moment in the history of social psychology, because we're discovering things every day about how our environments, our social environments, shape our behavior. And one thing you can do when you understand what's shaping your behavior is take control. Think about whether you really want to be shaped in those ways, and whether you can do something to stop yourself being pushed in directions you don't want to be pushed in.

So I think there's a huge amount to be learned by looking at modern social psychology. And one of the things about most of the great experiments about social psychology is actually they're designed by people with a great narrative imagination. They design these wonderful experiments, which make good stories.

One of my favorite is about students of the Princeton Theological Seminary. I believe this experiment was done by Danny Kahneman and some of his colleagues. And what they did was-- they had these students who were studying the story of the Good Samaritan, and they were preparing a sermon on it. And the path from where they were studying this to where they were going to give the sermon went by a derelict person lying in the doorway, looking as though he needed help.

A perfect Good Samaritan situation. Theological students. What happens? What predicts whether they'll stop? Turns out it's not whether they've been thinking about the Good Samaritan. What predicts whether they stop is whether you say to them before they leave, "You're late." If you tell them they're late, these theology students, these people who've been thinking about the Good Samaritan, don't do the Good Samaritan thing. And they go and give their sermon about the Good Samaritan, right?

If you tell them you're not in a hurry, then they stop, right? So they haven't, as it were-- it seems to me-- they haven't learned the moral lesson that they've been thinking deeply about and that they're professionally committed to. Well, once you know that whether you are going to do what you should for strangers can depend on something like whether you feel you're in a hurry, you can ask yourself the question when you see a stranger need of help, "Am I really in that much of a hurry?" And this sort of experiment shows you, teaches you, that sort of thing.

Here's a great experiment. You take two lots of people. One lot are standing outside a bakery with beautiful smells of croissants in the air. And the other lot are standing outside what in the literature is called a dry goods store. Something where there's no odors.

You go up to the people outside the bakery and you say, "I have a buck. I need some quarters to park my car." They give it to you. You go to people outside the dry goods store, they don't. And it's a huge difference. People are 10 times as likely to give it to you. The conclusion?

The thing that we think we should do, right? We all think that if you've got four quarters and a person needs four quarters, a decent person will give them the change. Whether you do the thing that you think, in theory, you ought to do just depends on whether you're in a good mood. If you're in a good mood, because you've got these pleasant smells in the air, you'll behave as you think you should.

And if you're in a normal mood, not a lousy mood, just a normal mood, you won't. I think that that experiment reminds us of our deep sensitivity to features of our environment that have nothing to do with what's morally important.

I don't want to be naive about the difficulty of taking these highly stylized results from carefully constructed experimental situations and applying them in the real world. Both for the reason that I've already said, which is that, as it were, if this is evidence about how we are, then knowing how we are doesn't stop us being that way. So we can't just change our natures because someone told us something about them. But also because the real world is extremely complicated. And the actual psychologies of actual people in actual circumstances of moral crisis are very complicated. And lots of things are going on. Not just one thing is going on.

So the genius of a great experiment is to abstract from the messy reality of our lives a sort of very abstractly characterized, simple situation, and study it. How you put the complexity back in? That's very, very hard. And I do not mean to think, to imply that it's easy, but I do think that we have to try.

How to Cite This Video

Facing History & Ourselves, “ How Social Environments Shape Behavior ,” video, last updated February 11, 2014.

You might also be interested in…

Discussing contemporary islamophobia in the classroom, pronouncing names, contracting for back to school, building connections with concentric circles, create a goal and discover your “why”, pre-war jewish life in north africa, responses to rising antisemitism and antisemitic legislation in north africa, the holocaust and north africa: resistance in the camps, contextualizing a found poem, confronting islamophobia, exploring islamophobic tropes, addressing islamophobia in the media, inspiration, insights, & ways to get involved.

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Speaking, writing and reading are integral to everyday life, where language is the primary tool for expression and communication. Studying how people use language – what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine – can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do.

Linguistics scholars seek to determine what is unique and universal about the language we use, how it is acquired and the ways it changes over time. They consider language as a cultural, social and psychological phenomenon.

“Understanding why and how languages differ tells about the range of what is human,” said Dan Jurafsky , the Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor in Humanities and chair of the Department of Linguistics in the School of Humanities and Sciences at Stanford . “Discovering what’s universal about languages can help us understand the core of our humanity.”

The stories below represent some of the ways linguists have investigated many aspects of language, including its semantics and syntax, phonetics and phonology, and its social, psychological and computational aspects.

Understanding stereotypes

Stanford linguists and psychologists study how language is interpreted by people. Even the slightest differences in language use can correspond with biased beliefs of the speakers, according to research.

One study showed that a relatively harmless sentence, such as “girls are as good as boys at math,” can subtly perpetuate sexist stereotypes. Because of the statement’s grammatical structure, it implies that being good at math is more common or natural for boys than girls, the researchers said.

Language can play a big role in how we and others perceive the world, and linguists work to discover what words and phrases can influence us, unknowingly.

How well-meaning statements can spread stereotypes unintentionally

New Stanford research shows that sentences that frame one gender as the standard for the other can unintentionally perpetuate biases.

Algorithms reveal changes in stereotypes

New Stanford research shows that, over the past century, linguistic changes in gender and ethnic stereotypes correlated with major social movements and demographic changes in the U.S. Census data.

Exploring what an interruption is in conversation

Stanford doctoral candidate Katherine Hilton found that people perceive interruptions in conversation differently, and those perceptions differ depending on the listener’s own conversational style as well as gender.

Cops speak less respectfully to black community members

Professors Jennifer Eberhardt and Dan Jurafsky, along with other Stanford researchers, detected racial disparities in police officers’ speech after analyzing more than 100 hours of body camera footage from Oakland Police.

How other languages inform our own

People speak roughly 7,000 languages worldwide. Although there is a lot in common among languages, each one is unique, both in its structure and in the way it reflects the culture of the people who speak it.

Jurafsky said it’s important to study languages other than our own and how they develop over time because it can help scholars understand what lies at the foundation of humans’ unique way of communicating with one another.

“All this research can help us discover what it means to be human,” Jurafsky said.

Stanford PhD student documents indigenous language of Papua New Guinea

Fifth-year PhD student Kate Lindsey recently returned to the United States after a year of documenting an obscure language indigenous to the South Pacific nation.

Students explore Esperanto across Europe

In a research project spanning eight countries, two Stanford students search for Esperanto, a constructed language, against the backdrop of European populism.

Chris Manning: How computers are learning to understand language​

A computer scientist discusses the evolution of computational linguistics and where it’s headed next.

Stanford research explores novel perspectives on the evolution of Spanish

Using digital tools and literature to explore the evolution of the Spanish language, Stanford researcher Cuauhtémoc García-García reveals a new historical perspective on linguistic changes in Latin America and Spain.

Language as a lens into behavior

Linguists analyze how certain speech patterns correspond to particular behaviors, including how language can impact people’s buying decisions or influence their social media use.

For example, in one research paper, a group of Stanford researchers examined the differences in how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online to better understand how a polarization of beliefs can occur on social media.

“We live in a very polarized time,” Jurafsky said. “Understanding what different groups of people say and why is the first step in determining how we can help bring people together.”

Analyzing the tweets of Republicans and Democrats

New research by Dora Demszky and colleagues examined how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online in an attempt to understand how polarization of beliefs occurs on social media.

Examining bilingual behavior of children at Texas preschool

A Stanford senior studied a group of bilingual children at a Spanish immersion preschool in Texas to understand how they distinguished between their two languages.

Predicting sales of online products from advertising language

Stanford linguist Dan Jurafsky and colleagues have found that products in Japan sell better if their advertising includes polite language and words that invoke cultural traditions or authority.

Language can help the elderly cope with the challenges of aging, says Stanford professor

By examining conversations of elderly Japanese women, linguist Yoshiko Matsumoto uncovers language techniques that help people move past traumatic events and regain a sense of normalcy.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

16 Behavioral Community Approaches

Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar; Vincent T. Francisco; and Leonard A. Jason

Chapter Sixteen Objectives

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Explain how large, complicated problems can be broken down into smaller solvable ones
• Identify the importance of studying and bringing about change in observable behaviors
• Understand how behavioral approaches have been used in Community Psychology

You may have heard of B. F. Skinner , who pioneered the use of behavioral approaches to show how rewards and punishments can change the behaviors of animals and people. This behavioral revolution has had a tremendous effect on psychology in terms of how therapy is now practiced in countries throughout the world. The old Freudian perspective has been replaced by a variety of behavioral-type therapies, used to help patients with a wide variety of common problems such as anxiety and depressive disorders. Most behavioral studies have been conducted in hospitals in inpatient settings or other types of institutions, with much less behavioral research occurring in community settings such as homes or neighborhoods (Hanley et al., 2003). When behavioral-type work is conducted in community settings and has the values from the field of Community Psychology (as reviewed in Chapter 1, Jason et al., 2019), it has been referred to as Behavioral Community Psychology .

As we will see in this chapter, the Behavioral Community Psychology approach allows for a more focused and targeted method to define and change a range of community and social problems. In a sense, this approach breaks down large and complex problems into smaller ones that are much more manageable to solve. By specifying and measuring specific behaviors, such as littering or tobacco use, behavioral community psychologists can chart those behaviors over time to determine whether or not a particular intervention is effective. We will show in this chapter how these types of practical and easy-to-implement interventions can lead to what are called small wins , which can be reinforcing and sustain the work of community psychologists over time. We can change the world through being extremely strategic and focused by breaking down large problems into smaller ones that are solvable.

Ok, let’s give an example of a problem that seemed very difficult to solve. If you can believe it, this problem involved uncollected dog droppings in Chicago. There was a time when nobody knew how to even approach this problem, let alone study or solve it. But as you will see, by collecting data and showing that there was a possible solution, change did occur for not only Chicago but also other urban areas in the US. The behavioral community psychology Case Study 16.1 was carried out at a time when there were no formal laws that required dog owners to pick up after their dogs.

Case Study 16.1 Getting the Scoop on Behavioral Interventions

Leonard Jason invited his Alderman in Chicago to his community psychology class, and Jason said to himself that he would tackle whatever the Alderman mentioned as the most pressing community issue. When informed that it was uncollected dog feces, Jason’s mouth fell open in disbelief, but he pledged to work on this issue. Jason’s team first counted all fresh dog feces within an eight by five block area surrounding DePaul University. The fact that 1,147 droppings were within this area suggested that dog litter was a serious and prevalent problem within this community. Next, the team for five hours daily recorded the number of dogs, the number who defecated, and the number of dog defecations picked up by their owners. In addition, all defecations were picked up and weighed each morning. During the baseline phase, few dog owners were observed to pick up after their dogs and over 19 pounds of dog defecations were deposited in the target block. When dog owners were given instructions and a demonstration concerning how to use a plastic bag to pick-up dog feces, 82% of the dog owners proceeded to pick up after their dogs.

These findings indicated that the prompting intervention, which applied instructions and modeling, effectively motivated dog owners to dispose of their dogs’ waste properly.

At the study’s end, the Chicago alderman asked Jason to present the above data at City Hall in order to support a proposed ordinance which would require dog owners to have in their possession a pooper scooper when walking dogs. This ordinance was passed by the City Council, making Chicago one of the first cities in the country to pass a pooper scooper ordinance. The alderman to whom Jason had originally provided the data mentioned to him that this study, which received considerable media exposure, had helped change the politicians’ perception of the problem. The Alderman wrote to Jason: “In the past, this problem has often been scoffed at and not taken seriously. Your comments regarding the dog defecation problem altered that perception greatly.” Chicago’s ordinance became a model for other similar ordinances in towns around the country (Jason, 2013).

Although the subject matter of this study is a bit hard to believe, it is a true story. It shows the usefulness of listening to the community for ideas about what is important, even if it sometimes involves getting one’s hands dirty in the process. In other words, the subject matter of the intervention was decided upon by the needs of the community, and this is a critical part of behavioral community interventions. Also, by focusing on one small area and collecting data on dogs and their owners, it was possible to show that change could occur. In fact, it was found through the behavioral intervention that dog owners were willing to pick up after their dogs. Most importantly, the findings were transmitted to the legislative process, and a new ordinance came into law that made a real difference to the community. By getting into the trenches, getting our hands dirty, and being willing to study dog litter, we were able to influence dog owners to pick up. Just think what else is possible to accomplish.

HISTORICAL ROOTS 

Some of the first developments of learning theory started in the 1890s when Ivan Pavlov demonstrated the importance of the environment on behavior. Pavlov wanted to measure the amount of salivation in dogs when they were given food, predicting that the dogs would begin to salivate in response to being fed. A researcher would bring food to the dogs whenever he walked into the lab. Pavlov noticed that after a while, the dogs began to salivate in response to hearing the researcher’s footsteps, meaning they began to associate the footsteps with being fed, which caused a behavioral response (e.g., salivation).

Pavlov (1897) examined this discovery further with a series of experiments , in which the dogs underwent numerous trials and were exposed to a sound that was immediately followed by food. Pavlov discovered that when he just made the sound that accompanied food, the dogs began to salivate even if the food was not presented. Through the systematic control of the environment (i.e., onset of a sound and delivery of food), the animals learned to associate the sound with the food that followed. This fundamental learning process is referred to as Classical Conditioning .

Later, B. F. Skinner further examined behavioral responses and developed Operant Conditioning through the use of small boxes that contained a lever that lab rats pressed to release food. In these experiments , a rat was placed in the box and then observed. At first, the rat scurried around and then accidentally pulled the lever that released the pellets of food. In successive trials, Skinner observed that the time in which it took the rat to release the pellets of food decreased each time it was placed in the box. The rat began to learn that pulling the lever resulted in the delivery of food. Skinner taught the rats to pull the lever by rewarding the behavior, which became the basis for Operant Conditioning . This theory builds upon the work of Pavlov in understanding the relationship between one’s environment and behavior. Skinner coined the term Behavioral Analysis (1953) to systematically demonstrate how the behavior of individuals and groups is influenced by the environment. His work led the way to understand how animal and human behavior changed through reinforcement and punishment.

These theories demonstrate the importance of the environment on shaping behavior. Environments have a powerful influence on individuals, and this work has provided insights for community psychologists as they try to understand larger and more complex ecological systems.

APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS

Behavioral community psychologists often use the term Applied Behavior Analysis to understand and explain human behavior as a function of the interaction between behavior and the environment. Applied Behavior Analysis is rooted in Learning Theory , which focuses on objectively observable behaviors and how learning occurs when individuals respond to environmental factors or stimuli. Positive reinforcement and punishment can be used to teach and sustain behavior and shape individual as well as community behavior.

Another term that is often used in the behavioral literature is Behavior Modification , which refers to the systematic application of learning principles and techniques to assess and change an individual’s behavior (Martin & Pear, 2015). Often the terms Behavior Modification and Applied Behavior Analysis are used interchangeably within the field of Behavioral Community Psychology. Below are some terms used frequently in this field:

Positive Reinforcement leads to increases in the chances that a behavior will continue to occur .  On the other hand, Punishment often leads to the reduction of the rate or likelihood of a behavior, which can result in the behavior being Extinguished .

Here is an example: Imagine that you see a person driving on the highway at a speed exceeding the local limit and the police give the person a speeding ticket. It is possible that this ticket (i.e., consequence) reduces the likelihood of future speeding behavior. So, the person’s behavior is changed by the consequences as they now drive at the speed limit.

Shaping of behavior involves establishing a complex set of behaviors using a set of steps. Teaching a child to cross a street involves teaching several behaviors connected in a certain order. This might look something like this: walk up to the corner, push the button to activate the crosswalk and traffic light, wait until you get the correct “walk” signal and the cars are stopped, and then quickly get across the street before the light changes.

Stimulus control highlights how characteristics of the environment might influence the occurrence of a behavior. To give an example of this principle, in Case Study 16.2 below, a group of Behavioral Community Psychology investigators examined the effects of altering traffic light pattern sequences on driver compliance at a busy, urban intersection in Chicago. In this case study, you will see that by making a small change to the traffic light pattern, car accidents were reduced.

Case Study 16.2 A Change in Lights: A Reduction in Car Accidents

This study began when a hazardous situation was observed with two sets of traffic lights that were separated by only about 100 feet. Drivers that were stopped at the first traffic light that was red, next saw this light turn green, and they began driving to the second traffic light which was in the process of turning from yellow to red. The drivers already had waited a long time for the first light to turn green, and were probably annoyed at facing another light that was going to delay them. As a consequence, more than half of the drivers sped right by the next light changing from yellow to red and this resulted in many accidents. Working with officials from the city of Chicago, the investigators then slightly altered light pattern sequences so that when the second set of traffic lights were approached, the lights were not changing from yellow to red. This small change resulted in almost all of the drivers not passing through a yellow or red light at the second traffic light. Following the completion of the study, the traffic engineer approved the permanent alteration of the light timing pattern that increased traffic rule compliance. Accident data collected before and after the light timing changes indicated a reduction in automobile accidents (Jason et al., 1985).

ADDITIONAL BEHAVIORAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Several additional important developments in the behavioral approach have occurred. For example, Albert Bandura (1986) discovered that behavior is also learned from the environment through the process of observation (see the video below for a brief history of Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment).

Bandura showed that it is possible to learn by just observing another person engaging in a particular behavior. So, a child might watch a parent use a fork to eat food, and then the child might engage in that behavior from just watching the parent engaging in the behavior. This work has helped scientists better understand how aggressive behavior can be learned by youth, and this can occur when youth observe violence being reinforced. In addition, Bandura helped us better understand the importance of the thoughts and feelings that intervene between the stimuli and responses. In a sense, we are active information processors , and therefore cognitive factors are also involved in learning.

A final development that has attracted considerable media attention is the emergence of the field of behavioral economics, which is derived from the fields of psychology and economics. In essence, we are susceptible to temptations and often make bad decisions even though there are better options. For example, it is not uncommon to eat high fat and high-calorie snacks rather than healthier foods, which has resulted in an obesity crisis in the US. Reed, Niileksela, and Kaplan (2013) suggest that this apparent irrationality can still be understood based on the principles of operant learning. Some risk-taking behaviors, such as unhealthy food choices, have more reinforcing value than less risk-taking behaviors such as healthy food choices. Often high fat and high-calorie foods are appealing and tasty, which reinforces continuing to eat them. Therefore, it is possible to understand responses such as these types of food choices (even though these foods can lead to obesity and other health complications) by the fact that these behaviors are being reinforced.  

CONTRIBUTIONS OF BEHAVIORAL COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY

Most applications of Applied Behavior Analysis and Behavior Modification have been within the medical model , such as working one on one with patients having severe developmental disabilities. However, Behavioral Community Psychology interventions have addressed issues such as littering (Clark et al., 1972); recycling (Zulas, 2009); illegal sales of cigarettes to minors (Jason et al., 1991); drug addiction (Silverman et al., 2008); bullying in schools (Embry, 2002); blood donations (Ferrari & Jason, 1990); and identifying and conducting behavioral analyses on concerns of community members (Arellano et al., 2016; Balcazar et al., 2009; Suarez-Balcazar & Balcazar, 2016). Many of these interventions have embraced Community Psychology values summarized by Fawcett (1991), and include:

1) Valuing collaborative relationships 2) Focusing on behavior-environment relationships of importance to communities 3) Conducting research focusing on modifiable and sustainable environmental events 4) Involving setting and research measures relevant to community concerns 5) Using measurement systems that capture the dynamic relationship between behavior and environment 6) Developing interventions owned by the community and sustainable with local resources 7) Providing interventions focused on maximizing impact and benefits to the community 8) Spreading effective interventions 9) Communicating effectively to the community stakeholders 10) Contributing to fundamental change.

These values have guided the work of behavioral community psychologists (Glenwick & Jason, 1980).

Below are case studies that provide several examples of Behavioral Community Psychology interventions. Case Study 16.3 shows how behavioral community psychologists collaborated with community-based organizations to influence legislative officials to support laws that contributed to second-order change , in this case protecting the safety of infants and children. Before child car restraints became law, thousands of children in the US were either injured or killed in car accidents. In fact, the leading cause of death for children under one year of age was car accidents due to not being protected in infant seats.

Case Study 16.3 A Behavioral Community Psychology Approach: Changing Laws and Saving Lives

A national coalition of behavioral community psychologists, that included Leonard Jason and Stephen Fawcett, was trying to influence legislators to pass legislation that would require infants and children to wear a seatbelt or to be placed in an appropriate car or infant seat while in cars. In Illinois, Jason and his colleagues worked with a community-based organization that was trying to pass needed child restraint legislation. Their hunch was that data gathered on behavioral and self-report information could be used to influence the debate about passing needed legislation. For months, they looked inside cars to see whether or not infants and children were placed in car restraints. They also used telephone surveys to collect information about the public’s attitude toward the child-restraint bill. The goal was to use both data collection on attitudes and firsthand observations to build a more convincing case when trying to influence policy officials. Although they were also working closely with an Illinois organization that was advocating for the passage of this bill, they were unsure if the data would persuade legislators. They sent the collected information to a randomly selected half of the Illinois state legislators prior to a vote on the child passenger restraint bill. In that letter, the senators were informed that 140 children in Illinois were killed and 25,828 injured in automobile accidents over the last six years in Illinois. The authors also pointed out that, through their observations, 93% of Illinois children were not placed in adequate restraints while riding in cars. They also provided the legislators with the results of the survey, in which 78% of adults supported the child passenger restraint bill. By sending this critical information to half of the legislators, they were able to see whether the targeted letter had made a difference in encouraging support for this important legislation. Significantly more senators (79%) who received the information voted for passage of the bill, whereas only 53% of senators who did not receive the letter voted for the bill. Their intervention was a success, and even the governor requested a copy of the findings before finally signing the legislation. With the passage of the legislation, for children between the ages of one to four, the use of appropriate car restraints increased from 13% to 42%. Rates of appropriate restraints increased from 49% to 74% for infants less than one year of age. Most importantly, children’s deaths caused by traffic accidents decreased by 53%. Comments made by members of the Illinois Child Passenger Safety Association included: “The data were very, very interesting. It was a building block in the passage of the bill.” “Those who had the data and understood them, it made them more forceful and vocal in support of the bill” (Jason & Rose, 1984).

For many social and community problems, working at the policy level can have more substantial and enduring results, as the car restraint case study illustrated. Psychologists often provide therapy to those who are injured in car accidents, but there are clear advantages to using our more preventive behavioral community psychology strategies to change laws that influence parents to appropriately protect their children while being driven in cars.

The next case study illustrates how the community researchers used principles of Applied Behavior Analysis to study a concrete behavior—compliance with traffic signs by drivers—and developed operational definitions of terms to observe the behavior in a community context. The authors worked with community residents to identify an issue of concern to them and their children with disabilities: traffic safety. As you will see, specific roles for the investigators included developing a strong reciprocal partnership with the community, identifying issues the community cared about, helping design a coding system to observe the behavior in context, and developing action steps to address the issue in collaboration with the community. The community in this example refers to Latino parents of youth and young adults with disabilities.

Case Study 16.4 Familias Saludables (Healthy Families)

Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar and her team, in collaboration with residents of a predominantly Latino neighborhood and staff from a local community agency, initially designed a healthy lifestyles program called Healthy Families (Familias Saludables) to address a concern identified by the community about a lack of culturally relevant healthy lifestyles programming for their families with developmental disabilities (Suarez-Balcazar et al., 2016; Suarez-Balcazar et al., 2018). Eight evidence-based sessions were then provided that focused on enhancing healthy routines at home and in the community, and addressed neighborhood issues that families cared about. During these sessions, many mothers reported cars in their neighborhood driving over the speed limit or failing to stop for crosswalks, leading them to worry for their children’s safety and their own. Furthermore, one of her collaborators (The Consortium to Lower Obesity in Chicago Children, n.d.) was at the time sponsoring a city-wide effort to collect walkability data across Chicago’s diverse neighborhoods and address walkability safety concerns. The lack of pedestrian traffic safety in program participants’ neighborhoods further made worse the numerous environmental barriers that youth and young adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities already faced to participating in their communities (e.g., over-stimulating sensory features, challenging physical layout). Utilizing Applied Behavior Analysis, the team designed a study in collaboration with their community partners to examine the behavior of traffic patterns in this neighborhood.

To assess the neighborhood’s walkability, data on traffic safety were collected based on direct observations. Independent researchers stood on street corners throughout the target area to observe and record traffic patterns including the number of cars failing to stop for the crosswalk, the smoothness of sidewalks, the speed of cars, and general street conditions. Data were collected at 25 intersections and focused on the behavior of car drivers on selected neighborhood streets, previously identified by community residents and agency staff as places/streets frequented by local families due to proximity to parks, schools, places of worship, and stores. Behaviors of interest that were recorded included drivers complying with street signs, drivers engaging in a complete stop whereby the car is not moving for a minimum of five seconds, and cars yielding to pedestrians.

They found that only one out of every three cars stopped at stop signs, and only half stopped before the crosswalk to allow pedestrians to pass. A pedestrian survey regarding walkability safety and engagement in the community found that participants walked to about six to nine places within the neighborhood weekly. Survey respondents also shared concerns about traffic safety. Consistent with a Behavioral Community Psychology approach, the data were utilized by the research team, the community residents, and staff from the local partner organization. As a result, over fifteen families participated in a community health walk to raise awareness of safe driving practices. The health walk was organized by a number of organizations and participating families who decided to use this walk as an opportunity to educate the community about walkability safety. Parents and children created signs in both English and Spanish with self-selected messages such as, “Do not text and drive” and “Maneja con cuidado” [drive carefully] to carry during the walk. Then together, the team and the families joined the health walk alongside other community residents to continue promoting pedestrian safety in their areas.

This case study nicely illustrates the core values of Behavioral Community Psychology. First, the target population was actively involved in all aspects of the intervention, including identifying the concerns and taking action. Second, increased fostering of the target population’s sense of personal control and empowerment was accomplished by families designing the signs to carry during the health walk and identifying the streets to be observed. Third, there was the use of objective and subjective assessments when evaluating outcomes, using an instrument developed by a local traffic safety expert group. Fourth, they saw an increased emphasis on antecedent events, and in this case, an important antecedent was the traffic signs posted at street corners indicating to drivers that the desired behavior is for them to stop. Finally, increased interdisciplinary collaboration occurred, as this project included a team of community psychologists, several graduate students from occupational therapy and nutrition, and one faculty member from public health.

Some might think that focusing on dog litter or traffic safety is just not important, given the other types of serious problems that we face. But behavioral community psychologists have tackled even larger issues, as the next case study demonstrates.

Case Study 16.5 The I-Files: A Community Movement for the Big Island

The project began during the first day of a two-day behavioral training workshop in Honolulu in the spring of 1997. The workshop was on the development of community coalitions for health improvement and was delivered at the request of the Chronic Disease Branch Chief of the State of Hawai’i Department of Public Health. In attendance were many employees of the health departments from Honolulu and several of the neighboring islands. Also present were health educators, public health nurses, epidemiologists, branch chiefs from several divisions, and the Directors of District Health Offices from Kauai and Hilo. By noon on the first day, one table was absolutely buzzing with excitement. At the table were six public health nurses, three health educators, and the district health officer. On the back of a napkin, they sketched an idea for a community health improvement initiative that would later be named I-Files. The idea was simple—for each of the six districts on the Big Island, they would develop teams of three people including someone specializing in community mobilization and action planning, another person specializing in grant writing, and another person who would be trained in behavioral evaluation. They would develop community partnerships to address the most pressing health issues in each district, and mobilize the people and financial resources needed to resolve the issues.

Many of the behavioral programs and efforts that began in 1997 continue to this day. Some of the major behavioral accomplishments include: the development of a drug and alcohol-free surf competition for area teens; a community leadership development program where the fire department trained teens in firefighting, community service, and leadership skills; a community coalition comprised of businesses, professional fishermen, and community members in Kona to minimize destructive fishing practices near the area’s reefs. Further accomplishments were a community coalition to support the continued success of the Ka’u Hospital to promote community health improvement and build the capacity of residents to prevent health outcomes such as diabetes, the development of a neighborhood watch and diabetes self-management program by public health nurses, and a community policing program. To learn more about these outcomes, see the Prezi presentation .

In this case study, community members and employees of the District Health Offices were involved in a project that led to breakthrough approaches in community health improvement. By empowering the community health workers to respond to what they were learning from community members, more responsive programming was developed to meet real-world needs as they emerged in communities. By creating coalitions that represented multiple sectors in communities, programs and policies were developed that affected behavioral changes to reach more people, resulting in improvements in a variety of valued life outcomes. The new and modified programs, policies, and practices developed by and with community members represented a variety of behavior change strategies. By involving both the community members and the public health workforce, programs and policies were more relevant and had a long term positive influence. As this case example indicates, Behavioral Community Psychology investigators can make a difference using their innovative methods with a wide variety of community issues.

OTHER ISSUES TO CONSIDER

Clearly, the behavior of individuals and groups takes place in complex environments across a variety of settings including families, homes, schools, neighborhoods, community agencies, places of worship, and work settings. These behaviors can be complex as they are in constant interaction with and impacted by the environment (Kelly, 1968).

Behavioral community interventions do not operate in a vacuum but rather compete with other competing messages, which can affect and influence the effectiveness of the interventions. As mentioned in Chapter 1, for many years smoking prevention interventions were implemented in schools, and yet children reported that they were almost always sold cigarettes by store vendors. The fact that youth were sold these dangerous substances did have a negative effect on school smoking prevention programs, for there were youth who wondered how dangerous cigarettes could be if they were sold cigarettes by adults. Therefore, additional behavioral interventions were needed to reduce youth access to retail sources of tobacco. As another example, commercials on the media constantly advertise the benefits of food that have high levels of sugar and fat, and these media influences will also need to be addressed by those working on childhood obesity behavioral programs.

Some feel there are no generalizable laws of behavior that can be used to understand something as complex as a community, which has complicated layers of ecological influences operating at the individual, group, organizational, and societal levels. In other words, an intervention that might work in one setting might not be effective in a different place, so they feel that behaviorists who believe in universal laws of behavior are overly simplistic. We have an answer to this concern. We believe that the principles of learning reviewed in this chapter are operating in community settings, but there might be important differences in how they are implemented in different settings (Jason et al., 2016). As an example, a behavioral school-based program that has been shown to work well in environments that have adequate staff and resources might have very different outcomes when located in an environment where there are inadequate resources and other multiple problems due to gangs and violence. What is important to remember is that an excellent intervention in one setting might not work well when it is implemented in another that is less supportive and reinforcing. Also, an intervention for one age group might not work for another age group, as indicated below in Case Study 16.6.

Case Study 16.6 Prevention of Prejudice

Behavioral Community psychologists attempted to impact inter-ethnic relations of elementary school age children by implementing a peer tutoring program. These youth were shown how to tutor their classmates. Direct observations of social interactions on the playground and sociometric indices of interpersonal ratings were used to measure inter-ethnic associations before and after the eight-week program. For first-graders, inter-ethnic interactions and sociometric choices increased and improvements were found in arithmetic and reading grades. However, no significant changes were found among the third-grade program children. The first-grade children carried the benefits of the peer tutoring program from the classroom to the playground. First-grade youngsters quickly developed cohesive, interdependent groups and some continued to use their group name from the study on the playground eight months following the program’s end. The findings suggest the importance of fostering cooperation and addressing prejudice early on, as indicated by the lack of significant changes for third-graders in their ratings of fellow children of different ethnic backgrounds. These findings further suggest that a behavioral cooperative peer tutoring classroom structure may improve the inter-ethnic relationships of first-grade children, who have experienced only a short history of competitive academic exercises and whose overt ethnic prejudice may be less ingrained (Rooney-Rebeck & Jason, 1986).

It is by attending to the unique history, age, and resources available in these school settings that we might be better able to understand these types of different outcomes. Basic behavioral principles are operating throughout these settings, and our task is to better identify and understand these complex environmental factors.

Some have also been concerned about the language and terms used by behavioral psychologists, who often used words such as “controlling behavior” (Mattaini et al., 2016). While dictators of certain countries are “controlling” of their citizens, it is understandable that some might be concerned with the terms sometimes used by behaviorists. But these phrases do not capture the rich collaborations that occur in behavioral community interventions, when researchers work closely with community members in both defining the goals of interventions and actively participating in bringing about changes (Glenwick & Jason, 1980). As shown by the case studies above, behavioral community psychologists are able to gain “control” of key aspects of the environment, but it is through a collaborative, mutually agreed upon process with key members of the community (Bogat & Jason, 2000).

Behavioral Health Changes and COVID-19

The Coronavirus pandemic has been an unprecedented event requiring a wide-spread change in behavioral and social norms.  There are many roles for Community Psychologists such as encouraging communities on getting vaccinated, wearing face masks, and social distancing. The intention is for these solutions to be easily sustained by community members. For example, by using modeling and building trust with communities, Community Psychologists could achieve the implementation of widespread behavior changes.

The leaders of Australia uniting as one team guided by health experts successfully modeled cooperative and prosocial health behaviors. With a reported 27,912 cases and 908 deaths as of December 1st, 2020, the country’s COVID-19 response offers valuable insights into managing the pandemic (Child, 2020). A major theme that emerged from conversations with those who shaped Australia’s action and policy decisions was that of building trust with citizens and modeling wearing a mask and social distance. Most Australian’s adhered to quarantining, rapid testing, and wearing a mask. Notably, this cooperation was fostered by a display of collaboration among Australian politicians and the federal government. These decision-makers worked intentionally to show unity when discussing pertinent COVID-19 information, emphasizing the idea of one truth. This behavior modeled to Australian citizens that their part in the pandemic was greater than individual interests and instead prioritizes protecting the country as a whole.

In this chapter, the principles of Applied Behavior Analysis were utilized in the Behavioral Community Psychology case studies to illustrate how to promote real community change in a variety of settings. Behavioral community psychologists focus on the complex relationship between individual/group behavior and the environment. By attending to the relationship between behavior and the environment, whereby each impacts the other, it is possible to bring about important change.

As we end this chapter on Behavioral Community Psychology, it is useful to point out that many of our social and community problems, such as substance abuse, school failure, and juvenile delinquency, share many developmental roots such as poverty and lack of resources. Coordinating our behavioral community interventions so that they uncover common environmental causes, and take them into consideration as we implement change, will ultimately increase the enduring impact of this work.

Critical Thought Questions

• Discuss what you think are some of the benefits and limitations of using Applied Behavior Analysis principles to study problems of interest to Community Psychology.
• Many community psychologists do research in schools. What do you think about the practice of some school teachers across the country using different types of tangible positive reinforcers (e.g., stickers, candy) to promote compliance and “good classroom behavior?” Justify your response.
• Imagine that you are living in a tenant building with an active renters’ association and you were elected president of the association for a one-year term. You noticed a problem with residents’ lack of awareness about the need to recycle. Although the recycling bins are provided and street collection is scheduled once per week, hardly anyone is taking the recycling bins out. Most tenants are young college students who are likely to produce recycling items (cans, paper, plastic). You want to start a recycling campaign and assess its effectiveness. Based on the principles learned in this chapter, identify components of the campaign and how you would get residents to recycle. Identify how you would assess if the campaign is effective. What would you measure as the unit of behavior for which you can take baseline measures?

Take the Chapter 16 Quiz

View the Chapter 16 Lecture Slides

____________________________________________________________________

Arellano, R., Balcazar, F. E., Alvarado, F., & Suarez, S. (2016). A participatory action research and intervention in a rural community of Mexico concerns report method/Titulo en Español.  Universitas Psychologica ,  15 (2), 15.

Balcazar, F., Garcia-Iriarte, E., & Suarez-Balcazar, Y. (2009). Participatory action research with Colombian immigrants. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences , 31 (1), 112-127.

Bandura, A. (1986).  Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Bogat, G. A., & Jason, L. A. (2000). Toward an integration of behaviorism and community psychology. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of Community Psychology , (pp. 101-114). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Child, J., Dillon, R., Erasmus, E., & Johnson, J. (2020, December 15). Collaboration in crisis: Reflecting on Australia’s COVID-19 response. Retrieved December 17, 2020, from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/collaboration-in-crisis-reflecting-on-australias-covid-19-response

Clark, R. N., Burgess, R. L., & Hendee, J. C. (1972). The development of anti-litter behavior in a forest campground. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 5 (1), 1-5.

Consortium to Lower Obesity in Chicago Children [CLOCC]. (n.d.). Neighborhood walkability  initiative. http://www.clocc.net/our-focus-areas/physical-activity-and-built-environment/neighborhood-walkability-initiative/

Embry, D. D. (2002). The good behavior game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 5 (4), 273-297.

Fawcett, S. (1991). Some values guiding community research and action.  Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis ,  24 (4), 621-636.

Ferrari, J., & Jason, L. A. (1990). Incentives in blood-donor recruitment – response. Evaluation & the Health Professions , 13 (3), 374-377.

Glenwick, D., & Jason, L. A. (1980). Behavioral community psychology: Progress and prospects . Praeger.

Hanley, G., Iwata, B., & McCord, B. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 36 (2), 147–185.

Jason, L. A. (2013).  Principles of social change . Oxford University Press.

Jason, L. A., Glantsman, O., O’Brien, J. F., & Ramian, K. N. (2019). Introduction to the field of Community Psychology. In L. A. Jason, O. Glantsman, J. F. O’Brien, & K. N. Ramian (Eds.), Introduction to Community Psychology: Becoming an agent of change. https://press.rebus.community/introductiontocommunitypsychology/chapter/intro-to-community-psychology/

Jason, L. A., Ji, P., Anes, M., & Birkhead, S. H. (1991). Active enforcement of cigarette control laws in the prevention of cigarette sales to minors. The Journal of the American Medical Association , 266 (22), 3159-61.

Jason, L. A., Neal, A. M., & Marinakis, G. (1985). Altering contingencies to facilitate compliance with traffic light systems . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 18 , 95-100.

Jason, L. A., & Rose, T. (1984). Influencing the passage of child passenger restraint legislation.  American Journal of Community Psychology , 12 , 485-495.

Jason, L. A., Stevens, E., Ram, D., Miller, S. A., Beasley, C. R., & Gleason, K. (2016). Theories in the field of community psychology. Global Journal of Community Psychology Practice , 7 (2), 1-27. https://www.gjcpp.org/en/article.php?issue=22&article=125

Kelly, J.G. (1968). Towards an ecological conception of preventive interventions. In J.W. Carter (Ed.) Research contributions from psychology to community mental health . (pp. 76-97). Behavioral Publications.

Martin, G., & Pear, J. (2015). Behavior modification: What it is and how to do it (10th ed.). Routledge.

Mattaini, M. A., Jason, L. A., & Glenwick, D. S. (2016). Behavioral and time-series approaches. In L. A. Jason & D. S. Glenwick (Eds.), Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods . (pp. 177-186). Oxford University Press.

Pavlov, I. P. (1897). The work of the digestive glands. Griffin.

Reed, D. D., Niileksela, C. R., & Kaplan, B. A. (2013). Behavioral economics: a tutorial for behavior analysts in practice.  Behavior Analysis in Practice ,  6 (1), 34–54.

Rooney-Rebeck, P., & Jason, L. A. (1986). Prevention of prejudice in elementary school students.  The Journal of Primary Prevention , 7 (2), 63-73.

Silverman, K., Roll, J. M., & Higgins, S. T. (2008). Introduction to the special issue on the behavior analysis and treatment of drug addiction.  Journal of Applied Behavior  Analysis ,  41 (4), 471-480.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior . The Macmillan Company.

Suarez-Balcazar, Y., & Balcazar, F. (2016). Functional analysis of community concerns in participatory action research. In L. A. Jason & D. Glenwick (Eds.), Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research, (pp. 315-324). Oxford University Press.

Suarez-Balcazar, Y., Hoisington, M., Orozco, A. A., Arias, D., Garcia, C., Smith, K., & Bonner, B. (2016). Benefits of a culturally tailored health promotion program for Latino youth with disabilities and their families. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 7005180080.

Suarez-Balcazar, Y., Early, A., Maldonado, A., Arias, D., Garcia, C., Zeidman, A., & Agudelo-Orozco, A. (2018). Community-based participatory research to promote healthy lifestyles among Latino immigrant families with youth with disabilities. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 25 (5):396-406. doi: 10.1080/11038128.2018.

Zulas, A. L. (2009). Environmental change: The application of three theories of behavior change  on recycling behavior and ecological values. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (ID: 1954848701).

Acknowledgments: We wish to thank Jamie Archibong for helping to write the section on Behavioral Health Changes and COVID-19.

An American psychologist known for his influential work in behavioral psychology.

The application of the principles of behavioral science to applied problems in community settings.

Progress that occurs when breaking down a goal into manageable parts.

Refers to a procedure of learning in which a stimulus (e.g., food) is paired with a previously neutral stimulus (e.g., a bell) to shape behavior.

A method of learning where an individual makes an association between a specific behavior and a consequence.

A science of behavior focusing on the relationship between behavior and its consequences, resulting in a greater understanding of the principles of behavior that are observable and replicable.

The application of principles of behavioral science to applied problems.

A method of learning that occurs when individuals respond to environmental factors or stimuli.

A technique used to change the frequency or duration of a behavior.

When something rewarding happens after the onset of a behavior.

A consequence associated with a behavior or group of behaviors that decreases the rate or likelihood of the behavior in the future.

Decreasing undesirable behaviors by stopping the delivery of reinforcers that follow the behavior.

A complex set of procedures that results in a change in topography, or the sequence, of behaviors.

The process in which the rules (antecedents) in an environment become associated with consequences, and then make a behavior or group of behaviors more or less likely to happen in the future.

In psychology, the medical model involves a therapist delivering one-on-one psychotherapy to patients. In medicine, it involves physicians providing treatments for one patient at a time.

Those who have something to gain or lose from a study.

Involves initiating more structural, long term, and sustainable transformational changes.

A group of individuals that share a characteristic which is the focus of scientific research.

The process of gaining power emerging at the individual, organizational, community, and societal levels, which are affected by peoples' previous experiences, skills, actions, and context.

Anything preceding a behavior that signals the likelihood of a consequence if the behavior is performed.

Scientists from multiple disciplines work together to try to understand complex social and community problems.

A set of organizations, institutions and community agents that cooperate to improve the living conditions of the community.

Achievement of the results intended by the intervention (it is an indicator that the intervention works properly).

Introduction to Community Psychology Copyright © 2019 by Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar; Vincent T. Francisco; and Leonard A. Jason is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

This page has been archived and is no longer being updated regularly.

Culture and the Self

July 26, 2016

Social scientists have long understood that people in different parts of the world see themselves in different ways, but research has often been driven by a rather black-and-white — and some would say stereotypical — view of what the differences are.

In an article just published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , Vignoles and colleagues (2016) (PDF, 209KB) introduce a new perspective on cultural differences in self-construal. Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (UK), and conducted by members of the Culture and Identity Research Network among more than 10,000 members of diverse cultural groups spanning all inhabited continents, their research explodes the common myth of a "West-versus-the-Rest" divide in self-perceptions.

For several decades, psychological scientists have commonly assumed that Western cultures foster seeing oneself as independent from others, whereas the rest of the world's cultures foster seeing oneself as interdependent with others. Critics have argued that this view of cultural diversity is too simplistic, but it has remained a dominant assumption in the field — and researchers often explain unsupportive findings away as methodological failures rather than question it.

The new research paints a much richer picture of diversity in cultural models of selfhood. It shows that Western cultures tend to emphasize certain ways of being independent (e.g., being different from others, self-directed, and self-expressive), but not others (e.g., being self-interested, self-reliant, and consistent across contexts).

Viewed in global context, Western cultures are not "exceptional" but they form part of the broad kaleidoscope of global variation. Nor is cultural individualism linked straightforwardly to independent self-perceptions, as has been commonly presumed.  Different ways of seeing oneself as both independent and interdependent were emphasized in different parts of the world, and this was partly explained by socioeconomic development and religious heritage of the cultural groups studied.

The findings will be important to practitioners and researchers interested in cultural diversity. They open up new research possibilities that will help researchers better understand how psychological processes vary across the world.

A richer understanding of cultural variation, based firmly on empirical research rather than stereotypes, could help practitioners intervene more effectively with members of diverse cultural communities.

• Vignoles, V. L., Owe, E., Becker, M., Smith, P. B., Easterbrook, M. J., Brown, R.,…Bond, M. H. (2016). Beyond the 'east–west' dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145 (8), 966–1000. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000175

Note: This article is in the Basic / Experimental Psychology topic area. View more articles in the Basic / Experimental Psychology topic area.

APA Journals Article Spotlight ®

APA Journals Article Spotlight is a free summary of recently published articles in an APA Journal .

Browse Article Spotlight topics

• Basic/Experimental Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Core of Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology, School Psychology, and Training
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology and Medicine
• Industrial/Organizational Psychology and Management
• Neuroscience and Cognition
• Social Psychology and Social Processes

Contact APA Publications

Written by Terence Hockett • March 3, 2022 • 5:34 am • Community

How Does One’s Community Affect and Influence Their Personality?

Email address:

• Community 4
• Community Service 2
• Project News 5

Advertisement

Recent Posts

• How Does Flooring Affect Home Resale Value? (Revealed)
• How to Relieve Back Pain with Chiropractic Care
• How to Install a New Faucet Easily and Quickly
• Streamlining Mission Logistics with Travel Specialists
• Luxurious Retreats: Villas in Tuscany’s Heart
• Privacy Policy

Trending Posts

• Expert Panel
• Advisory Council
• GET INVOLVED

Search our Knowledge Base

The Impact of Community on Your Child’s Growth and Development

We’ve all heard “it takes a village to raise a child,” and any parent who has scrambled to find a babysitter or been late to school pick-up knows how true that is. But, what can be less obvious is how to build that village, maintain it over time, and add to it as your family’s needs evolve. Surrounding children with community—from social peers to caring adults—has countless benefits, including helping your child’s development and emotional regulation.

What Families Gain from Community Membership

Their nuclear family is a child’s first community, but just as you need other relationships to thrive, so do your kids. This includes same-aged peers and friends, but importantly, it also means other non-parental adults who can impact your child’s upbringing such as teachers or coaches, religious leaders, extended family, and trusted friends. Dr. Dan Siegel Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the UCLA School of Medicine and a member of the Center for Children and Youth’s expert panel emphasizes the value children gain from having multiple adult attachments in his work. The more supportive communities children are a part of, the more aware they become of our interconnected world. These integrated relationships lead to more communication between the different areas of the brain which builds a child’s ability to self-regulate their emotions, mood, empathy, behavior, and more.

Building community and entrusting your child to the care of other adults is also good for you; when you feel the burden of parenthood, you can turn to others for advice, for help, and for guidance in raising your child and shaping who they will become.

Creating Connection with Others

While the challenges of the pandemic were many, interpersonal connection took an especially hard hit. Young children have missed out on formative years of social skill-building, and many adolescents have gotten too comfortable with being alone and less comfortable with peers. The good news is that it is not too late for your child to form the interpersonal connections that can have a positive impact on their health, development, and sense of self within the greater community.

Parents can support their child’s development, identify formation, and build community by signing them up for activities, participating in school events, or spending time with other families. Encouraging tweens and teens to balance their free time with joining groups with like-minded peers will help develop a healthy community-based focus and sense of self.

How We Can Help

As a division of Jewish Family and Children’s Services, the work of CCY focuses on creating welcoming communities as a key Jewish value. Through CCY, you’ll find programs for your family at every stage, from the moment you welcome your first child until you send your youngest off to college.

Community is critically important for new parents, who often feel isolated. Our Jewish Baby Network (JBN) program serves expectant parents and families with children ages 0 – 36 months throughout the Bay Area. By offering opportunities for connection, family events, and helpful resources, JBN encourages its participants to get to know each other and to lean on each other through the joys and challenges of early parenthood and beyond. All are welcome, including those unaffiliated, single and multi-parent, multi-faith, multi-ethnic, multi-abled, and LGBTQ+ families.

CCY also offers ongoing baby play groups where parents can ask questions and spend quality time with their child to promote their growth and development during their first year of life.

Your child’s school is another space where you can build community . By focusing on social-emotional learning as well as an academic curriculum, schools reinforce qualities such as resilience, kindness, and empathy.

The tween and teen years are also a critical time for forming integrated relationships, especially if children missed out on such connections when they were younger. During adolescence, the brain is reorganizing itself and teens start to identify their personal values, so there is a big opportunity for growth. Especially in the teen years, youth benefit from being part of non-school based affinity groups, and having adult role models in their lives, including youth workers, coaches, teachers, and others who support their skill development and provide positive reinforcement.

CCY’s YouthFirst is a community of teens and pre-teens from across the Bay Area who come together to discuss important questions and build the skills they need as they move into young adulthood. Programs include leadership skills development, internships, career exploration, and Jewish service-learning.

It’s important to put in the work to find and maintain your village. Not only will you benefit from having others to rely on but being exposed to diverse communities and forming attachments with other adults will allow your children to develop into well-rounded, empathic people.

As always, we’re here to help you in every way we can.

February 08, 2022

Next Article

Previous Article

Related Content

The parenting playbook: how to be a coach, not a critic, breaking new ground: ccy’s space program leads the way in treating childhood anxiety, it’s summer — so why is my child so anxious, connect with a parent coach today.

• Public Health
• Environmental Health

Factors that influence individual and community behavioural change regarding environmental health

• August 2022
• Journal of Health Research 37(1):33-43
• 37(1):33-43

• National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR)
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Edwin Liheluka

• J CLIN EPIDEMIOL

• Patrick M. Bossuyt
• David Moher
• COMPUT HUM BEHAV

• Hamideh Mihanpour

• Kate E. Storey

• Elad Yom-Tov

• Florencia Luna

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Community Violence and Youth: Affect, Behavior, Substance Use, and Academics

Michele cooley-strickland.

1 Department of Mental Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD USA

2 Center for Culture and Health, Department of Psychiatry, NPI-Semel Institute for Neuroscience, University of California—Los Angeles, 760 Westwood Plaza, Box 62, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1759 USA

Tanya J. Quille

Robert s. griffin, elizabeth a. stuart, catherine p. bradshaw, debra furr-holden.

Community violence is recognized as a major public health problem (WHO, World Report on Violence and Health, 2002 ) that Americans increasingly understand has adverse implications beyond inner-cities. However, the majority of research on chronic community violence exposure focuses on ethnic minority, impoverished, and/or crime-ridden communities while treatment and prevention focuses on the perpetrators of the violence, not on the youth who are its direct or indirect victims . School-based treatment and preventive interventions are needed for children at elevated risk for exposure to community violence. In preparation, a longitudinal, community epidemiological study, The Multiple Opportunities to Reach Excellence (MORE) Project , is being fielded to address some of the methodological weaknesses presented in previous studies. This study was designed to better understand the impact of children’s chronic exposure to community violence on their emotional, behavioral, substance use, and academic functioning with an overarching goal to identify malleable risk and protective factors which can be targeted in preventive and intervention programs. This paper describes the MORE Project, its conceptual underpinnings, goals, and methodology, as well as implications for treatment and preventive interventions and future research.

Prospective longitudinal studies involving large epidemiological samples of children exposed to varying levels of community violence are needed to further understand the complex risk and protective factors associated with living in violent neighborhoods. Few exist. This paper describes one such study currently underway, its conceptual underpinnings, goals, and methodology, as well as implications for treatment and preventive interventions and future research. The purpose is to explicate the foundation for such a body of work, its challenges, and motivate future research and clinical intervention on the effects of chronic community violence on youth. The fielding title of this longitudinal, community epidemiological study is the Multiple Opportunities to Reach Excellence (MORE) Project . It is one attempt to address methodological weaknesses of cross-sectional and other less rigorous study designs to better understand the impact of children’s exposure to community violence on their emotional, behavioral, substance use, and academic functioning. An overarching goal of the study is to identify malleable risk and protective factors that can be targeted through later preventive and intervention programs.

Community violence is recognized as a major public health problem (World Health Organization 2002 ) that Americans increasingly understand has adverse implications beyond inner-cities. However, the majority of research on chronic community violence focuses on those most directly impacted: ethnic minority, impoverished, and crime-ridden communities. Much of the extant research, treatment, and preventive interventions focus on the perpetrators of the violence, not on the youth who are its direct or indirect victims . The public health impact of living in violent communities is significant, particularly for children. Among the emotional, behavioral and academic achievement correlates are anxiety, depression, disruptive and aggressive behavior, substance use, school disengagement, and academic failure (Cooley-Quille et al. 2001 ; Gorman-Smith and Tolan 1998 ; Hutcheson 1998 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ; Lorion et al. 1999 ; Osofsky et al. 1993 ; Pynoos et al. 1987 ; Schwab-Stone et al. 1999 ; Singer et al. 1995 ) which may have profound effects on children’s development from early childhood into adolescence and beyond.

School-based treatment and preventive interventions are needed for children at elevated risk for exposure to community violence among those whose exposure impairs their ability to function developmentally appropriately and achieve academic success. Although there have been significant advancements in community violence research in the past decade, many methodological shortcomings pervade (e.g., psychometrically unsupported instruments, convenience samples, retrospective reports). Thus, the generalizability of the results and applicability of the conclusions are minimized (Schubiner et al. 1993 ; Shakoor and Chalmers 1991 ; Schwab-Stone et al. 1999 ). Research in this area has been largely cross-sectional, with few studies examining the longitudinal and developmental effects of exposure to violence over time (DuRant et al. 1994 ). This limits the ability to determine causality and identify variables that may mediate the association between community violence exposure and adjustment (Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ). Furthermore, much of the extant research has focused on small or highly selected samples (e.g., juvenile delinquents, high-risk males), used nonstandardized or noncomparable measures of community violence, and lacked a solid theoretical foundation.

Gorman-Smith and Tolan ( 1998 ) recommended that the impact of violence exposure is investigated among youth residing in different neighborhoods and communities. The MORE Project was designed to determine the prevalence of total community violence exposure among children at varying levels of risk for exposure. It compares several neighborhood strata within the same city that represent different levels (low, moderate, and high) of violent crime and associated risk for exposure to chronic community violence. It includes different modes of exposure to community violence (i.e., media, reported, witnessed, victim, and war/terrorism), as well as violence perpetration, and interparental conflict. Significant features of this study are its prospective longitudinal (three annual waves) design; child, parent/guardian, and teacher interviews; and focus on youth at-risk for varying levels of exposure to community violence. Measurement methods permit the investigation of a proposed conceptual model of the emotional, behavioral, substance use, and academic effects of community violence exposure on youth. Additionally, the selected setting for this project is significant because of the wide range in rates of neighborhood crimes which are known to be associated with children’s exposure to community violence (Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ).

Violence in Baltimore City

Baltimore, Maryland is an optimal city in which to study the epidemic of community violence and its impact on children and families. At the community level, some Baltimore neighborhoods have maintained extremely low crime rates whereas others have chronically high rates making it an ideal setting for a community epidemiological study of exposure to community violence. In 2006, there were 276 homicides and 10,816 violent crimes in this city of over 600,000 residents (Federal Bureau of Investigation 2006a ). This reflects a significant decrease from the record-high of over 350 homicides 15 years ago (Dao 2005 ), consistent with a national trend in reduced rates (Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 2002 ). However, the homicide rate in Baltimore remains nearly seven times the national rate, six times the rate of New York City, and three times the rate of Los Angeles (FBI 2006b ). Although crime in Baltimore is considered severe, police officials have highlighted that most violent crimes, particularly homicides, are committed by people who know their victims and who are often associated with drug-trafficking (FBI 2006b ). For example, Baltimore has more heroin addicts and heroin-related crime than any other city in America (Drug Enforcement Administration 2008 ). This, however, is little consolation to children who reside within and visit the neighborhoods in which the violence occurs.

Community Violence

Over 80% of children living in urban areas have witnessed community violence; as many of 70% of them report being victims of this violence (Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ; Gladstein et al. 1992 ; Kliewer et al. 1998 ). Culture plays a role in the level of community violence to which youth are exposed (Cooley et al. 1995 ). Although a national phenomenon, violence is particularly acute in urban neighborhoods (e.g., Gladstein et al. 1992 ; Richters and Martinez 1993 ). Community violence is defined as deliberate acts intended to cause physical harm against a person or persons in the community (Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ). Although the direct victims are obvious, its indirect victims are far more numerous. They are affected because they are: bystanders, witnesses or familiar with victims, or are cognizant of or anxious about the potential for violence (Horn and Trickett 1998 ; Lorion 1998 ). Chronic community violence is widespread among settings or social groups; its consequences impact significant portions of the community over a substantial period of time (Lorion 1998 ). Youth living in inner-cities are exposed to more violence than those living in middle- to upper-SES neighborhoods (Gladstein et al. 1992 ). Youth living in areas with the highest crime rates report the most violence exposure; they are also in the city’s poorest neighborhoods (Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ). Although higher crime rates increase the likelihood of direct exposure to community violence, exposure occurs through various modalities (media, witness, hearsay, victimization, war/terrorism) and extends beyond urban centers.

Community violence affects all racial and ethnic groups (Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ); however, ethnic minority—especially African American—children are disproportionately affected (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1991 ; Christofel 1990 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ; Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ). This increased exposure may be a function of socio-economic status and community variation given that ethnic minorities are over represented in urban areas (Attar and Guerra 1994 ; Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ; Rosenberg et al. 1992 ). Nationally, African American residents in inner-cities experience a higher rate of violent crime than urban Caucasians. African Americans are also victims of violence at rates higher than Caucasians (i.e., 99 per 1,000 vs. 61 per 1,000, respectively; Smith et al. 1999 ). Among a nationally representative sample of adolescents, 57% of the African American children had witnessed violence compared to 50% of the Latinos and 34% of the Caucasians (Crouch et al. 2000 ). African American youth’s exposure to violence (witness, victim) did not decrease with higher family incomes, as it did for Caucasians (Crouch et al. 2000 ). Given their disproportionate exposure, African Americans should be directly studied when investigating community violence. Important to examine is whether higher socioeconomic status protects African Americans against exposure; currently, the literature is mixed.

There are several types of community violence. The form that has been researched the longest is media violence. The form of exposure to community violence that has received the most recent attention in the United States is war/terrorism or “world” violence. The media coverage of the official Iraq war provided American families—including children—the experience of war in real time. They were likely the first generation of American children to experience war so intimately. Researchers have suggested that there is a dosage effect regarding children’s exposure to violence in the media; the more exposure through television, the more post-traumatic stress symptoms they experience (Pfefferbaum et al. 2001 ). Moreover, television violence may serve to sustain those anxiety symptoms (Pfefferbaum et al. 2001 ). Children may be affected by war or terrorism not only through the media, but also by disruptions or changes in their regular routines at school and in other activities (Stuber et al. 2002 ). Additionally, knowing or seeing an adult who has been upset or affected about an attack may affect children (Stuber et al. 2002 ), such as relatives in active military duty or recently discharged. The question remains: What is the impact of war/terrorism on the emotional, behavioral, and academic functioning of American children? Shaw ( 2003 ) conducted a review of potential outcomes on children not just in the United States, but also the world. This question is difficult to answer for American youth, as there are likely cohort effects. For example, following the terrorist attacks in 2001 against the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, DC, American children of varying ages were widely exposed to “world” violence, followed by the anthrax attacks through the US postal system, and later initiation of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. These events exposed American youth to world violence not only through the media (e.g., news reports), but also through hearsay from military personnel (e.g., friends, relatives). Over the past half decade or more, American youth’s exposure to “real” (versus fictitious film, television, and videogame) world violence has become less salient, despite ongoing military operations in the Middle East and worldwide.

A review of ten studies (over 5,000 inner city children) indicated that a minimum of 40% (range = 25–70%) of the children reported witnessing a shooting (Jenkins 2001 ). Often, the victims of these severe forms of community violence are friends or family members. Caregivers in our research projects have even stated that they do not watch local television news, nor do they allow their children to do so for fear of hearing reports of harm befalling a family member or acquaintance. Studies in Chicago schools indicate that over 70% of the shooting incidents youth witnessed involved a friend or family member as the victim; about 10% were a sibling or a parent (Jenkins and Bell 1994 ; Uehara et al. 1996 ). Not only is the severity of urban children’s exposure to community violence significant, so is the chronicity. Multiple studies have found that African American youth are frequently exposed to chronic and severe community violence (e.g., Hinton-Nelson et al. 1996 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ), as opposed to that which is episodic or single, nonrecurring events. Furthermore, not only are these youth often chronically exposed to community violence, but other forms of violence as well (e.g., intrafamilial violence; Crouch et al. 2000 ; Hampton et al. 1989 ).

The long-term, cumulative effects of chronic exposure to community—and other forms of—violence should be conducted in middle childhood and into adolescence to determine the impact on youth’s development in numerous domains. Involving multiple informants and methods to assess youth’s exposure to community violence improves upon the field’s reliance on single sources of data, most typically the child’s self-report. Parent–child agreement on reports of community violence exposure has been poor (Richters and Martinez 1993 ). Youth’s self-reports of violence exposure are consistently higher than reports from other informants (Ladd and Kochenderfer-Ladd 2002 ; Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ; Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ), including community violence exposure as reported by children compared to their parents (e.g., Cooley-Strickland et al. 2009 ). However, it is unclear which is the most valid report given the field’s assumption that youth are best informed about their own experiences with violence (Richters and Martinez 1993 ; Schwarz 1999 ) and that it may be the perception of the frequency and severity of violence that most substantially influences the subsequent impact of that exposure.

Exposure to Community Violence and Emotional, Social, and Behavioral Functioning

Stress theory has been primarily used as the theoretical foundation to investigate the emotional and behavioral effects of children’s exposure to community violence (Horn and Trickett 1998 ). Typically, community violence is the identified stressor and is used to predict maladaptive outcomes. Chronic exposure to community violence is believed to have a negative impact on various aspects of youth’s development and adaptive functioning (Attar and Guerra 1994 ; Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ; Martinez and Richters 1993 ). Youth growing up in urban environments with high levels of poverty, overcrowding, and violence show a wide range of maladaptive outcomes, including internalizing symptoms such as anxiety, post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression, academic failure, and school disengagement (Gibbs 1984 ; Lorion et al. 1999 ; Myers et al. 1992 ; Osofsky et al. 1993 ; Singer et al. 1995 ). Youth with higher levels of exposure to community violence (via incidence and/or severity) report significantly more distress than those with lower exposure (Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ; Freeman et al. 1993 ; Jenkins 1993 ; Martinez and Richters 1993 ).

Collectively, the evidence suggests that children’s exposure to community violence increases the likelihood of developing internalizing symptoms (e.g., Fitzpatrick 1993 ; Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ; Hutcheson 1998 ; Martinez and Richters 1993 ), although there have been studies that have not found a significant positive relationship (e.g., Hill and Madhere 1995 ; Kubiak 1998 ; White et al. 1998 ). Reviews of the literature generally conclude that when the data are from the same source, there is a positive linear relationship between anxiety/internalizing symptoms and children’s exposure to violence (Horn and Trickett 1998 ) such that the greater the exposure, the more problematic the outcome (e.g., Pynoos et al. 1987 ; Hutcheson 1998 ).

Poor urban youth are at-risk for a range of co-occurring emotional and behavioral symptoms and poor psychosocial functioning; disruptive behavior problems (Gorman-Smith and Tolan 1998 ) and aggression are central features (Tolan and Henry 1996 ). The community violence exposure of African American and Hispanic male children has been linked with increased aggressive behavior (Gorman-Smith and Tolan 1998 ). Witnessing and being the victim of violence in the community serves as a risk factor for future aggression (Attar and Guerra 1994 ; Bandura et al. 1961 ; Cooley-Quille et al. 2001 ; DuRant et al. 1994 ; Kubiak 1998 ). Complicating the directionality of the relationship is research that has shown that exposure to community violence may exacerbate externalizing behavior characteristics (Gorman-Smith and Tolan 1998 ).

Schwab-Stone and colleagues ( 1999 ) examined violence exposure in a community-based longitudinal study and found that violence exposure was associated with externalizing behavior and internalizing symptoms across gender and ethnic groups. Co-occurrence of psychiatric syndromes may represent shared underlying pathogenesis (Tolan and Henry 1996 ). Horn and Trickett ( 1998 ) concluded that it may not be a contradiction that children’s exposure to violence is related to externalizing (aggression) and internalizing (anxiety and affective) behavior problems; both can be true. Although there are conflicting results (e.g., Loeber and Keenan 1994 ), the literature suggests that youth with co-morbid anxiety and aggression may be at greater risk for impairment than youth who have either anxious symptoms or aggressive behaviors (e.g., Boivin and Vitaro 1995 ; Ialongo et al. 1996 ; Kashani et al. 1991 ; Ladd and Burgess 1999 ). Childhood anxiety may be an important risk factor for aggression given that anxious children perceive ambiguous situations in more threatening and hostile ways than nonanxious children (Kashani et al. 1991 ). This finding is also consistent with social information processing theory (Crick and Dodge 1994 ; Dodge 1985 , 1986 ), which posits that a series of biases in the processing of social information in ambiguous situations can trigger aggressive behavior.

Researchers are increasingly interested in social-cognitive factors which may mediate the association between exposure to community violence during childhood and aggressive behavior (Bradshaw and Garbarino 2004 ; Guerra et al. 2003 ). Several studies have shown that aggressive children tend to be hypersensitive to cues of threat, selectively attend to aggressive cues, and overlook other situational factors that may have influenced the person’s behavior (for reviews see Crick and Dodge 1994 ; Dodge and Pettit 2003 ). Aggressive children are believed to have a hostile attribution bias, which influences their interpretation of the situation, such that they infer greater hostility in other people’s ambiguous behavior. They may have a large repertoire of aggressive responses that can be enacted, and believe aggressive responses are more effective at obtaining the desired goal than prosocial ones. Consistent with social learning theory (Bandura 1973 ), witnessing violence may model aggression as an effective, normative, and justified way of resolving conflict or obtaining desired goals. Aggressive youth tend to perceive their own aggressive behavior as the proper defense against others’ hostile intent (Dodge and Somberg 1987 ).

Other researchers have suggested that problems regulating emotions also play a role in increasing the risk for maladaptive coping and aggressive behavior among children who witness violence (Mushe-Eizenman et al. 2004 ). Poor emotion regulation may contribute to poor processing of social cues and impulsive, aggressive behavior in ambiguous and potentially conflictual situations. Therefore, it is important to examine the relationship between negatively biased social information processing, coping, and emotion regulation as possible factors mediating the association between community violence exposure and aggressive behavior. Having an enhanced understanding of the factors that mediate the association between community violence exposure and aggressive and academic outcomes would inform the development of preventive interventions that target relevant social-cognitive mediators.

Children’s Exposure to Community Violence and Academic and Cognitive Functioning

Not well researched are the cognitive, academic achievement, and educational effects of violence exposure on children (Osofsky 1995 ). Studies of the impact of community violence on children’s school functioning are necessary and meritorious, yet there is a paucity of empirical investigations that directly assess academic functioning (Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ). Included among the few available studies are those that assess perceived academic functioning (e.g., Bowen and Bowen 1999 ; Overstreet and Braun 1999 ; Schwab-Stone et al. 1995 ; Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ). It is believed that the distractions youth experience from exposure to community and school violence disrupt cognitive development (Horn and Trickett 1998 ). The long-term consequences are underexplored, although the dropout rates are near 50% for historically disadvantaged ethnic minority groups (Swanson 2004 )—particularly those residents from urban areas with the highest levels of poverty and violence. It is increasingly understood from a life course perspective that dropping out of school is not an isolated event, but is a process that begins in early childhood and is impacted by cumulative factors (Alexander et al. 2001 ).

Community violence exposure has been associated with attentional impairment, declines in cognitive performance (Saltzman 1996 ; Singer et al. 1995 ) and declines in school achievement (Bell and Jenkins 1991 ). These academic difficulties have been suggested to result from lowered concentration levels due to distracting and intrusive thoughts concerning violent events that may accumulate over time and with repeated exposure (Bell 1997 ; Horn and Trickett 1998 ; Taylor et al. 1997 ), thus a meditational model is warranted (Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ). In a cross-sectional study of urban elementary school students, Schwartz and Gorman ( 2003 ) found support for such a model in that community violence was associated with poor academic performance as mediated by depressive symptoms and disruptive behavior. The authors suggest that community violence exposure may interfere with children’s developing capacities for self-regulation and behavioral control (Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ), which is consistent with the literature on social information processing (Dodge and Pettit 2003 ). Gender also may introduce an interaction effect given that inner-city girls who have been traumatized by violence are more likely to be suspended from school and arrested (Lipsitz et al. 2000 ).

When youth’s caregivers experience significant stressors—as is typical among those who dwell in high crime neighborhoods—they are less able to assist in their children’s cognitive and social development which is important in negotiating their children’s academic success. Research conducted by the first author has shown a positive relationship between neighborhood violence and school removal (i.e., school suspensions, expulsions; e.g., Boyd et al. 2003 ). As the primary developmental task for children is academic success, it is important to directly investigate the impact of community violence on children’s academic performance.

Community Violence: Age and Developmental Differences

In communities that frequently experience violent crime, reports (percentages and incidents) of witnessing violence increase with the average age of the children (Horn and Trickett 1998 ). Thus, the longer they reside in the neighborhoods, the more likely they will be repeatedly exposed to violence; hence the characterization of “chronically” violent communities (Hill and Madhere 1995 ). Of particular concern are findings indicating that children are exposed to severe and chronic community violence at young ages (Attar and Guerra 1994 ; Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 1993 ; Gladstein et al. 1992 ). For example, first and second grade children reported exposure to community violence at levels similar to that of fifth and sixth graders; the young children had also witnessed high levels of violence before they entered elementary school (Richters and Martinez 1993 ). Witnessing violence as young children (3- to 5-year olds) was a risk factor for behavior problems (Shahinfar et al. 2000 ). Compounding the problem, caregivers consistently underestimate the frequency of their children’s exposure to violence and thereby are believed to be less able to protect them (Cooley et al. 2004 ; Richters and Martinez 1993 ). Research suggests that young children’s—as well as their caregivers’—exposure to community violence is a significant risk factor for maladaptive development (Osofsky 1995 ; Scheeringa and Zeanah 1995 ). For example, Linares et al. ( 2001 ) found support for a meditational model of the impact of maternal distress (general distress, PTSD symptoms) on the association between community violence exposure and their young children’s internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Aisenberg and Ell ( 2005 ) found similar results and concluded that community violence research should move beyond an individual child focus to a more integrated child, parent, family, community approach to appropriately contextualize the effects of exposure and subsequent mental health prevention and intervention. Clearly, investigation of more comprehensive mediational models (parental/family distress affecting children’s behavior) is warranted.

Young adolescents may be more vulnerable to adverse outcomes associated with violence exposure than older adolescents (Schwab-Stone et al. 1999 ), but there may be heightened vulnerability at even younger ages. Because adolescents between the ages of 12 and 15 are victims of crime more frequently than any other childhood age group (Jenkins 2001 ), it is important to conduct prospective studies of the emotional, behavioral, and academic impact of exposure to violence in youth preceding that critical period of heightened victimization. To this end, middle childhood is an important developmental period to begin a longitudinal study. Middle childhood is also when negative academic patterns become fixed and stable (Pungello et al. 1996 as cited in Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ).

Community Violence: Gender Differences

Males generally report more community violence exposure than females (Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ). For example, older boys report witnessing more frequent and severe violent events than girls (Schubiner et al. 1993 ; Singer et al. 1995 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ). However, there are exceptions such that no gender differences have been found in some studies (Attar et al. 1994 ; Farrell and Bruce 1997 ; Uehara et al. 1996 ). There are also conflicting reports of whether there are gender differences in children’s emotional and behavioral reactions to violence exposure. Two studies found that both sexes exhibited similar numbers of post-traumatic stress symptoms following exposure to violent acts (Pynoos et al. 1987 ; Schwarz and Kowalski 1991 ). Studies have shown that girls report more internalizing (anxiety, depression, and general emotional distress) symptoms associated with exposure than boys (Farrell and Bruce 1997 ; Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ; Jenkins and Bell 1994 ). However, there were no sex differences in emotional outcomes for older children (Martinez and Richters 1993 ).

An increasing pattern in community violence research has yielded reports that girls may be vulnerable to both internalizing and externalizing behaviors. For example, a study of sixth grade students showed that witnessing violence was predictive of girls’ externalizing, but not internalizing, behavior (Farrell and Bruce 1997 ). Another study of urban, primarily African American children found that among girls, community violence exposure was significantly related to different forms of anxiety, but not among boys (White et al. 1998 ). Although there are clear age differences in youth’s exposure to community violence, the impact of gender is less clear. There are likely interaction effects.

Community Violence and Youth: Protective Factors

Research on the effects of children’s exposure to community violence has primarily focused on risk, not protective, factors. In general, it is the combination of risk factors that predicts which children will develop adverse functioning more so than the presence of any single factor, which follows the adversity index model (Rutter 1990 ; Rutter and Quinton 1977 ; Sameroff et al. 1998 ). However, it is known that some youth exposed to community violence have extraordinary coping skills (Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ). Despite experiencing similar levels of risk and vulnerability, differential outcomes—including resiliency—suggest that protective factors function to attenuate the effects of trauma (Rutter 1987 ; Garmezy 1993 ). These are factors that directly affect behavior, but also moderate the relationship between risk and healthier outcomes (Jessor et al. 1995 ). Tolan et al. ( 1997 ) discuss the unique styles of coping that children living in inner-cities must develop in their attempts to “stay out of harm’s way.” However, Tolan and colleagues stress the importance of distinguishing between “adaptive” and “effective” coping. In our research, we have found that the former pertains to coping styles that serve the child’s immediate situational needs, but may not be prosocial and perhaps are even antisocial (e.g., physically fighting or stealing to “solve” a problem). Effective coping involves prosocial means that effect positive change, particularly over the long-term and in larger society.

More traditional conceptualizations of protective factors from the trauma literature that apply to community violence include pre-morbid emotional health and adjustment prior to exposure, highly functioning parents, and good family relations (Pynoos 1993 ; Pynoos et al. 1999 ). Family environment (e.g., communication, bonding, and warmth) and family support are protective for youth exposed to family violence (Boney-McCoy and Finkelhor 1995 ; Gorman-Smith and Tolan 1998 ), but also may be considered general protective factors, as are intelligence, school involvement, participation in activities outside the home, religion, and self-competence (Beardslee and Podorefsky 1988 ; LaGreca et al. 1998 ; Luthar et al. 2000 ; Resnick et al. 1997 ; Tiet et al. 1998 ). The impact of a supportive school environment (e.g., competent, qualified teachers, safe schools, safe classrooms) may also serve a protective role among children exposed to community violence. Interestingly, youth may experience numerous risk and protective factors simultaneously (Jessor et al. 1995 ). Perhaps the combination may inform why some youth develop in relatively healthy ways whereas others evidence significant emotional, behavioral, and/or academic adversity.

Despite recognition of the maladaptive consequences associated with exposure to community violence, there is limited research examining combined risk and protective factors associated with children’s community violence exposure (Boyd et al. 2003 ). A longitudinal study that investigated whether individual level characteristics protected children from community violence exposure showed that among aggressive boys, low levels of anxiety protected them from later exposure (Boyd et al. 2003 ). More research is needed to gain a better understanding of the protective and risk mechanisms related to community violence exposure. For example, prosocial activities may be protective in nature because they decrease the opportunities for interacting with deviant peers, provide social support, and enhance self-competence. Relatedly, children’s well-being suffers most greatly among those with lower levels of social support or higher social strain (defined as those without social networks that facilitate talking about violence; Kliewer et al. 1998 ). Youth need more support than adults because they are less skilled at expressing their trauma-related concerns and have fewer informal and formal sources of support and psychological coping (Kliewer et al. 1998 ).

An additional protective factor may be internal strength manifested by religious beliefs and practices. Some attention has focused on links between participation in religious and/or spiritual activities and physical and mental health (Dossey 1993 ; Koenig 1997 ). Studies generally show that religion and spirituality are modestly related to emotional well-being (Ellison 1991 ). Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain this relationship, such as religious/spiritual involvement providing: meaning or purpose in life; inner-peace; connection to others and a community (Walters and Bennett 2000 ). Exploring the associated risk and protective factors is critical to advance the field from epidemiology into treatment and prevention.

Community Violence and Youth and Anxiety

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is the most widely recognized anxiety disorder that has physiological concomitants, although all anxiety disorders affect physiological, behavioral, and cognitive response systems (Kendall and Hammen 1995 ). Considering each of these domains is important to understand the cause of PTSD (Jones and Barlow 1990 ) and other anxiety and internalizing symptoms. Post-traumatic stress symptoms may be used to illustrate the link between community violence and anxiety because the onset of PTSD is necessarily preceded by an external stressor. Previous research supports the relationship between symptoms of PTSD and youth’s exposure to community violence (Pynoos et al. 1987 ; Schwarz and Kowalski 1991 ). Exposure to the external trauma causes exaggerated neurotransmitter activity and is related to aggression, hypersensitivity (Turner et al. 1997 ), and physiological and subjective hyperarousal (Keane et al. 1988 ). Biological factors are involved but cannot solely explain why some people develop PTSD after being exposed to traumas and others do not (Turner et al. 1997 ). Early studies found that adolescents living in inner-cities have higher blood pressures than youth living in suburban or rural areas (Thomas and Groer 1986 ), independent of race (Burns et al. 1980 ). Urban living is described as less esthetically pleasing, noisier, and more crowded (Thomas and Groer 1986 ). Interestingly, one study we conducted found that older urban adolescents with very high levels of exposure to community violence had lower resting blood pressures than lower exposed youth (A-Quille and Lorion 1999 ).

It is possible that older youth who are chronically and repeatedly exposed to violent events habituate or become desensitized (Fitzpatrick and Boldizar 1993 ). For example, signs of danger (e.g., police and ambulance sirens, gun shots) may occur with such frequency that youth eventually learn not to react with a “fight or flight” response and habituate to fear. In contrast, younger or infrequently exposed youth escape/avoid the anxiety-producing stimuli, a pattern that functions to increase or sustain the intensity of the fear response (Turner et al. 1997 ). The habituation or extinction model of fear is supported by a considerable body of literature noting that prolonged contact with fear-producing stimuli results in increased physiological reactivity and subjective distress. With repeated exposure, the physiological reactivity and anxious distress are followed by decreases in arousal and fear (i.e., the response habituates or is extinguished; Mowrer 1960 ). The concern is whether children in environments with high levels of community violence are learning to become desensitized to the signs of danger, but are not learning prosocial coping skills for managing their distress.

Some fears are developmentally inappropriate under almost all circumstances (Leonard et al. 1990 ), whereas others are adaptive or protective (Marks 1987 ). Anxiety clinicians and researchers have to differentiate between pathological anxiety and normal developmental fear (March and Parker 1999 ). The fears and anxiety associated with living in inner-city communities characterized by poverty, violence, and limited resources pose a challenge for determining whether the fears are reasonable or adaptive. Anecdotal reports by children living in inner-cities yield pervasive fears of being harmed (e.g., kidnapped, shot); their fears are even greater regarding harm befalling their family members (Cooley et al. 2004 ). Some meet threshold criteria for separation anxiety disorder (SAD), although they are older than the typical SAD child. Constant worry about one’s own or loved ones’ safety or health likely interferes with inner-city children’s ability to function in developmentally appropriate, academically successful, and healthy ways (Cooley et al. 2004 ).

African American children rarely receive treatment for anxiety problems (Neal and Brown 1994 ). Epidemiological data on racial differences in childhood anxiety suggests that African American children have higher rates than Caucasian youth (Kashani and Orvaschel 1988 ; Neal and Turner 1991 ). Compared to Caucasian children, African American children report more fears; those fears appear to be more reality-based (Nalven 1970 ) and relatively more stable. The racial differences in children’s fears persist even after controlling for socio-economic status and age (Last and Perrin 1993 ). Older children’s fears are more socio-evaluatively based (Morris and Kratochwill 1983 ) and center around harm befalling self or a family member (Neal and Brown 1994 ). Inter-racial regional differences have also been found such that northern urban African American children report more fears than southern rural children (Neal and Baskett 1993 ). As such, African American children from low-socio-economic status backgrounds who live in violent, urban communities may be at even greater risk.

Community Violence and Youth: Depressive Symptoms

Depression is a significant problem across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups, but it is most prevalent among those with low socioeconomic status (Beardslee 2003 ). Ethnic minorities are over-represented in lower socio-economic status groups (Bruce et al. 1991 ). Poor urban children are among those most vulnerable to the development of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems (McKay et al. 1998 ; Tolan and Henry 1996 ). Elementary school students may experience adult like depressive symptoms and disorders (Weisz et al. 1987 ). Investigators have found moderately strong associations between children’s exposure to community violence exposure and depressive symptoms, including intrusive thoughts, low energy, and diminished motivation (Osofsky 1995 ; Schwartz and Gorman 2003 ).

Depression is a disorder that should be understood from several different perspectives: It is a biological disorder, but one that profoundly affects family functioning and relationships; etiological factors are both genetic and environmental (Beardslee 2003 ). Children of parents with mood disorders are two to four times more likely to develop mood disorders compared to children in families without parental illness; depression rates as high as 50% have been found among adolescents and young adults who have severely ill parents (Beardslee 1998 ). Other significant potential factors in the development and maintenance of depression include: adverse life events; racism and prejudice, however covertly experienced by ethnic/racial minorities; and poverty (e.g., Beardslee 2003 ; Brown et al. 1995 ; Koss-Chiono and Vargas 1992 ; Turner and Lloyd 1999 ). Ethnic minority children living in poor urban environments are at risk for experiencing chronic levels of neighborhood violence (Barreto and McManus 1997 ) and their parents/caregivers may limit their activities outside of the home in an attempt to protect them harm (McAlister-Groves et al. 1993 ). However, social withdrawal is associated with depression and other internalizing symptoms so these restrictions may thwart children’s emotional development (Beardslee 2003 ) and physical health and increase their vulnerability to depression and other affective problems.

Depressive symptoms may also occur because of environmental adversity, like being a victim of violence, bereavement, or having multiple first-degree relatives with the disorder (Beardslee 2003 ). Other risk factors are low self-esteem, hopelessness, helplessness, being female, and poverty (Institute of Medicine 1994 ). Youth’s exposure to community violence has been linked to symptoms of distress (e.g., Kliewer et al. 1998 ; Martinez and Richters 1993 ) but the form of distress may be related to the type of violence youth experience (Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ; McAlister-Groves et al. 1993 ). For example, children’s exposure to acute (i.e., nonrecurring) forms of community violence may be related to internal distress (e.g., anxious, depressive, somatic, and withdrawal symptoms), whereas exposure to chronic community violence may be related to externalizing behaviors (e.g., aggression, conduct problems; Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ). This differential outcome may be a function of vicarious learning such that witnessing high levels of community violence models aggressive and externalizing behaviors (Cooley-Quille et al. 1995 ). However, alternative explanations include the behavioral principles of reinforcement and punishment. Specifically, internalizing symptoms (e.g., depression, anxiety, withdrawal, somatic complaints) may not be accepted (i.e., are punished) among those dwelling in highly violent communities because they are perceived as weaknesses, thus making youth vulnerable and easy targets for future victimization (Earls 1991 ; Barreto and McManus 1997 ).

Community Violence and Youth: Substance Use

Prevalence rates for drug use initiation by race/ethnicity indicate that while African Americans are less likely than Caucasians to initiate smoking tobacco and drinking by 13 years of age, they are at greater risk for initiating cocaine and marijuana use at earlier ages (Everett et al. 1998 ). Prevalence data for early-onset substance abuse is rare. Nonetheless, there are limited descriptive statistics for substance use and progression. For example, Wills et al. ( 2001 ) studied elementary school children in a mixed urban-suburban community (mean age 11.8 years; 27% African American). About one-quarter (24%) of the children had tried one or two cigarettes and 1% indicated smoking on at least a monthly basis. For alcohol use, almost one-third (30%) of the elementary school students reported drinking alcohol one or two times, and 2% drank on at least a monthly basis. Regarding marijuana, 2% had tried it once or twice, and less than 1% reported using it regularly (Wills et al. 2001 ). Another study examined the prevalence of alcohol and drug use among children in three cities: Denver, Pittsburgh, and Rochester (Huizinga et al. 1993 ). The authors found a high frequency of drug initiation prior to the teenage years. Denver’s rates represented the highest-risk areas; for 7-year-old children: 15.3% of the boys and 9.7% of the girls reported having drank alcohol at least once, while 1.2% of the boys and 0.7% of 7-year-old girls reported having smoked marijuana one or more times (Huizinga et al. 1993 ).

In a preliminary study conducted by the first author in which inner-city children’s coping styles were assessed, fifth grade African American students reported using substances when they were “faced with difficulties or felt tense.” Almost one-quarter (22.9%) of the 11- and 12-year olds reported having smoked tobacco and 17.1% reported drinking alcohol at least sometimes to help them “cope.” Research investigating the outcomes associated with community violence exposure should target substance use. Children may not consider themselves “substance users” out of context (e.g., not associated with peers or distress). An advantage of studying middle childhood over time permits the identification of mediating and moderating variables that influence initiation and maintenance of drug use.

Trauma has been related to adolescent substance abuse (Kilpatrick et al. 2000 ). Several studies have shown that post-traumatic stress is a risk factor for the development and chronicity of depression and substance use (Bolton et al. 2000 ; Giaconia and Reinherz 1995 ; Kilpatrick et al. 2000 ). Behavior problems (e.g., aggression, unsafe behaviors) are associated with drug use initiation (Epstein et al. 2000 ). A comprehensive summary of possible causes of the association between substance use and violence was presented by Mulvey and colleagues (Mulvey et al. 2006 ): (1) Substance use causes violence either directly (e.g., via disinhibition) or indirectly (e.g., mediated by association with aggressive peers; poor coping skills; life stressors); (2) Experience with violence increases the likelihood of using substances (e.g., substance use as a coping response); or (3) The relationship is spurious (i.e., a tertiary factor enhances the exhibition of substance use and/or aggression) (Parker and Auerhahn 1998 ; White 1990 , 1997 ).

Developmental patterns of drug use may vary with age, gender, ethnicity, social class, and ecological, cultural, and historical conditions (Kandel et al. 1978 ). Certain risk factors for drug initiation exert differential effects according to gender and ethnicity (Brunswick and Messeri 1984 ; Ellickson and Morton 1999 ). Regarding urban African American youth, variables from multiple domains (e.g., personal background, school achievement, family-peer orientations, psychogenic orientations, health attitudes, and behaviors) have been shown to influence smoking initiation (Brunswick and Messeri 1984 ). However, the only predictors of African American youth’s “hard” drug use were social influences promoting drug use and intentions to use them (Ellickson and Morton 1999 ).

The directionality of the association between substance use and poor school performance is uncertain (Bryant et al. 2000 ). Investigators found that among 8th to 12th grade students, adverse school experiences (i.e., school misbehavior, poor academic achievement) precipitated tobacco use (Bryant et al. 2000 ). Another study found similar results among African Americans; those who dropped out of school were more likely to inject drugs as adults (Obot and Anthony 2000 ). However, another study did not find that poor grades predicted substance (i.e., inhalant) use for African American high school students, but they did for Asians (Mackesy-Amiti and Fendrich 2000 ). Importantly, researchers recommend that the relations between youth’s problem behaviors (e.g., academic failure, deviance, alcohol, and marijuana use) are assessed as they change over time, particularly identifying the risk and protective factors that influence the undesired behaviors (Duncan et al. 2000 ).

The MORE Project Study Questions

There are five main questions that are being investigated in the MORE Project. They are: (1) What is the prevalence of urban children’s exposure to community violence? (2) What are the risk factors associated with children’s exposure to community violence? (3) What are the protective factors associated with preventing children’s exposure to community violence? (4) What are the adverse outcomes associated with children’s exposure to community violence? (5) What factors protect against the adverse outcomes of children’s community violence exposure? Each main question will be furthered examined by: Stratum of neighborhood violence (low versus moderate versus high strata or by low and moderate versus high); gender; age; and, when appropriate, informant (child, parent, and teacher).

The conceptual model that provides the foundation for the MORE Project is illustrated schematically in Fig.  1 . Figure  2 identifies the major constructs assessed in the project that correspond to the main questions under investigation.

Conceptual model of the effects of children’s exposure to community violence. Prosoc. Coping prosocial coping; Parent Psych. Health parent psychiatric health; Cog. Ability cognition and cognitive ability; Healthy Family Envi. Healthy family environment; Healthy School Envi. healthy school environment; Healthy Neighb. Envi. Healthy neighborhood environment; Low SES low socio-economic status

Constructs assessed in the MORE Project and their associated factors

Sample and Procedures

Sampling design.

Neighborhood crime is hypothesized to place youth at risk for exposure to community violence, as has been found in previous studies (e.g., Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ). There are a total of 55 neighborhoods that link to Baltimore City Public Schools using data provided by the Baltimore City Data Collaborative (BCDC 2003 ) ( http://www.baltimorekidsdata.org ). The Data Collaborative compiles agency databases and other informational rosters from sources such as the Baltimore City Health Department, Baltimore City Public Schools, Baltimore Police Department, Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and Baltimore City Child Care Resource Center. Community boundaries were drawn considering the city’s neighborhood and community organizations and existing census tract boundaries to create statistical profiles. All 55 communities were rank ordered from 1 to 55 based on their Baltimore City neighborhoods’ homicide rates in 2002 (the most recent year for which data were available when the project was funded). Ten of those communities had zero homicides; the remaining 45 communities had between 1 and 164.3 homicides per 100,000 residents. The 10 neighborhoods with no homicides in that year were placed in the “low” neighborhood violence stratum (i.e., 0 homicides per 100,000 residents). The “moderate” violence stratum consisted of the four communities in the middle of the distribution of homicide rates (i.e., 25.0–31.4 homicides per 100,000 residents), and the four communities with the highest homicide rates (i.e., 97.2–164.3 homicides per 100,000 residents) were placed into the “high” violence stratum. Within each stratum, the neighborhood with the two largest schools enrolling third through fifth graders became our target schools.

Once approval to conduct the MORE Project was obtained from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Institutional Research Board and the Baltimore City Public School System, funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) was awarded and a Certificate of Confidentiality from the Department of Health and Human Services was received. The principals at eight schools were contacted by the Project Investigator and/or Project Director to obtain their permission to partner together to conduct the MORE Project. Two principals declined, one in the high stratum reportedly because of his skepticism of research studies and feeling overburdened by current responsibilities, and the other from the moderate stratum who stated that it was her first year as principal and she did not have enough social capital among her school parents to ask them to participate in a research study. The elementary schools with the next largest student body in those neighborhood strata were contacted and their principals consented. A $1,000 honorarium was presented to each participating school to thank them for partnering with the MORE Project and to defray associated expenses.

The two elementary schools in the MORE Project located in the high violence stratum are situated in one zip code, the two medium violence schools are located in another zip code, and the two low violence schools are in two other zip codes that have similar demographic characteristics within each stratum. Across strata, there are some differences. For example, ANOVAs indicate that the percentages of African American residents differ across the community strata ( p  < .001), with fewer in the low and most in the high, which will need to be adjusted for in subsequent analyses. The population density for the low violence community is less than the other strata, but we will be unable to “control for density” since it is fully collinear with strata and it is one of the distinguishing characteristics of urban versus inner-city life. Table  1 characterizes differences between the three strata as categorized by their zip codes.

Table 1

Demographic characteristics of low, moderate, and high violence strata MORE Project neighborhoods in Baltimore City based on zip code

http://www.city-data.com (2008)

a www.bcps.k12.md.us/School_Info/index.asp

b Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, AIDS Administration ( 2007 ). Baltimore City HIV/AIDS Epidemiological Profile. www.dhmh.state.md.us/AIDS/

Participants

The MORE Project participants are comprised of 746 students, their parents/caregivers, and teachers. Recruitment spanned one and one-half academic years among 8- to 12-year-old students who attended six urban public elementary schools located in three Baltimore, Maryland communities with low, moderate, and high levels of neighborhood crime. To avoid selection bias and human subjects concerns, race/ethnicity was not used as a selection criterion. The inclusion criteria for students at the time of recruitment were: (1) Enrolled as a full-time student in one of the six identified Baltimore City public elementary schools in the Fall of 2006 or 2007; (2) aged 8–12 years, inclusively; (3) speak English and live with an English-speaking parent/guardian. Exclusion criteria included: (1) Presence of serious medical or neurological illness (e.g., epilepsy, closed head trauma) or mental retardation that precluded completion of the interview; or (2) Does not live with at least one parent or legal guardian.

Initial recruitment began in January 2007 and yielded 490 eligible families who consented to participate and comprised Cohort 1; 427 (87.1%) child interviews were conducted in the first semester of fielding the project. The teachers and caregivers of the Cohort 1 students were also interviewed, including 375 (88.2%) teachers and 282 (66.4%) parents/caregivers. In the following academic semester (Fall 2007), an additional 256 families consented and comprised Cohort 2. Cohort 2 consisted of third, fourth, and fifth grade students in the six participating schools who were not enrolled in the MORE Project during the previous year due to nonresponse or they were new student transfers. There were a total of 1,119 eligible students across both cohorts representing a 67% consent rate. School-level means and limited data on all students in grades 3, 4, and 5 were compared with those who consented. Comparing all students in the schools at the beginning of the academic year with those enrolled in the project, there was no difference in the proportion of males ( p  > .05). There was a slight difference in the proportion who were African American (86% of participating students versus 93% of eligible, p  < .01), but that 7% difference should not affect the generalizability of the results to the population of all students in the selected schools. As such, it is believed that the families who consented to participate in the MORE Project are representative of those who were eligible.

Data collection for Year 2 yielded interviews on over 600 children, 336 from Cohort 1 and 278 from Cohort 2. The current sample (Cohorts 1 and 2 combined) is 85% African American and 53% female. At the time of consent, their mean age was 9.6 years old ( SD  = 1.08; range = 8–12 years); 2.4% of the sample was in second grade, 44.6% in the third grade, 27.1% in the fourth grade, and 25.9% in the fifth grade. Table  2 provides more detail on the demographic characteristics of the total MORE sample.

Table 2

Characteristics of the MORE Project total student sample by strata

Participant Recruitment

The principals at each participating school designated a contact person, typically a member of the school’s administrative staff, to assist the MORE Project with administrative requests. These designees provided the project with school-wide rosters for each second, third, fourth, and fifth grade classroom to identify the target participant pool. Once identified, rosters were used to personalize two consent packets for every eligible student (i.e., parental consent form, MORE Project lottery form, letter of support/commitment from their school’s principal). One consent packet was mailed to the student’s home address, the second was distributed in eligible classrooms to each student following a brief explanatory presentation by a MORE Project staff member. The mailings and classroom distributions were further supplemented with follow-up telephone calls to caregivers when there were working phone numbers. For parents/caregivers without telephones and/or for nonresponsive families, specially trained consent gatherers attempted to make home visits to explain the study and obtain parental consent.

Various levels of incentives were provided to encourage students and parents/caregivers to consider participating in the MORE Project. For example, each caregiver who returned the signed MORE Project lottery form was entered into a school-wide lottery for a $50 Wal-Mart gift card whether they declined or assented to participate in the project. Each student who returned the consent and/or lottery form to their teacher received a small incentive (e.g., inflatable globe, key chain, ball). Classroom-wide pizza parties were awarded if 90% of the eligible students in that class returned the consent and/or lottery form. Other recruitment strategies included informational presentations by the MORE Project Director and Field Coordinator at various school functions, such as Back-to-School Night and Parent–Teacher Organization meetings. Familiarity and trust—the best recruitment tool—take a lot of time to build.

Many factors influence the successful completion of over 1,500 annual MORE Project interviews. Goodwill with the participating schools is of the utmost importance. For example, the school principal influences the tenor of interactions with the school at all levels including other administrators, teachers, and front office staff. Without the support of these persons, it is difficult to conduct a longitudinal study of this magnitude. Transparency in procedures is important to establishing an atmosphere of trust and partnership. Whether the teacher assessment is perceived as burdensome is largely dependent on the principal’s overall attitude toward the study. An overview of the project and its demand on teachers, staff, and students was presented at grade-level faculty meetings at each of the six schools. To encourage teacher support and motivation, they were compensated with Wal-Mart gift cards or University checks (range = $20–$50 depending on the percentage of responses) for their students’ returned lottery forms and/or parental consents, whether families consented or declined.

Data Collection

Standardized training procedures for interviewers and adherence monitoring to ensure quality delivery of the interviews are necessary for the integrity of the project. Interviewer considerations include training, competence, continuity, and sensitivity to the culture within each school and community. This includes being comfortable and engaging with diverse children, not removing students from core classes, and respecting school rules, scheduled program assemblies, and state-wide testing preparation and administration. Although seemingly simplistic, these considerations are key factors in the successful completion of quality interviews that yield positive experiences for each child. To that end, a teacher at one of the high violence schools observed that the MORE Project interview may be “therapeutic” for the children. She said the students seem to enjoy the interviews and may not frequently, if ever, experience an adult asking them so much about their lives in such an engaging and individualized manner. The teacher’s comment was a result of observing the rapport between MORE Project interviewers and the children at her school, as well as positive feedback from the children regarding the interview process.

During the second year of fielding, the interview schedule at each school was revised to reflect a better understanding of the school climate, schedules, and burden to staff and students. Initially, interviewers went to each school one day per week until all child interviews were complete. Interviewer presence for only one day per week was thought to be less burdensome for the schools. During the second year of interviewing, it became clear that it would be less burdensome for the school and a more efficient use of interviewers’ time to concentrate on one school at a time. The maximum number of interviewers manageable for a school were assigned to the same school every day until student interviews at that school were complete. To assist in the scheduling process, an online interactive calendar accessible to the coordinator and interviewers was created using Microsoft Office Outlook 2003; it supports multiple—even simultaneous—users who can check their assignments from anywhere.

Annual student interviews were conducted at each school during school hours. First, each school’s administrative contact was provided with a list of all students for whom parental consent had been obtained. Based on teacher convenience, attendance, and space availability (often a significant challenge), students were individually released from noncore classes to be interviewed by MORE Project staff. Interviewers briefly introduced the MORE Project and obtained child assent prior to the start of the interview. Rarely, a student might decline to leave a certain class or feel uncomfortable with an unfamiliar interviewer; a second attempt to interview the child was always successful and, of over one thousand child interviews, no child declined to participate in an interview.

Students were interviewed in private areas in the school (e.g., empty classrooms, break rooms). The child assessment measures were administered using a combined paper–pencil and computerized battery. Examples of paper–pencil administered instruments are the Wechsler scales (i.e., WIAT-II and WASI) which require individual administration following a standardized protocol. For other measures, interviewers read items from laptop screens; students could also read along simultaneously. Students’ responses were entered by the interviewers. The computerized assessment battery was programmed using Sensus Multimedia version 2.0 software (Adaptive Technologies Group, Inc. 1994–1997). Sensus Multimedia is a Windows-based program used to construct attractive, easy to follow interviews that facilitate accurate and efficient data collection. It comes with a fully integrated statistics and cross-tabulation package so data can be verified immediately. The average completion time for the child interview was 120 min (range = 75 to 180 min), completed in one sitting including a light snack and brief break. Upon completion, each child is given a Wal-Mart gift card (Wave 1: $10; Wave 2: $15) as a token of appreciation and a letter to take to their caregiver notifying them that their child finished their interview and requesting them to schedule their parent interview.

The parents/caregivers of children whose interviews had been completed were called to schedule a telephone interview. For hard to reach caregivers, those without telephones, or those who preferred in-person interviews, parent interviews were conducted face-to-face either at the MORE Project offices at Johns Hopkins University or at their child’s school. The entire parent interview was administered using a computerized battery and completed within an average of 60 min (range = 40–180 min). Interviewers read each item and the possible answer choices to the caregiver; caregivers’ responses were entered by the interviewers on the laptops. Methods for expressing appreciation to parents for their participation include: thank you notes, distribution of Baltimore City Resource Guides, and Wal-Mart gift card incentives (Wave 1: $40; Wave 2: $45). The Baltimore City Resource Guides were developed by MORE Project staff and contain information for families on a variety of social, educational, cultural, legal, employment, municipal, physical, and mental health resources. Retaining parents’ commitment to the project has been through regular communication by newsletters, children’s birthday cards, and other reminder post-cards distributed by mail or in-person via home visits.

Teacher and principal paper–pencil assessments were completed at the end of each school year. Teachers were given a folder containing an informational letter, a survey of general questions about their qualifications and the school/classroom environment, and individualized questionnaires for each consented child in their class (5–10 min per student). Wal-Mart gift cards or University checks were given as a token of appreciation ($5 per student; range = $20–100). Principals and vice-principals completed a brief survey about their teaching qualifications and their school’s climate. Principals were given plaques; vice-principals and administrative staff were given certificates of appreciation. All received $25 Wal-Mart gift certificates as tokens of appreciation.

The MORE Project assessment instruments were selected for their age-appropriateness, psychometric properties, available norms, and when possible, appropriateness for use with ethnic minority youth. The following describes the measures that assess key constructs in the conceptual model (i.e., primary predictor variable, protective factors, risk factors, outcomes; see Fig.  1 ) as outlined in Fig.  2 .

Primary Predictor Variable: Children’s Exposure to Chronic Community Violence

Because community violence is a significant variable in this project, it is important to assess it using multiple methods, informants, and measures. Community violence is related to other forms of violence, several of which are assessed as well (with the exception of parent–child violence, as there were substantial concerns regarding parents’ willingness to consent to participate if we were to assess child abuse). Children’s exposure to community violence is being assessed using both child and parent report of perceived events. Perceived exposure to violence to community violence may differ from objective accounts of events (e.g., police reports, indicators of neighborhood and social disorder). The Children’s Report of Exposure to Violence (CREV; Cooley et al. 1995 ) is a widely used self-report questionnaire developed to assess children’s lifetime exposure to community violence. Community violence is defined as deliberate acts intended to cause physical harm against persons in the community. The types of violent situations include being chased or threatened, beaten up, robbed or mugged, shot, stabbed, or killed. The original CREV has good two-week test–retest reliability ( r  = .75), internal consistency (overall α = .78), and construct validity (Cooley et al. 1995 ).

An additional module was created in a previous project to assess youth’s exposure to war and terrorism. Following the terrorist attacks in the United States in September 2001 and the initiation of the Iraqi war, this “world violence” module was designed to assess the frequency of children’s perceived exposure to war and terrorism that may have occurred in their communities, their country, or elsewhere in the world (e.g., attacks on public transportation, chemical or biological attacks, bombs, war). As in the other CREV modules, frequency of exposure to world violence is through four modes (i.e., media, hearsay, direct witness, direct victimization). The CREV-Revised (CREV-R) is comprised of the original 29 items plus world violence items. Its Total score is derived by summing the responses (scored 0–4) on the 45 scored items for the Media, Reported/Hearsay, Witnessed, Victim, and World Violence subscales; higher scores indicate greater exposure. The potential range of scores is from 0 to 180. The lifetime version of the CREV-R was used at Wave 1, but the past-year version is being used in Waves 2 and 3 to determine chronicity/severity of violence exposure. The CREV-R has good reliability and validity as demonstrated in a preliminary study of school-based sample of third to fifth grade urban children using a paper–pencil version. Cronbach’s α’s for the computerized version of the lifetime CREV-R Total score with the World Violence module is 0.78, without it is 0.88. The past-year CREV-R Total score α is 0.89.

The Children’s Report of Exposure to Violence — Parent Report (CREV-P) is a modification of the CREV-R to obtain parent/caregiver’s report of their perception of their child’s exposure to community violence. Scoring procedures for the CREV-P are generally identical to the CREV, although the Media violence subscale is not asked of the parents. Separate past year and lifetime scores may be computed. Both have good internal consistency in a preliminary study (Cronbach’s αs = 0.93 and 0.91, respectively) and in the current study (Cronbach’s αs for the computerized version of the lifetime and past-year Total scores are 0.81 and 0.79, respectively).

Eight items of the short version of the My Exposure to Violence (MyETV; Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ) structured interview are included in the MORE Project child battery. The past-year portion assesses exposure to violent events that were either witnessed or personally experienced (e.g., shot at, heard gunfire, serious accident, seen dead body). The distinction between violence in the home versus in the community is important to make in community violence research with children (Horn and Trickett 1998 ), and is permitted by the addition of the MyETV. On a sample of 9- to 24-year-old participants from diverse racial/ethnic groups, the MyETV was found to have high internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and good construct validity (Selner-O’Hagan et al. 1998 ). Reliability estimates based on the sum of the eight individual items in the current study were low (Cronbach’s α = 0.45).

Risk Factors

Demographic characteristics , including socioeconomic status, are reported by parents/caregivers using the Household Structure and Demographics questionnaire. It was created by researchers in the Baltimore Prevention Program at Johns Hopkins University for use in large school-based community-epidemiological studies is asked of parents/caregivers to provide family socio-demographic characteristics for each of the members of the household. It includes level of education, occupational status, ethnicity, employment status, age, and relationship to the target child. Additional information assessed includes self-reported total family income, the child’s country of origin, the biological father’s and mother’s involvement in the child’s caregiving, and the number of moves the family has made since the target child was born.

Culture of violence is a broad risk factor that includes indices of the community’s pervading attitude toward violence, aggression, and hostility, both as a means to an end and as a symptom, as well as whether it is accepted or not. Included among the measures to assess this construct are the child’s report of their Attitudes Toward Violence and Relational Aggression, parent STAXI and CTS1, as well as indices of violence from the neighborhood assessment, NIfETy. Youth’s self-reported attitudes toward violence were assessed via five items derived from the Attitude toward Interpersonal Peer Violence Scale (Slaby and Guerra 1988 ). The scale indicates the perceived legitimization or appropriateness of aggressive responses to threat. Responses across the five items (e.g., “Its okay for me to hit someone if they hit me first”) are averaged with higher scores indicating greater support for aggressive behavior. Prior research with this measure reported α’s ranging from 0.75 (Dahlberg et al. 1998 ) to 0.85 (Bradshaw et al. in press). Parental trait anger is one of six scales from the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2, Spielberger 1999 ) used in the MORE Project to assess angry feelings as a personality trait. This scale is comprised of ten items assessed on a four-point Likert scale to indicate the frequency/intensity of anger over time. Evidence supports the validity and reliability of the STAXI-2 for adolescents and adults (Spielberger 1999 ). In the MORE Project, the Cronbach’s α for the STAXI-2 Trait Anger scale is 0.81.

Relational aggression is assessed through four items developed by Little et al. ( 2003 ) to measure reactive relational aggression. Participants indicate the extent to which they agreed with statements such as, “If others have hurt me, I try to keep them from being in my group of friends,” and “When I am upset with others, I ignore them or stop talking to them.” Prior research with this measure reported an α of 0.63 and in the MORE Project is very low (α = 0.35). Parental trait anger is one of six scales from the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2, Spielberger 1999 ) used in the MORE Project to assess angry feelings as a personality trait. This scale is comprised of 10 items assessed on a four-point Likert scale to indicate the frequency/intensity of anger over time. Evidence supports the validity and reliability of the STAXI-2 for adolescents and adults (Spielberger 1999 ). In the MORE Project, the Cronbach’s α for the STAXI-2 Trait Anger scale is 0.81.

Familial conflict and violence is assessed using the Conflict Tactics Scale — Form R (CTS1-Form R; Straus 1979 , 1987 , 1988 , 1990 ), which is a 13-item parent report of intrafamilial violence used to resolve conflicts. Items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale; higher scores indicate more family conflict and higher levels of coerciveness. There are three subscales (Reasoning, Verbal aggression, and Violence), each of which the parent respondent rates: (a) their own behavior toward their partner (i.e., “participant”); and (b) their partner’s behavior toward the participant (i.e., “partner”). No questions regarding parent/caregiver aggression toward their child were asked. The CTS-Form R has high internal consistency, face and concurrent validity, and acceptable construct validity (Straus 1979 ). In the current sample, the internal consistencies for the Reasoning, Verbal Aggression, and Violence subscales were α’s = 0.69, 0.76, and 0.76, respectively, and for the Participant and Partner scales were 0.72 and 0.69, respectively.

Characteristics of the neighborhood environment are assessed by the Neighborhood Inventory for Environmental Typology (NIfETy; Furr-Holden et al. 2008 ). The NIfETy method uses independent evaluators who go to the residential blocks of Baltimore neighborhoods to systematically assess physical and social disorder; indicators of violence, alcohol, and other drug exposure; and positive neighborhood characteristics. Built upon previous methods that assessed neighborhood context to inform child and family health (e.g., Caughy et al. 2001 ; McDonnell 2007 ; Raudenbush et al. 2003 ; Sampson and Raudenbush 1999 , 2005 ), the NIfETy method involves an epidemiological approach to evaluate characteristics of residential neighborhoods that might indicate a change in crime, violence, victimization, and alcohol and other drug exposure in a manner that is quantifiable, replicable, and designed to be longitudinal (Furr-Holden et al. 2008 ). For the MORE Project, the city unit blocks in which the consented families resided were given to the NIfETy project investigators who sent trained field assessors to make evaluations using Palm OS Zire 31 Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) programmed with Pendragon Form 5.0 software. For Cohort 1, 98.1% of the families’ neighborhood blocks were assessed. The assessments were conducted in the daytime.

There are 114 quantitative and 15 qualitative items that comprise seven domains assessed by the NIfETy that include positive/healthy and negative indicators: (1) Physical layout of the block face (e.g., length/width of block, alleys present [that run through to next street], dwelling count); (2) Types of structures (e.g., single family/detached homes, liquor stores, churches); (3) Adult activity (e.g., adults watching youth, adults in work uniforms, [male] adults sitting on steps); (4) Youth activity (e.g., youth playing, “corner kids/boys,” dangerous youth activities; 5) Physical disorder and order (e.g., abandoned/vacant structures, new construction or renovation, police present); (6) Social disorder and order (e.g., outdoor community recreation outlets, homeless people, traffic); and (7) Violence and alcohol and other drug indicators (e.g., drug paraphernalia, memorials, obvious signs of drug selling). In an independent sample, internal consistency reliability for the Total NIfTEy scale was good (intra-class coefficient = 0.84); α coefficients ranged from 0.27 to 0.90 for the subscales; and inter-rater reliability and validity were in the acceptable to good range (Furr-Holden et al. 2008 ).

Adverse Life Events in the child’s life are assessed by both child and parent report on the MESA, respectively. The former is assessed using the Multicultural Events Schedule for Adolescents (MESA; Gonzales et al. 1995 ). This scale was developed to assess major and minor life events that are specific to an inner city, multi-ethnic population (Gonzales et al. 1995 ). It was normed on African American and Caucasian youth, as well as English- and Spanish-speaking Mexican American adolescents. The MESA was derived from existing life events scales (e.g., Adolescent Perceived Events Scale, Compas et al. 1987 ; Adolescent Life Events Checklist, Johnson and McCutcheon 1982 ) and is comprised of 84 items that occur over the past 3 months. A Total life events score is based on the total number of events endorsed, with a higher score indicating more adverse life events and hassles. There are eight separate subscales: Family Trouble/Change; Family Conflict; Peer Hassles/Conflict; School Hassles; Economic Stress; Perceived Discrimination; Language Conflicts; and Perceived Violence/Personal Victimization. The MESA has concurrent validity and adequate test–retest reliability (two weeks: r  = 0.71; Gonzales et al. 1995 ). In the current study, the Cronbach’s α for the MESA total score is 0.90.

Parental reports of adverse events that occurred in their child’s life are assessed using a modified version of the Multicultural Events Schedule for Adolescents (MESA; Gonzales et al. 1995 ) created for the MORE Project using five of the eight subscales. This Parent-MESA is comprised of 34 items that occurred over the past year and include the following subscales: Family Trouble/Change, Family Conflict, Economic Stress, and Violence/Personal Victimization. In the current study, the Parent-MESA Total score Cronbach’s α is 0.86.

Protective Factors

Children’s Prosocial Coping is assessed by the child’s self-report on the ACOPE and SSRS, as well as teacher reports on the SSRS and TOCA. The Adolescent Coping for Problem Experiences (A-COPE; Patterson and McCubbin 1987 ) is a youth self-report measure that identifies major coping strategies and behaviors in dealing with general life stress (Schwarzer and Schwarzer 1996 ). The 54 items rated on a 5-point frequency scale comprise 12 subscales, although only seven of them are used in the MORE Project (i.e., Ventilating Feelings, Seeking Diversions, Solving Family Problems, Avoiding Problems, Seeking Spiritual Support, Investing in Close Friends, and Seeking Professional Support). The A-COPE has been validated within a longitudinal study investigating health-risk behaviors and is appropriate for research on youth stress and health-risk behaviors (Schwarzer and Schwarzer 1996 ). In the current study, the internal consistency reliability for the A-COPE Total score is α = 0.72.

The Social Skills Rating System (SSRS; Gresham and Elliott 1990 ) assesses third through twelfth grade students’ social behaviors that may affect student-teacher relationships, peer acceptance, and academic performance (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ). There are five subscales, two of which are used in the MORE Project: Cooperation and Self-Control. The Cooperation scale includes behaviors such as helping others, sharing materials, and complying with rules and directions (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ). The Self-Control scale includes behaviors exhibited in conflict (e.g., teasing) and nonconflict (e.g., compromising) situations. Items are rated on a three-point Likert frequency scale. National norms are based on a very large, diverse (e.g., multi-racial, male, female) sample of youth, yielding a median Social Skills Total score coefficient α of 0.90 across all informants (i.e., parent, child, and teacher). Published internal consistency α coefficients for the Cooperation and Self-Control subscales ranged from 0.78 to 0.84, with acceptable test–retest reliabilities for the Cooperation and Self-Control subscales (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ). In the MORE Project, internal consistencies for the youth’s Social Skills Rating Scale Cooperation and Self-Control subscales are α = 0.74 and 0.58, respectively, and the combined SSRS Cooperation and Self-Control α is 0.78.

The Teacher Form of the SSRS (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ) individually assesses student’s social skills and academic competence using this screening instrument that classifies social behavior in educational and family environments. The Teacher Form of the SSRS is comprised of subscales that assess social skills, problem behaviors and academic competence. The 57 items are rated using 3-point frequency and importance scales. The raw scores from the Social Skills Scale and the Problem Behaviors Scale are converted into age- and gender-normed standard scores ( M   =  100; SD  = 15; Benes 1995 ) based on a large standardization sample that included regular and special education students, as well as a significant proportion of ethnic minority youth (Benes 1995 ). The teacher report is psychometrically sound and has good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and validity (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ). The Cooperation, Assertion, Self-Control, Internalizing, Externalizing, and Hyperactivity subscales are used in the current study; the Cronbach’s αs for those scales range from 0.80 to 0.93 and the Cronbach’s α for the Academic Competence scale as 0.96.

The Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation — Revised (TOCA-R; Werthamer-Larsson et al. 1991 ) is a brief measure of each child’s adequacy of performance on the core tasks in the classroom as defined and assessed by the teacher. The teacher reports on the adequacy of each child’s performance on a six-point scale on six basic tasks: Accepting authority (aggressive behavior); social participation (shy or withdrawn behavior); self-regulation (impulsivity); motor control (hyperactivity); concentration (inattention); and peer likeability (rejection). In addition, the teacher reports on youth’s academic performance, behavior, education, substance use, and mental health services s/he perceives each child needs or is receiving. The TOCA-R subscales included in the MORE Project include: Concentration, Aggression, Shy Behavior, Likeability, Hyperactivity, Impulsivity, Proactive Aggression, Oppositional Defiant, and Conduct Problems. Excluding the Shy Behavior scale, whose α was 0.51, the subscale Cronbach’s αs in the MORE Project range from 0.78 to 0.91.

Cognition and Cognitive Ability are hypothesized as protective factors, including the WASI and Social Information Processing . General cognitive ability is assessed in the MORE Project using two of four subtests of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI; Psychological Corporation 1999 ). The WASI was designed to provide a quick and accurate estimate of an individual’s intellectual functioning for screening purposes (Psychological Corporation 1999 ). The Vocabulary subtest assesses expressive vocabulary, expressive knowledge, verbal knowledge, and fund of information; Matrix Reasoning involves gridded patterns to assess nonverbal reasoning ability (Psychological Corporation 1999 ). The published WASI test–retest reliability coefficients for the children’s sample ranged from 0.86 to 0.93 for the Vocabulary subtest, 0.86 to 0.96 for Matrix Reasoning, and for the two-subtests combined were from 0.85 to 0.88 (Psychological Corporation 1999 ).

Social information processing is assessed via a modified version of Dodge and Frame’s ( 1982 ) series of vignettes describing a hypothetical situation between the participant and a peer (Bradshaw et al. in press). The interviewer reads aloud each scenario and participants state their interpretation of the provocateurs’ intent (hostile attribution bias) and their own likely response (aggressive response generation). Using a seven-point coding scheme, independent coders rate intent and response such that higher scores indicate more aggressive hostile attribution biases and aggressive response generation, respectively. Prior research with this measure yielded αs of 0.62 (intent) and 0.63 (response). The correlations among the intent ratings assigned by the three coders for the MORE project ranged from r  = .94, p  < .001 to r  = .96, p  < .001, with an ICC of .95, indicating a high level of agreement. Similarly, the correlations among the response ratings ranged from r  = .91, p  < .001 to r  = .93, p  < .001, with an ICC of .91. Ratings were averaged to yield one score per item. The intent and response scores across all four vignettes were averaged, yielding one score for hostile attribution bias (α = .78) and one for response generation (α = .78), respectively. Having lower scores on the intent and response items is hypothesized as more protective.

Parent Psychiatric Health is assessed using the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R; Derogatis 1977 ), a widely used self-report measure designed to assess a broad range of adult psychiatric symptom patterns. There are nine symptom scales and three global scales (i.e., Global Severity Index, Positive Symptom Distress Index; Positive Symptom Total). The nine symptom scales are: Somatization, Obsessive–Compulsive, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Depression, Anxiety, Hostility, Phobic Anxiety, Paranoid Ideation, and Psychoticism. The SCL-90-R has excellent reported reliability and validity (Derogatis and Savitz 2000 ). In the MORE Project sample, the SCL-90-R total score Cronbach’s α is 0.98. Lower scores on the SCL-90-R are hypothesized as protective.

Healthy Family Environment is being assessed by parent reports on the FES and the PPS. The Family Environment Scale (FES; Moos and Moos 1986 ), which assesses social and environmental characteristics of the family. There are 10 nine-item subscales including: Cohesion, Expressiveness, Conflict, Independence, Achievement Orientation, Intellectual–cultural orientation, Active-recreational orientation, Moral-religious emphasis, Organization, and Control. The FES is used to measure the parent/caregiver’s perceptions of the family environment, deemed an important potential protective factor. In the current study, the Cronbach’s α for the Total FES score is 0.77. The Parenting Practices Scale (PPS) assesses parental involvement, monitoring, and discipline using a five-point Likert scale. Parents/caregivers are asked how frequently over the past month they engaged in positive, developmentally appropriate interactions and communications with their child (i.e., 10-item Parental Involvement subscale), and applied discipline/punishment and its effectiveness (i.e., eight-item Discipline subscale). In the MORE Project, the Cronbach’s αs are 0.79 and 0.63, respectively.

Healthy School Environment is assessed via school administrator, teacher, and child assessments. A background questionnaire is completed by each principal, vice-principal, and teacher with MORE Project students to provide information on their educational career and teaching certification (e.g., highest degree, year graduated, type of certification). School Climate is measured by a questionnaire that uses a four-point Likert scale to assess the atmosphere of the overall school environment including safety and availability of resources and support from the principal, vice-principal, and teacher’s perspective. In the current sample, the Cronbach’s α’s for the School Climate items for the principals and teachers are 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. Teachers also completed the Classroom Climate scale that indicates the general skill level and behavior of all students in their class (in aggregate) on a five-point Likert scale; Cronbach’s α = 0.78. Children’s attitudes toward school are assessed via four items administered to the students from the Sense of School Membership Scale (Goodenow 1993 ). Youth indicate on a four-point Likert scale the extent to which they agree with statements such as, “I feel like I belong at this school” and “The teachers here respect me.” Prior research on this measure reported α’s ranging from 0.77 to 0.88 (Dahlberg et al. 1998 ; Goodenow 1993 ); the current α reliability coefficient is only 0.57.

Healthy Neighborhood Environment is the last level of hypothesized protective factor, which includes parent reports, child self-reports, and assessments of positive neighborhood indicators. Positive aspects of the neighborhood environment are assessed using the Collective Efficacy Scale (Sampson et al. 1997 ) as indicated by the parent/guardian. Collective efficacy is defined as “social cohesion among neighbors combined with their willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good” (Sampson et al. 1997 ). An extremely large survey of Chicago neighborhood residents showed that collective efficacy has a strong negative association with violence and high between-neighborhood reliability (Sampson et al.). The five-item Informal Social Control subscale α reliability coefficient in the MORE Project is 0.79. Students’ perceptions of safety are assessed through the following three items: “I feel safe at my school,” “I feel safe in my house,” and “I feel safe in my neighborhood.” Students indicate the extent to which they agree with each statement on a four-point Likert scale. Prior research on this measure reported an α of 0.63 (Dahlberg et al. 1998 ) and in this project the reliability coefficient is 0.54. Indicators of healthy neighborhoods as assessed by the NIfETy Method (Furr-Holden et al. 2008 ) are also hypothesized to protect children from adversities associated with exposure to community violence.

The adverse outcomes that are hypothesized in the conceptual model to be associated with youth’s exposure to chronic community violence include internalizing symptoms, externalizing behaviors, academic difficulties, and substance use.

Internalizing symptoms and externalizing behaviors are assessed using the internalizing and externalizing/hyperactivity scales, respectively, from the Teacher Form of the SSRS (Gresham and Elliott 1990 ) and particular scales on the TOCA-R (Werthamer-Larsson et al. 1991 ). Additionally, the Youth Self-Report (YSR; Achenbach 1991 ), a widely used self-rating of competencies and problems over the past 6 months that parallel those of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach 1991 ) indicates internalizing and externalizing syndromes. The YSR was normed on a large sample of youth of various ethnicities and socio-economic levels. The test–retest reliabilities ranged from 0.47 to 0.79 and internal consistencies ranged from 0.71 to 0.95 (Achenbach). Although the published recommended minimum age for the YSR is 11 years, communication with a researcher at the YSR publication company (D. Jacobowitz, personal communication, June 24, 2003), Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment, clarified that the YSR may be used with younger children, but requires a fifth grade reading level. Standard practice, according to Mr. Jacobowitz, is to read the items aloud to elementary school students below the fifth grade. As such, MORE Project interviewers read the YSR aloud to all student participants. YSR standard scores ( T -scores; Mean = 50; SD  = 10) are used in the current project. The subscales used in the MORE Project include: Withdrawn, Somatic Complaints, Anxious/Depressed, Social Problems, Thought Problems, and Attention Problems. The Cronbach’s α for the YSR Total score is 0.92.

Parent reports of their child’s internalizing symptoms and externalizing behaviors are assessed using a standardized questionnaire that parallels the Youth Self-Report form. The Child Behavior Checklist-4-18 (CBCL-4-18; Achenbach 1991 ) is a very widely used instrument (Crijnen et al. 1997 ) that yields parents’ reports of children’s competencies and problems in a standardized format. This parent-rated behavior problem checklist yields data on internalizing and externalizing behavior problems as well as social competence (i.e., activities, social, school functioning). The CBCL-4-18 is appropriate for parents of children aged 4–18 years. The behavior problem checklist items are grouped into behavioral syndromes that correspond to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th Edition (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association 1994 ) diagnostic categories. The CBCL-4-18 was normed on nationally representative samples, with good to excellent internal consistency and inter-parental agreement (Doll 1998 ). In the MORE Project, the same subscales in the YSR are used in addition to Delinquent and Aggressive Behavior subscales. For the current study, the Cronbach’s α for the CBCL-4-18 Total score is 0.94.

Two more measures that assess the youth’s self-reported externalizing behaviors include the DVPS and bullying. Youth’s perpetration of violence is assessed using DuRant’s Youth Violence Perpetration Scale (DVPS). It is a brief self-report measure of different types of lifetime violent and aggressive acts across a range of severity (e.g., “Have you ever been in a gang fight?” “Have you ever carried a weapon?” “Have you ever hurt someone so badly they had to be treated by a doctor or nurse?”). Published psychometric properties are not available. Reliability estimates were calculated on the eight summed items and were low (Cronbach’s α = 0.41). Bullying , consistent with Olweus’ ( 1993 ) definition and that of other large scale studies (e.g., World Health Organization’s international study of bullying; Nansel et al. 2001 ; Spriggs et al. 2007 ), is defined in the MORE student battery as occurring “when a person or group of people repeatedly say or do mean or hurtful things to someone on purpose.” It includes intentional behaviors like teasing, hitting, threatening, name-calling, ignoring, and leaving someone out (Bradshaw et al. 2007 ). Based on the work of Solberg and Olweus ( 2003 ), a threshold of two or more incidents of bullying in the past month is used to determine “frequent” involvement in bullying. No reliability coefficients were calculated because only one item was asked for victimization (“How often have you been bullied during the last month?”) and one for perpetration (“How often have you bullied someone else during the last month?”).

Academic difficulties are another hypothesized adverse outcome of chronic community violence exposure. Academic achievement in the MORE Project is assessed using the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-Second Edition-Abbreviated (WIAT-II-A; Psychological Corporation 2001 ) consists of several subtests, two of which are used in this project: Word Reading and Numerical Operations). The WIAT-II-A efficiently assesses basic academic skills and intervention needs in young children through adults. The screener permits the calculation of age- and grade-based standard scores and was standardized using a large representative sample. The WIAT-II-A is widely used, and has demonstrated reliability and validity, with little evidence of practice effects (Psychological Corporation 2001 ). Teacher ratings of academic competence are measured with the Teacher Form of the SSRS, as well as subscales from the TOCA-R. Additionally, academic achievement indicators will be obtained from the Baltimore City Public School System (e.g., attendance, special education status, limited English proficiency, Maryland School Assessment (MSA) and Stanford math and reading scores).

Substance exposure and use , the final hypothesized outcome, is assessed using the Baltimore Substance Use Scale (BSUS; Chilcoat et al. 1995 ; Chilcoat and Anthony 1996 ; Kellam and Anthony 1998 ). The BSUS was developed for use in longitudinal prospective community-epidemiological studies of students in third through eighth grades. It is an adaptation of Elliott and Huizinga’s measure of substance use, which they developed for use in the National Survey of Delinquency and Drug Use (Elliot et al. 1985 ). Youth report on their knowledge, current and/or anticipated use of tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, crack cocaine, heroin, inhalants, and stimulants. Reliability coefficients were not calculated for the MORE Project because individual items are used to reflect intention and drug use patterns.

Data Analyses

The conceptual model in Fig.  1 drives the analyses that will be conducted using the MORE data. The primary analyses will thus involve estimating the prevalence of exposure to community violence, investigating risk and protective factors for such exposure, and examining outcomes of that exposure. Questions of primary interest will include whether rates of violence exposure differ across violence strata, gender, or race, and whether students with different levels of risk or protective factors, such as family support, have different levels of exposure to violence. Analyses will need to take into account the clustering of students within schools and violence strata, using methods for clustered data such as generalized estimating equations (GEE; Liang and Zeger 1986 ) or multilevel models (Raudenbush and Bryk 2002 ). Multilevel models will allow the formal investigation of relationships between variables at both the individual student level and at the level of the school and neighborhood, investigating, for example, how protective factors at both the community level and at the individual level reduce violence exposure. It will also be important to control for other baseline characteristics of the children and their neighborhoods, such as ethnicity, since the neighborhoods differ not just in their violence levels but also in other characteristics. The use of GEE and multilevel models will allow us to include these characteristics as additional predictors of outcomes.

One of the strengths of the MORE Project is the availability of data on many measures from multiple informants, as illustrated in Fig.  2 . For example, both the students and their parents provide information on the children’s internalizing and externalizing problems (through the YSR and CBCL instruments, respectively), and both the students and their parents also provide information on community violence exposure (through the CREV-R and CREV-P, respectively). This permits systematic investigation of the concordance between child and parent reports, providing additional insight into what those individuals are experiencing and giving researchers in the field of community violence guidance for future data collection. Investigation of the performance of the measures used in the MORE Project also provide valuable information on the use of those measures in a low-income urban environment and whether the standard scales are applicable. When the existing scales do not seem sufficient, the variables will be first grouped based on theory followed by confirmatory factor analysis (Anderson and Gerbing 1988 ) to identify scale compositions that potentially best fit the MORE Project data. The results could have important implications for future use of these scales.

Another strength of the MORE Project is the availability of longitudinal data for students, with up to 3 years of data available for each child. This is uncommon among community violence studies, particularly those with multiple strata of neighborhood violence. The longitudinal data will allow the calculation of simple correlations over time, to investigate the stability of violence exposure as well as of the risk and protective factors. It will also allow researchers to examine how violence exposure at one time point is associated with outcomes measured later, such as how exposure to violence in 1 year is related to behavior problems the following year. The primary statistical tool to be used in these longitudinal analyses will again be GEE and multilevel models, which can account for both the clustering of observations within children as well as control for year 1 characteristics and demographics (e.g., race, gender) by including them as predictors in the models. More complex GEE models with interaction terms will allow tests of hypotheses such as whether odds of exposure to community violence vary across waves, whether the magnitude of associations vary over time, and whether baseline characteristics such as race/ethnicity or gender moderate the effects of violence exposure. In some cases, the longitudinal data may be used to assess mediators, such as whether parental distress mediates the relationship between exposure to violence and children’s behavior, but these analyses will need to be done with care and heavily informed by the conceptual model, as temporality may be hard to determine precisely.

The MORE Project is a comprehensive, community-based, longitudinal, prospective, and theoretically driven study of children’s exposure to community violence. Data analyses have been underway and data collection for additional waves is ongoing. Beyond issues raised previously, there are additional challenges and limitations to the study, some of which are discussed below.

Limitations

Regarding recruitment, a number of factors impacted the failure to attain the initial target in Wave 1 (e.g., fewer students were available in the participant pool than anticipated based on published school enrollments; year-long delay in obtaining IRB approval for the project thus the grant award was delayed one year; recruitment began in the second semester of school instead of at the beginning of the first semester when we would be perceived as an integrated part of the school environment; no prior relationship existed between the researchers and the participating schools which necessitated “marketing” campaign in an historically conservative climate). Recruitment challenges were further compounded by those that face other studies of urban, primarily ethnic minority families. The caregivers are often challenging to recruit in research, even though all parents in school samples who fail to return consent forms do not necessarily intend to deny their child’s participation in the research activities (Hollman and McNamara 1999 ). The literature indicates as low as a 40% parental consent rate without using active methods to increase participation (Brooks and Kendall 1982 ). Although only slightly more than half of the eligible families agreed to participate in the MORE Project, active recruitment strategies were used, enlisting the aid of the principals, teachers, administrators, consultants, and parent helpers, among others.

Following-up families after the first year in which they consented also poses challenges. If the student has changed schools, it is particularly challenging to track and trace the family. The changes in privacy legislation have further complicated previously successful strategies to track and trace parents/caregivers rendering many of those practices no longer effective. These include using social security and driver’s license numbers to locate families once they have moved. The advent of cellular phone use which, in many cases among inner-city families, replaces home telephones and are not traceable—particularly those that do not require registration for use. Regarding transfer students, there is generally poor follow-up between the original school and the student’s new school for numerous reasons, including parents/caregivers not notifying the old school that they are removing their child and the new system not obtaining school records in a timely fashion. Some students are “lost in the cracks.” Another complication in locating families for follow-up assessments is inaccurate home addresses. At the beginning of the school year, contact information is obtained from parents and sent to the schools, although never at 100% and often with inaccuracies. Despite the dramatic overall differential characteristics between the neighborhoods of each strata as illustrated in Table  1 , there may be overlap in the amount and frequency of children’s exposure to community violence across the strata. The geographic boundaries of neighborhoods may not eliminate children’s exposure to community violence, particularly when the definition and assessment of exposure includes media (television, film, and videogame) and hearing about (reported) violent events. Four of the six MORE Project schools are in zip codes that are contiguous. In past generations, children were less mobile and were more inclined to stay within their neighborhoods. Mass transit, reduced parental monitoring, spending time with friends/relatives outside of their primary residence and other factors may contribute to heterogeneous strata and greater exposure to community violence than one would expect for the low and moderate violence strata. This contributes to the importance of having multiple—and psychometrically sound—methods of assessing youth’s exposure to community violence to comprehensively understand its complexities. However, some of the measures assess overlapping constructs, making it challenging to test the conceptual model. Data reduction strategies, such as the creation of composite factors, will be essential to manage such a large number of constructs.

Community Violence and Youth: Treatment and Prevention

The need for psychosocial treatment and prevention is particularly critical in inner-cities where mental health resources are sparse (Cooley and Lambert 2006 ). The effects of traumatic events on youth are lessened when the youth has a chance to process those events (Pynoos and Nader 1990 ), and intervening early in life is most beneficial (Earls 1991 ; McAlister-Groves et al. 1993 ). For example, there has been some discussion of whether anxiety serves an inhibitory or protective function by keeping youth who live in violent communities from being further exposed to violence (e.g., fear may motivate them to remain indoors). Another example involves children being at lower risk for aggression if they had some degree of anxiety (Boyd et al. 2003 ). Although avoidance is sometimes the most appropriate strategy, youth need an array of strategies for handling stressful and anxiety-provoking situations. Those with anxiety, affective, and behavioral problems typically have a limited repertoire.

There is a paucity of empirically validated, published treatment intervention studies for community violence related distress. Caregivers are important potential mediators in preventing the adverse emotional effects of community violence exposure (e.g., their physical availability, provision of emotional support in working through traumatic events, serving as models of prosocial behavior and coping (Wallen and Rubin 1997 ). However, that presupposes that the caregivers are themselves prosocial role models. The MORE Project will investigate whether certain parental/caregiver characteristics (e.g., hostility, anger, psychiatric illness) challenge their ability to serve as prosocial role models. Although parents in the MORE Project report on their children’s community violence exposure, no direct assessment of parents’ own community violence exposure is included, which may mediate their ability to optimally help their children navigate hostile contexts. Increasing children’s competence, self-efficacy, and problem solving skills and the inclusion of parents in treatment have been identified as potential strategies to treat youth who have been exposed to violence (Davies and Flannery 1998 ; Duncan 1996 ; Garbarino et al. 1991 ). Promoting parental understanding of child development (Beardslee 2003 ) may also offset the constraints adult caregivers impose when rearing children in settings with frequent violence (Podorefsky et al. 2001 ). Active approaches are crucial because many inner-city youth cannot escape direct and indirect exposure to the violence in their communities (e.g., Garbarino et al. 1991 ; Osofsky et al. 1993 ).

Poor urban children are among those most vulnerable to the development of emotional and behavioral problems (McKay et al. 1998 ; Tolan and Henry 1996 ; Tuma 1989 ), but the least likely to receive adequate services (Day and Roberts 1991 ; McKay et al. 1998 ) and most likely to terminate treatment prematurely (McKay et al. 1996 ). School-based preventive interventions for children exposed to community violence, particularly those that are held regularly after-school and offer intensive, affordable, yet developmentally appropriate and fun, evidence-based treatments have particular promise because they are not stigmatized as pull-out programs, keep children safe and well monitored in the hours following school and before caregivers are home from work, and offer the intensity needed to adequately apply the intervention. These are under-developed in the literature.

A series of interventions have been created with the intent of altering social-cognitive styles, and thus may benefit children exposed to community violence. One such program called Brain Power (Hudley et al. 1998 ) was designed to alter the hostile attributional bias through behavioral rehearsal. The intervention targeted third to sixth grade children and had a positive impact on their interpretation of peers’ intents in ambiguous situations. Although the attributional biases were amenable to change through the intervention, the positive impacts on aggressive behavior were relatively short lived. A more intensive small group intervention called Coping Power has been shown to alter social information processing patterns and aggressive behavior in 8- to 13-year-old children (Lochman and Wells 2004 ). Similar effects were observed in the classroom-based preventive intervention called Making Choices which addresses elementary school children’s social cognitive and emotion regulation skills (Fraser et al. 2005 ). Furthermore, the Metropolitan Area Child Study (MACS) examined the impact of a social-cognitive ecological intervention for aggressive youth in urban and inner-city communities (Eron et al. 2002 ). This work highlighted the importance of addressing youth, peer, and parent attitudes toward violence to promote sustainable changes in children’s beliefs about the appropriateness and effectiveness of aggression.

Prevention and intervention programs typically have minimal impact in producing sustained deterrents to youth violence (Tolan and Guerra 1994 ) and its concomitants, although there may be more promise for the victims of community violence. It is critical, however, to fully appreciate the multiple influences that compromise urban children’s lives (e.g., un-/under-employment, quality of education and housing, family dysfunction (Reese et al. 2001 ). For example, it is problematic to teach urban youth conflict management skills without addressing the effects of witnessing violence (Jenkins and Bell 1994 ). Human ecology theory emphasizes the importance of understanding children in context, a critical component in designing effective treatment and preventive interventions (e.g., Bronfenbrenner 1979 ; Lerner 1995 ; Lewis et al. 1998 ). Responding to cultural differences when intervening with youth is essential to improve service delivery (Kazdin 1993 ). Each community has unique cultural characteristics, strengths and needs; “customizing” interventions when working with specific populations is important (Reese et al. 2001 ). Well-designed studies of multiple adverse outcomes associated with youth’s community violence exposure and associated protective factors are warranted to help design effective school-based preventive and treatment interventions.

Future Research

Future research should extend community-epidemiological longitudinal studies of urban children from elementary school into and through middle school and beyond. In middle school, childhood problem behaviors that are sequela to violence exposure may become more pronounced, such as academic achievement problems becoming more evident as the achievement gap widens and alcohol and substance use emerge. Additional areas that warrant further study are neurocognitive and neurobehavioral functioning associated with youth’s exposure to community violence as well as physical health concomitants. Conversely, there are numerous examples of resiliency despite the environmental challenges urban youth experience. Compared to the volume of studies that focus on risk factors, more research is needed on youth’s exposure to community violence that focus on protective factors and resilience. Lastly, it would be beneficial to compare the MORE Project data from urban Baltimore to those from other national and international geographical areas (urban, suburban, and rural) and racial/ethnic populations. Although neighborhood crime may be similar among some metropolitan areas, the role of culture as well as immigration challenges may result in differences in the impact of children’s exposure to community violence.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge those who have assisted with the MORE Project research. We thank our collaborators: Scott Hubbard, Nicholas Ialongo, Phillip Leaf, Megan Bair-Merrit, and Jean Ko. This endeavor is only successful with the ongoing support and cooperation of the Baltimore City Public School System and our six partner schools. The administrators and staff at these schools have provided access and guidance, allowing us to learn from them. We sincerely thank the Baltimore City students and their families who share their lives with us for the betterment of others. We thank the dedicated MORE Team (Alisa, Amber, Andrew, Corina, Dan, Debbie, Katie, Maria, Max, Mike, Lindsay, Steph, Ty, and Winn), with particular appreciation to Kathryn Otte for contributions to this paper. Support and funding for the MORE Project comes from a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse to M. Cooley (1 R01 DA018318).

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

• Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the youth self-report and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
• Aisenberg, E., & Ell, K. (2005). Contextualizing community violence and its effects: An ecological model of parent–child interdependent coping. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,20, 855–871. doi:10.1177/0886260505276833. [ PubMed ]
• Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Kabbani, N. S. (2001). The dropout process in life course perspective: Early risk factors at home and school. Teachers College Record,103, 760–822. doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00134.
• American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
• Anderson, J., & Gerbing, D. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin,103, 411–423. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411.
• Attar, B. K., & Guerra, N. G. (1994). The effects of cumulative violence exposure on children living in urban neighborhoods. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Society Convention, Washington, D.C.
• Attar, B. K., Guerra, N. C., & Tolan, P. H. (1994). Neighborhood disadvantage, stressful life events, and adjustment in urban elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,23, 391–400. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2304_5.
• Baltimore City Data Collaborative (BCDC). (2003). How are we doing? Indicator data on child and family wellbeing. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.baltimorekidsdata.org.
• Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,63, 575–582. doi:10.1037/h0045925. [ PubMed ]
• Barreto, S., & McManus, M. (1997). Casting the net for “depression” among ethnic minority children from high-risk urban communities. Clinical Psychology Review,17, 823–845. doi:10.1016/S0272-7358(97)00054-8. [ PubMed ]
• Beardslee, W., & Podorefsky, D. (1988). Resilient adolescents whose parents have serious affective and other psychiatric disorders: The importance of self-understanding and relationships. The American Journal of Psychiatry,145, 63–69. [ PubMed ]
• Beardslee, W., Versage, E., & Gladstone, T. (1998). Children of affectively ill parents: A review of the past ten years. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,37, 1134–1141. [ PubMed ]
• Beardslee, W. R. (2003). Out of the darkened room: When a parent is depressed: Protecting the children and strengthening the family. Boston, MA: Little Brown & Co.
• Bell, C. (1997). Community violence: Causes, prevention, and intervention. Journal of the National Medical Association,89, 657–662. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Bell, C. C., & Jenkins, E. J. (1991). Traumatic stress and children. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved,2, 175–188. [ PubMed ]
• Benes, K. M. (1995). Review of the social skills rating system. In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
• Boivin, M., & Vitaro, F. (1995). The impact of peer relationships on aggression in childhood: Inhibition through coercion or promotion through peer support. In J. McCord (Ed.), Coercion and punishment in long-term perspectives (pp. 183–197). NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Bolton, D., O’Ryan, D., Udwin, O., Boyle, S., & Yule, W. (2000). The long-term psychological effects of a disaster experienced in adolescence: II: General psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines,41, 513–523. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00636. [ PubMed ]
• Boney-McCoy, S., & Finkelhor, D. (1995). Prior victimization: A risk factor for child sexual abuse and for PTSD-related symptomatology among sexually abused youth. Child Abuse & Neglect,19, 1401–1421. doi:10.1016/0145-2134(95)00104-9. [ PubMed ]
• Bowen, N. K., & Bowen, G. L. (1999). Effects of crime and violence in neighborhoods and schools on the school behavior and performance of adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research,14, 319–342. doi:10.1177/0743558499143003.
• Boyd, R., Cooley, M., Lambert, S., & Ialongo, N. (2003). First grade child risk behaviors for community violence in middle school. Journal of Community Psychology,31, 297–314. doi:10.1002/jcop.10047.
• Bradshaw, C. P., & Garbarino, J. (2004). Social cognition as a mediator of the influence of family and community violence on adolescent development: Implications for intervention. In J. Devine, J. Gilligan, K. A. Miczek, R. Shaikh, & D. Pfaff (Eds.), Youth violence: Scientific approaches to prevention (pp. 85–105). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. [ PubMed ]
• Bradshaw, C. P., Rodgers, C., Ghandour, L., & Garbarino, J. (in press). Social-cognitive mediators of the association between community violence exposure and aggressive behavior. School Psychology Review .
• Bradshaw, C. P., Sawyer, A. L., & O’Brennan, L. M. (2007). Bullying and peer victimization at school: Perceptual differences between students and school staff. School Psychology Review,36, 361–382.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Brooks, P. H., & Kendall, E. D. (1982). Working with children. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Strategies and techniques of child study (pp. 325–343). New York: Academy.
• Brown, D., Ahmed, F., Gary, L., & Milburn, N. (1995). Major depression in a community sample of African Americans. The American Journal of Psychiatry,152, 373–378. [ PubMed ]
• Bruce, M., Takeuchi, D., & Leaf, P. (1991). Poverty and psychiatric status: Longitudinal evidence from the New Haven Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study. Archives of General Psychiatry,48, 470–474. [ PubMed ]
• Brunswick, A., & Messeri, P. (1984). Origins of cigarette smoking in academic achievement, stress and social expectations: Does gender make a difference? The Journal of Early Adolescence,4, 353–370. doi:10.1177/0272431684044006.
• Bryant, A., Schulenberg, J., Bachman, J., O’Malley, P., & Johnston, L. (2000). Understanding the links among school misbehavior, academic achievement, and cigarette use: A national panel study of adolescents. Prevention Science,1, 71–87. doi:10.1023/A:1010038130788. [ PubMed ]
• Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1991). Criminal victimization in the United States, 1989. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.
• Burns, M., Morrison, J., Khoury, P., & Glueck, C. (1980). Blood pressure studies in Black and White inner-city and suburban adolescents. Preventive Medicine,9, 41–50. doi:10.1016/0091-7435(80)90058-4. [ PubMed ]
• Caughy, M. O., O’Campo, P. J., & Patterson, J. (2001). A brief observational measure for urban neighborhoods. Health & Place,7, 225–236. doi:10.1016/S1353-8292(01)00012-0. [ PubMed ]
• Chilcoat, H., & Anthony, J. (1996). Impact of parent monitoring on initiation of drug use through late childhood. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,35, 91–100. doi:10.1097/00004583-199601000-00017. [ PubMed ]
• Chilcoat, H. D., Dishion, T. J., & Anthony, J. (1995). Parent monitoring and the incidence of drug sampling in urban elementary school children. American Journal of Epidemiology,141, 25–31. [ PubMed ]
• Christofel, K. (1990). Violent death and injury in US children and adolescents. American Journal of Disease Control,144, 697–706. [ PubMed ]
• Compas, B. E., Davis, G. E., Forsythe, C. J., & Wagner, B. M. (1987). Assessment of major and daily stressful events during adolescence: The Adolescent Perceived Events Scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,55, 534–541. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.55.4.534. [ PubMed ]
• Cooley, M., Boyd, R. C., & Grados, J. J. (2004). Feasibility of an anxiety preventive intervention for community violence exposed children. The Journal of Primary Prevention,25, 105–123. doi:10.1023/B:JOPP.0000039941.85452.ea.
• Cooley, M., & Lambert, S. (2006). School-based interventions for children and adolescents exposed to chronic community violence. In A. Lieberman, R. DeMartino, & N. Fox (Eds.), Interventions for children exposed to violence. New Jersey: Johnson & Johnson Pediatric Institute.
• Cooley, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Assessing community violence: The children’s report of exposure to violence (CREV). Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,34, 201–208. doi:10.1097/00004583-199502000-00015. [ PubMed ]
• Cooley-Quille, M., Boyd, R. C., Frantz, E., & Walsch, J. (2001). Emotional and psychophysiological impact of exposure to community violence in urban adolescents. Journal of Child Clinical Psychology. Special Section: Violence & Youth,30, 199–206. [ PubMed ]
• Cooley-Quille, M. R., & Lorion, R. (1999). Adolescents’ exposure to community violence: Sleep and psychophysiological functioning. Journal of Community Psychology,27, 367–375. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(199907)27:4<367::AID-JCOP1>3.0.CO;2-T.
• Cooley-Quille, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). The emotional impact of children’s exposure to community violence: A preliminary study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,34, 1362–1368. doi:10.1097/00004583-199510000-00022. [ PubMed ]
• Cooley-Strickland, M. R., Scharfstein, L. A., & Beidel, D. C. (2009). Community violence and youth: Prevalence, affect, and behavior . Manuscript submitted for publication.
• Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin,115, 74–101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74.
• Crijnen, A., Achenbach, T., & Verhulst, F. (1997). Comparisons of problems reported by parents of children in 12 cultures: Total problems, externalizing, and internalizing. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,36, 1269–1277. doi:10.1097/00004583-199709000-00020. [ PubMed ]
• Crouch, J. L., Hanson, R. F., Saunders, B. E., Kilpatrick, D. G., & Resnick, H. S. (2000). Income, race/ethnicity, and exposure to violence in youth: Results from the national survey of adolescents. Journal of Community Psychology,28, 625–641. doi:10.1002/1520-6629(200011)28:6<625::AID-JCOP6>3.0.CO;2-R.
• Dahlberg, L. L., Toal, S. B., & Behrens, C. B. (Eds.). (1998). Measuring violence-related attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors among youth: A compendium of assessment tools. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
• Dao, J. (2005, February 9). Baltimore streets meaner, but message is mixed. New York Times . Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/.
• Davies, W. H., & Flannery, D. J. (1998). Post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents exposed to violence. Pediatric Clinics of North America,45, 341–353. doi:10.1016/S0031-3955(05)70010-9. [ PubMed ]
• Day, C., & Roberts, M. (1991). Activities of the Child and Adolescent Service System Program for improving mental health services for children and families. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,20, 340–350. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2004_2.
• Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, AIDS Administration. (2007). Baltimore city HIV/AIDS epidemiological profile. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/AIDS/.
• Derogatis, L. R. (1977). SCL-90-R: Administration. Scoring and procedures manual. Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometrics Research.
• Derogatis, L. R., & Savitz, K. L. (2000). The SCL-90-R and Brief Symptom Inventory in primary care. In M. Maruish (Ed.), Handbook of psychological assessment in primary care settings (pp. 297–334). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Dodge, K. A. (1985). A social information processing model of social competence in children. In M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (pp. 77–125). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Dodge, K. A. (1986). Social information-processing variables in the development of aggression and altruism in children. In C. Zahn-Waxler, E. M. Cummings, & R. Iannotti (Eds.), Altruism and aggression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Dodge, K., & Frame, C. L. (1982). Social-cognitive biases and deficits in aggressive boys. Child Development,53, 620–635. doi:10.2307/1129373. [ PubMed ]
• Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (2003). A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology,39, 349–371. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.349. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Dodge, K. A., & Somberg, D. R. (1987). Hostile attributional biases among aggressive boys are exacerbated under conditions of threat. Child Development,58, 213–224. doi:10.2307/1130303. [ PubMed ]
• Doll, B. (1998). Review of the child behavior checklist. In J. C. Impara & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The thirteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
• Dossey, L. (1993). Healing words. San Francisco: Harper.
• Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). (2008). Briefs and background, drugs and drug abuse, state fact sheets, Maryland 2008 . Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/states/maryland.html.
• Duncan, D. F. (1996). Growing up under the gun: Children and adolescents coping with violent neighborhoods. The Journal of Primary Prevention,16, 343–356. doi:10.1007/BF02411740. [ PubMed ]
• Duncan, S., Duncan, T., & Strycker, L. (2000). Risk and protective factors influencing adolescent problem behavior: A multivariate latent growth curve analysis. Annals of Behavioral Medicine,22, 103–109. doi:10.1007/BF02895772. [ PubMed ]
• DuRant, R., Cadenhead, C., Pendergrast, R., Slavens, G., & Linder, C. (1994). Factors associated with the use of violence among Black adolescents. American Journal of Public Health,84, 612–617. doi:10.2105/AJPH.84.4.612. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Earls, F. (1991). A developmental approach to understanding and controlling violence. In H. Fitzgerald, et al. (Eds.), Theory and research in behavioral pediatrics (pp. 61–88). New York: Plenum.
• Ellickson, P., & Morton, S. (1999). Identifying adolescents at risk for hard drug use: Racial/ethnic variations. The Journal of Adolescent Health,25, 382–395. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(98)00144-X. [ PubMed ]
• Elliot, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Explaining delinquency and drug use. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
• Ellison, C. G. (1991). Religious involvement and subjective well-being. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,32, 80–99. doi:10.2307/2136801. [ PubMed ]
• Epstein, J., Botvin, G., Diaz, T., Williams, C., & Griffin, K. (2000). Aggression, victimization and problem behavior among inner city minority adolescents. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse,9, 51–66. doi:10.1300/J029v09n03_04.
• Eron, L., Huesmann, R., Spindler, A., Guerra, N., Henry, D., & Tolan, P. (2002). A cognitive-ecological approach to preventing aggression in urban settings: Initial outcomes for high-risk children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,70, 179–194. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.179. [ PubMed ]
• Everett, S., Giovino, G., Warren, C., Crossett, L., & Kann, L. (1998). Other substance use among high school students who use tobacco. The Journal of Adolescent Health,23, 289–296. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(98)00023-8. [ PubMed ]
• Farrell, A. D., & Bruce, S. E. (1997). Impact of exposure to community violence on violent behavior and emotional distress among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,26, 2–14. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2601_1. [ PubMed ]
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (1993). Uniform crime reports, 1991. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2002). Uniform crime reports, 2002. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Criminal Justice Information Services Division. (2006a). Crime in the United States by Metropolitan Statistical Area, 2006. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_06.html.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Criminal Justice Information Services Division. (2006b). Crime in the United States, 2006. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/index.html.
• Fitzpatrick, K. (1993). Exposure to violence and presence of depression among low-income, African-American youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,61, 528–531. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.61.3.528. [ PubMed ]
• Fitzpatrick, K. M., & Boldizar, J. P. (1993). The prevalence of depression among low-income African American youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,61, 528–531. [ PubMed ]
• Fraser, M. W., Galinsky, M. J., Smokowki, P. R., Day, S. H., Terizan, M. A., Rose, R. A., et al. (2005). Social information-processing skills training to promote social competence and prevent aggressive behaviors in the third grade. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,73, 1045–1055. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1045. [ PubMed ]
• Freeman, L., Mokros, H., & Poznanski, E. (1993). Violent events reported by normal urban school-aged children: Characteristics and depression correlates. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,32, 419–423. doi:10.1097/00004583-199303000-00025. [ PubMed ]
• Furr-Holden, C. D. M., Smart, M. J., Pokorni, J. P., Ialongo, N. S., Holder, H., & Anthony, J. C. (2008). The NIfETy method for environmental assessment of neighborhood-level indicators of alcohol and other drug exposure. Prevention Science, 9(4), 245–255. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Garbarino, J., Kostelny, K., & Dubrow, N. (1991). No place to be a child: Growing up in a war zone. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Garmezy, N. (1993). Children in poverty: Resilience despite risk. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes,56, 127–136. [ PubMed ]
• Giaconia, R., & Reinherz, H. (1995). Traumas and posttraumatic stress disorder in a community population of older adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,34, 1369. doi:10.1097/00004583-199510000-00023. [ PubMed ]
• Gibbs, J. T. (1984). Black adolescents and youth: An endangered species. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,54, 6–21. [ PubMed ]
• Gladstein, J., Rusonis, E. J., & Heald, F. P. (1992). A comparison of inner-city and upper-middle class youths’ exposure to violence. The Journal of Adolescent Health,13, 275–280. doi:10.1016/1054-139X(92)90159-9. [ PubMed ]
• Gonzales, N. A., Gunnoe, M. L., Samaniego, R., & Jackson, K. M. (1995, June). Validation of the Multicultural Events Scale for urban Adolescents (MESA) . Paper presented at the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Community Research and Action, Chicago, IL.
• Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools,30, 79–90. doi:10.1002/1520-6807(199301)30:1<79::AID-PITS2310300113>3.0.CO;2-X.
• Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and developmental problems among inner-city youth. Development and Psychopathology,10, 101–116. doi:10.1017/S0954579498001539. [ PubMed ]
• Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
• Guerra, N. G., Huesmann, L. R., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development,74, 1561–1576. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00623. [ PubMed ]
• Hampton, R., Gelles, R., & Harrop, J. (1989). Is violence in Black families increasing? A comparison of 1975 and 1985 national survey rates. Journal of Marriage and the Family,51, 969–980. doi:10.2307/353209.
• Hill, H. M., & Madhere, S. (1995). Exposure to community violence and African American children: A multi-dimensional model. Unpublished manuscript, Howard University, Washington, DC.
• Hinton-Nelson, M. D., Roberts, M. C., & Snyder, C. R. (1996). Early adolescents exposed to violence: Hope and vulnerability to victimization. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,66, 346–353. [ PubMed ]
• Hollman, C. M., & McNamara, J. R. (1999). Considerations in the use of active and passive parental consent procedures. The Journal of Psychology,133, 141–156.
• Horn, J. L., & Trickett, P. K. (1998). Community violence and child development: A review of research. In P. Trickett & C. Schellenbach (Eds.), Violence against children in the family and the community (pp. 103–138). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Hudley, C., Britsch, B., Wakefield, W. D., Smith, T., Demorat, M., & Cho, S. J. (1998). An attribution retraining program to reduce aggression in elementary school students. Psychology in the Schools,35, 271–282.
• Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., & Thornberry, T. (1993). Longitudinal study of delinquency, drug use, sexual activity, and pregnancy among children and youth in three cities. Public Health Reports: Journal of the U.S. Public Health Service, 108, 90–96. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Hutcheson, S. P. (1998). Multiple stressors and social–emotional functioning in African American elementary school children (Doctoral dissertation, Howard University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 59 , 0419.
• Ialongo, N., Edelsohn, G., Werthamer-Larsson, L., Crockett, L., & Kellam, S. (1996). The course of aggression in first-grade children with and without co-morbid anxious symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,24, 445–456. [ PubMed ]
• Institute of Medicine. (1994). New directions in definitions. In P. J. Mrazek & R. J. Haggerty (Eds.), Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research (pp. 19–29). Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [ PubMed ]
• Jenkins, E. (1993). Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms of African-American youth exposed to violence . Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Behavior Therapy, Atlanta, GA.
• Jenkins, E. J. (2001). Violence and trauma in the lives of African American children. In A. Neal-Barnett, J. Contreras, & K. Kerns (Eds.), Forging links: African American children clinical developmental perspectives (pp. 107–128). Westport, CT: Praeger.
• Jenkins, E. J., & Bell, C. G. (1994). Post-traumatic stress disorder and violence among inner city high school students. In S. Friedman (Ed.), Anxiety disorders in African Americans. NY: Springer.
• Jessor, R., van den Boss, J., Vanderryn, J., Costa, F., & Turbin, M. (1995). Protective factors in adolescent problem behavior: Moderator effects and developmental change. Developmental Psychology,31, 923–933.
• Johnson, J. H., & McCutcheon, S. (1982). Assessing life events in older children and adolescents: Preliminary findings with the Life Events Checklist. In I. Sarason & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Stress and anxiety. New York: Norton.
• Jones, J., & Barlow, D. H. (1990). The etiology of post-traumatic stress disorder. Clinical Psychology Review,10, 299–328.
• Kandel, D., Kessler, R., & Margulies, R. (1978). Antecedents of adolescent initiation into stages of drug use: A developmental analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,7, 13–40. [ PubMed ]
• Kashani, J. H., Deuser, W., & Reid, J. C. (1991). Aggression and anxiety: A new look at an old notion. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,30, 218–223. [ PubMed ]
• Kashani, J. H., & Orvaschel, H. (1988). Anxiety disorders in mid-adolescence: A community sample. American Journal of Psychiatry,145, 960–964. [ PubMed ]
• Kazdin, A. E. (1993). Adolescent mental health. American Psychologist,48, 127–141. [ PubMed ]
• Keane, T. M., Gerardi, R. J., Lyons, J. A., & Wolfe, J. (1988). The interrelationship of substance abuse and PTSD: Epidemiological and clinical considerations. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism (Vol. V). New York: Plenum Press. [ PubMed ]
• Kellam, S., & Anthony, J. (1998). Targeting early antecedents to prevent tobacco smoking: Findings from an epidemiologically based randomized field trial. American Journal of Public Health,88, 1490–1495. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Kendall, P. C., & Hammen, C. (1995). Abnormal psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
• Kilpatrick, D. G., Acierno, R., Saunders, B., Resnick, H. S., Best, C. L., & Schnurr, P. P. (2000). Risk factors for adolescent substance abuse and dependence: Data from a national sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,68, 19–30. [ PubMed ]
• Kliewer, W., Lepore, S. J., Oskin, D., & Johnson, P. D. (1998). The role of social and cognitive processes in children’s adjustment to community violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,66, 199–209. [ PubMed ]
• Koenig, H. G. (1997). Use of religion by patients with severe medical illness. Mind/Body Medicine,2, 31–36.
• Koss-Chiono, J., & Vargas, L. (1992). Through the looking glass: A model for understanding culturally responsive psychotherapies. In L. Vargas & J. Koss-Chiono (Eds.), Working with culture: Psychotherapeutic interventions with ethnic minority children and adolescents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Kubiak, C. H. S. (1998). The relationship between community crime level and the manifestation of anxiety in a referred sample of children (Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International Section Al: Humanities & Social Sciences, 58 , 2546.
• Ladd, G. W., & Burgess, K. B. (1999). Charting the relationship trajectories of aggressive, withdrawn, and aggressive/withdrawn children during early grade school. Child Development,70, 910–929. [ PubMed ]
• Ladd, G. W., & Kochenderfer-Ladd, B. J. (2002). Identifying victims of peer aggression: Analysis of cross-informant data for concordance, estimation of relational adjustment, prevalence of victimization. Psychological Assessment,14, 1–23. [ PubMed ]
• LaGreca, A., Silverman, W., & Wasserstein, S. (1998). Children’s pre-disaster functioning as a predictor of post-traumatic stress following hurricane Andrew: A prospective study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,64, 712–723. [ PubMed ]
• Last, C. G., & Perrin, S. (1993). Anxiety disorders in African American and White children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,21, 153–164. [ PubMed ]
• Leonard, H. L., Goldberger, E. L., Rapoport, J. L., Cheslow, D. L., & Swedo, S. E. (1990). Childhood rituals: Normal development or obsessive-compulsive symptoms? Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,29, 17–23. [ PubMed ]
• Lerner, R. (1995). America’s youth in crisis: Challenges and options for programs and policies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Lewis, J. A., Lewis, M. D., Daniels, J. H., & D’Andrea, M. J. (1998). Community counseling: Empowerment strategies for a diverse society. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks-Cole.
• Liang, K.-Y., & Zeger, S. L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika,73, 13–22.
• Linares, L. O., Heeren, T., Bronfman, E., Zuckerman, B., Augustyn, M., & Tronick, E. (2001). A meditational model for the impact of exposure to community violence on early child behavior problems. Child Development,72, 639–652. [ PubMed ]
• Lipsitz, S. R., Molenberghs, G., Fitzmaurice, G. M., & Ibrahim, J. (2000). GEE with Gaussian estimation of the correlations when data are incomplete. Biometrics,56, 528–536. [ PubMed ]
• Little, T., Henrich, C., Jones, S., & Hawley, P. (2003). Disentangling the “whys” from the “what’s” of aggressive behaviour. International Journal of Behavioral Development,27, 122–133.
• Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). The Coping Power program for preadolescent aggressive boys and their parents: Outcome effects at the 1-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,4, 571–578. [ PubMed ]
• Loeber, R., & Keenan, K. (1994). Interaction between conduct disorder and its comorbid conditions: Effects of age and gender. Clinical Psychology Review,14, 497–523.
• Lorion, R. (1998). Exposure to pervasive community violence: Contamination of the school environment. In D. S. Elliott, K. Williams, & B. Hamburg (Eds.), Violence in American schools (pp. 293–311). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Lorion, R. L., Brodsky, A., & Cooley-Quille, M. R. (1999). Exposure to urban violence: A framework for conceptualizing risky settings. In D. E. Biegel, & A. Blum (Eds.), Innovations in practice and service delivery across the lifespan (pp. 124–143). New York: Oxford.
• Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development,71, 543–562. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Mackesy-Amiti, M., & Fendrich, M. (2000). Trends in inhalant use among high school students in Illinois: 1993–1995. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 26 , 569–590. [ PubMed ]
• March, J. S., & Parker, J. D. (1999). The multidimensional anxiety scale for children (MASC). In M. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing or treatment planning and outcomes assessment (2nd ed., pp. 299–322). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Marks, I. (1987). Fears, phobias and rituals. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Martinez, P., & Richters, J. E. (1993). The NIMH community violence project: II. Children’s distress symptoms associated with violence exposure. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes,56, 22–35. [ PubMed ]
• McAlister-Groves, B., Zuckerman, B., Marans, B., & Cohen, D. (1993). Silent victims: Children who witness violence. Journal of the American Medical Association,269, 262–264. [ PubMed ]
• McDonnell, J. R. (2007). Neighborhood characteristics, parenting, and children’s safety. Social Indicators Research,83, 177–199.
• McKay, M., McCadam, K., & Gonzales, J. (1996). Addressing the barriers to mental health services for inner-city children and their caretakers. Community Mental Health Journal,32, 353–361. [ PubMed ]
• McKay, M., Stoewe, J., McCadam, K., & Gonzales, J. (1998). Increasing access to mental health services for urban children and their caregivers. Health and Social Work,23, 9–15. [ PubMed ]
• Moos, R. H., & Moos, B. S. (1986). The family environment scale: The manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
• Morris, R. J., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1983). Treating children’s fears and phobias: A behavioral approach. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
• Mowrer, O. H. (1960). Learning theory and the symbolic processes. New York: Wiley.
• Mulvey, E., Odgers, C., Skeem, J., Gardner, W., Schubert, C., & Lidz, C. (2006). Substance use and community violence: A test of the relation at the daily level. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,74, 743–754. [ PubMed ]
• Mushe-Eizenman, D. R., Boxer, P., Danner, S., Dubow, E. F., Goldstein, S. E., & Heretick, D. M. L. (2004). Social-cognitive mediators of the relation of environmental and emotion regulation factors to children’s aggression. Aggressive Behavior,30, 389–408.
• Myers, H. F., Taylor, S., Alvy, K. T., Arrington, A., & Richardson, M. A. (1992). Parental and family predictors of behavior problems in inner-city Black children. American Journal of Community Psychology,20, 557–576. [ PubMed ]
• Nalven, F. B. (1970). Manifest fears and worries of ghetto vs. middle-class suburban children. Psychological Reports,27, 285–286. [ PubMed ]
• Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simmons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of American Medical Association,285, 2094–2100. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Neal, A. M., & Baskett, D. (1993). North and South: A comparative study of African American children’s fears . Unpublished manuscript, Kent State University.
• Neal, A. M., & Brown, B. J. W. (1994). Fears and anxiety disorders in African American children. In S. Friedman (Ed.), Anxiety disorders in African Americans (pp. 65–75). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
• Neal, A., & Turner, S. (1991). Anxiety disorders research with African Americans: Current status. Psychological Bulletin,109, 400–410. [ PubMed ]
• Obot, I., & Anthony, J. (2000). School dropout and injecting drug use in a national sample of White non-Hispanic American adults. Journal of Drug Education,30, 145–155. [ PubMed ]
• Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
• Osofsky, J. D. (1995). The effects of exposure to violence on young children. American Psychologist,50, 782–788. [ PubMed ]
• Osofsky, J. D., Werers, S., Hann, D. M., & Fick, A. C. (1993). Chronic community violence: What is happening to our children? Psychiatry,56, 36–45. [ PubMed ]
• Overstreet, S., & Braun, S. (1999). A preliminary examination of the relationship between exposure to community violence and academic functioning. School Psychology Quarterly,14, 380–396.
• Parker, R., & Auerhahn, K. (1998). Alcohol, drugs, and violence. Annual Review of Sociology,24, 291–311.
• Patterson, J. M., & McCubbin, H. I. (1987). Adolescent coping style and behaviors: Conceptualizations and measurement. Journal of Adolescence,10, 153–186. [ PubMed ]
• Pfefferbaum, B., Nixon, S., Tivis, R., Doughty, D., Pynoos, R., Gurwitch, R., et al. (2001). Television exposure in children after a terrorist incident. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes,64, 202–211. [ PubMed ]
• Podorefsky, D., Beardslee, W., & McDonald-Dowdell, M. (2001). Adaptation of preventive interventions for use in a low-income culturally diverse community. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,40, 879–886. [ PubMed ]
• Psychological Corporation. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence Manual . San Antonio, TX: Author.
• Psychological Corporation. (2001). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test Screener Manual . San Antonio, TX: Author.
• Pynoos, R. S. (1993). Traumatic stress and developmental psychopathology in children and adolescents. In J. Oldham, M. Riba, & A. Tasman (Eds.), Review of Psychiatry (pp. 205–237). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
• Pynoos, R. S., Frederick, C., Nader, K., & Arroyo, W. (1987). Life threat and post-traumatic stress in school-age children. Archives of General Psychiatry,44, 1057–1063. [ PubMed ]
• Pynoos, R. S., & Nader, K. (1990). Children’s exposure to violence and traumatic death. Psychiatry Annals,20, 334–344.
• Pynoos, R., Steinberg, A., & Piacentini, J. (1999). A developmental psychopathology model of childhood traumatic stress and intersection with anxiety disorders. Biological Psychiatry,46, 1542–1554. [ PubMed ]
• Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Raudenbush, S., Johnson, C., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). A multivariate, multilevel Rasch Model with application to self-reported criminal behavior. Sociological Methodology,29, 1–41.
• Reese, L. E., Vera, E. M., Thompson, K., & Reyes, R. (2001). A qualitative investigation of perceptions of violence risk factors in low-income African American children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,30, 199–206. [ PubMed ]
• Resnick, M., Bearman, P., Blum, R., Bauman, K., Harris, K., Jones, J., et al. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of the American Medical Association,278, 823–832. [ PubMed ]
• Richters, J. E., & Martinez, P. (1993). The NIMH community violence project: Children as victims and witnesses to violence. Psychiatry,56, 7–21. [ PubMed ]
• Rosenberg, M., O’Carrol, P., & Powell, K. (1992). Violence is a public health problem. Journal of the American Medical Association,267, 3071–3072. [ PubMed ]
• Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,57, 316–331. [ PubMed ]
• Rutter, M. (1990). Commentary: Some focus and process considerations regarding effects of parental depression on children. Developmental Psychology,26, 60–67.
• Rutter, M., & Quinton, D. (1977). Psychiatric disorder: Ecological factors and concepts of causation. In H. McGurk (Ed.), Ecological factors in human development (pp. 173–187). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
• Saltzman, W. R. (1996). Exposure to community violence and the prediction of violent antisocial behavior in a multi-ethnic sample of adolescents (Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, 1996). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section : The Sciences and Engineering, 57 , 2223.
• Sameroff, A., Bartko, W., Baldwin, A., Baldwin, C., & Seifer, R. (1998). Introduction: Family and social influences on the development of child competence. In M. Lewis & C. Feiring (Eds.), Families, risk, and competence (pp. 161–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology,105, 603–651.
• Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2005). Neighborhood stigma and the perception of disorder. Focus,24, 7–11.
• Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science,277, 918–924. [ PubMed ]
• Scheeringa, M., & Zeanah, C. (1995). Symptom expression and trauma variables in children under 48 months of age. Infant Mental Health Journal,16, 259–270.
• Schubiner, H., Scott, R., & Tzelepis, A. (1993). Exposure to violence among inner-city youth. Journal of Adolescent Health,14, 214–219. [ PubMed ]
• Schwab-Stone, M. E., Ayers, T. S., Kasprow, W., Voyce, C., Barone, C., Shriver, T., et al. (1995). No safe haven: A study of violence exposure in an urban community. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,34, 1343–1352. [ PubMed ]
• Schwab-Stone, M., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Silver, D., Lichtman, J., & Voyce, C. (1999). No safe haven II: The effects of violence exposure on urban youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,38, 359–367. [ PubMed ]
• Schwartz, D., & Gorman, A. (2003). Community violence exposure and children’s academic functioning. Journal of Educational Psychology,95, 163–173.
• Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist,54, 93–105.
• Schwarz, E. D., & Kowalski, J. M. (1991). Malignant memories: PTSD in children and adults after a school shooting. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,30, 936–944. [ PubMed ]
• Schwarzer, R., & Schwarzer, C. (1996). A critical survey of coping instruments. In M. Zeidner & N. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications. New York, NY: Wiley.
• Selner-O’Hagan, M. B., Kindlon, D. J., Buka, S. L., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. J. (1998). Assessing exposure to violence in urban youth. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines,39, 215–224. [ PubMed ]
• Shahinfar, A., Fox, N., & Leavitt, L. (2000). Preschool children’s exposure to violence: Relation of behavior problems to parent and child reports. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,70, 115–125. [ PubMed ]
• Shakoor, B. H., & Chalmers, D. (1991). Co-victimization of African-American children who witness violence: Effects on cognitive, emotional, and behavioral development. Journal of the National Medical Association,83, 233–238. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Shaw, J. A. (2003). Children exposed to war/terrorism. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review,6, 237–246. [ PubMed ]
• Singer, M., Anglin, T., Song, L., & Lunghofer, L. (1995). Adolescents’ exposure to violence and associated symptoms of psychological trauma. Journal of the American Medical Association,273, 477–482. [ PubMed ]
• Slaby, R. G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: I. Assessment. Developmental Psychology,24, 580–588.
• Smith, S. K., Steadman, G. W., & Minton, T. D. (1999). Criminal victimization and perceptions of community safety in 12 cities. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.
• Solberg, M., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior,29, 239–268.
• Spielberger, C. D. (1999). State-trait anger expression inventory-2. Odessa, Fl: Psychological Assessment Resource Inc.
• Spriggs, A. L., Iannotti, R. J., Nansel, T. R., & Haynie, D. L. (2007). Adolescent bullying involvement and perceived family, peer and school relations: Commonalities and differences across race/ethnicity. Journal of Adolescent Health,41, 283–293. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family,41, 75–88.
• Straus, M. A. (1987). Is child abuse increasing? Evidence from the National Family Violence Resurvey . Paper presented at the Conference on Child Abuse, American Association for Protecting Children, Austin, Texas.
• Straus, M. A. (1988). Measuring Psychological and Physical Abuse of Children with the Conflict Tactics Scale. Durham, NH: Family Research Laboratory, University of NH.
• Straus, M. A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scale and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8, 145 families (pp. 75–91). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing.
• Stuber, J., Fairbrother, G., Galea, S., Pfefferbaum, B., Wilson, G. M., & Vlahov, D. (2002). Determinants of counseling for children in Manhattan after the September 11 attacks. Psychiatric Services,53, 815–822. [ PubMed ]
• Swanson, C. B. (2004). Projections of 2003–04 high school graduates: Supplemental analyses based on findings from who graduates? who doesn’t? Retrieved April 20, 2009, http://www.urban.org/publications/411019.html.
• Taylor, R. J., Tucker, M. B., Chatters, L. M., & Jayakody, R. (1997). Recent demographic trends in African American family structure. In R. Taylor, J. Jackson, & L. M. Chatters (Eds.), Family life in Black America (pp. 14–62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Thomas, S. P., & Groer, M. W. (1986). Relationship of demographic, life-style and stress variables to blood pressure in adolescents. Nursing Research,35, 169–172. [ PubMed ]
• Tiet, Q., Bird, H., Davies, M., Hoven, C., Cohen, P., Jensen, P., et al. (1998). Adverse life events and resilience. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,37, 1191–1200. [ PubMed ]
• Tolan, P., & Guerra, N. (1994). Prevention of delinquency: Current status and issues. Applied & Preventive Psychology,3, 251–273.
• Tolan, P. H., Guerra, N. G., & Montaini-Klovdahl, L. R. (1997). Staying out of harm’s way: Coping and the development of inner-city children. In S. Wolchik & I. Sandler (Eds.), Handbook of children’s coping: Linking theory and intervention. New York: Plenum Press.
• Tolan, P., & Henry, D. (1996). Patterns of psychopathology among urban poor children: Co-morbidity and aggression effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,64, 1094–1099. [ PubMed ]
• Tuma, J. (1989). Mental health services for children: The state of the art. American Psychologist,44, 188–198. [ PubMed ]
• Turner, S., Beidel, D., & Cooley-Quille, M. (1997). Social effectiveness therapy: A therapist’s guide. Toronto: MHS.
• Turner, J., & Lloyd, D. (1999). The stress process and the social distribution of depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,40, 374–404. [ PubMed ]
• Uehara, E., Chalmers, D., Jenkins, E. J., & Shakoor, B. (1996). African-American youth encounters with violence: Results from the Chicago community mental health council violence project. Journal of Black Studies,26, 768–781.
• Wallen, J., & Rubin, R. H. (1997). The role of the family in mediating the effects of community violence on children. Aggression and Violent Behavior,2, 33–41.
• Walters, S. T., & Bennett, M. E. (2000). Assessing client’s spirituality and religious behavior: Recommendations for research and practice in mental health settings. The Behavior Therapist,23, 79–90.
• Weisz, J., Weiss, B., Wasserman, A., & Rintoul, B. (1987). Control-related beliefs and depression among clinic-referred children and adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,96, 58–63. [ PubMed ]
• Werthamer-Larsson, L., Kellam, S., & Wheeler, L. (1991). Effect of first-grade classroom environment on shy behavior, aggressive behavior, and concentration problems. American Journal of Community Psychology,19, 585–602. [ PubMed ]
• White, H. R. (1990). The drug use-delinquency connection in adolescence. In R. Weisheit (Ed.), Drugs, crime and the criminal justice system (pp. 215–256). Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences Monograph. Highland Heights, KY: Anderson.
• White, H. R. (1997). Alcohol, illicit drugs, and violence. In D. Stoff & J. Breiling (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 511–523). New York: Wiley.
• White, K. S., Bruce, S. E., Farrell, A. D., & Kliewer, W. (1998). Impact of exposure to community violence on anxiety: A longitudinal study of family social support as a protective factor for urban children. Journal of Child and Family Studies,7, 187–203.
• Wills, T., Sandy, J., & Yaeger, A. (2001). Time perspective and early-onset substance use: A model based on stress-coping theory. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors,15, 118–125. [ PubMed ]
• World Health Organization. (2002). World Report on Violence and Health. Brussels, Belgium: WHO.