Google

A longitudinal study of over 800 youths in Seattle identified specific risk factors for later violence by measuring them at ages 10, 14, and 16. The study categorized these predictors into three main domains: family, peers, and community, showing how different factors become salient at various stages of adolescence.

Seattle Longitudinal Study on Youth Violence Risk Factors

The Seattle longitudinal study revealed that family-related predictors of later violence vary by age. At age 10, parental attitudes favorable to violence were a key factor. By age 14, parental violence, criminality, poor family management, and family conflict became significant predictors. At age 16, the predictive factors included parental criminality, poor family management, family conflict, and residential mobility (frequent moves).

Family-Related Risk Factors for Later Violence (Seattle Study)

In the Seattle longitudinal study, peer group influences were strong predictors of future violence. Delinquency among peers was a consistent risk factor across elementary (age 10), middle (age 14), and high school (age 16). Gang membership emerged as a significant predictor during middle school (age 14) and continued into high school (age 16).

Peer-Related Risk Factors for Later Violence (Seattle Study)

The Seattle longitudinal study highlighted several community-level predictors of later violence. The availability of drugs was a persistent risk factor at ages 10, 14, and 16. Economic deprivation was predictive at age 10 and again at age 16. Other factors, such as community disorganization and the presence of neighborhood adults involved in crime, became predictive from age 14 onwards.

Community-Related Risk Factors for Later Violence (Seattle Study)

A large-scale longitudinal study tracked 800 youths, assessing risk factors for violence at ages 10, 14, and 16. The study found that while predictors could be grouped into family, peer, and community domains, the specific factors that most strongly predicted later violence changed as the youths aged. Based on this key finding, what is the most logical implication for designing prevention strategies?

Learn Before

Related