The Effect of Social Capital on Aggression and Delinquency in Maltreated Adolescents

hardtofindcurtainUrban and Civil

Nov 16, 2013 (3 years and 6 months ago)

97 views

The Effect of Social Capital
on
Aggression and Delinquency in
Maltreated Adolescents

J. Kotch, M
. Black, D. English, A.
Litrownik
, D.
Runyan
, R.
Thompson,
J. Smith, L
-
C
. Lee, B. Margolis,
& G
.
Taneja



International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect

Honolulu, Hawaii


September 28,
2010

1

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Acknowledgements


Grants
CA
-
90CA1401, 90CA1433, and
90CA1467 from the Administration for Children
and Families



Grant
1 R01 HD039689 from the National
Institute of Child Health

& Human
Development
.


Special thanks to Terri Lewis & Ali
Faiz

for
statistical support.


2

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Social Capital Defined



features of social organization such as
networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate
coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.


(
Putnam 1995)



“Social capital keeps bad things from happening
to good kids.”
(Putnam, 2000)


3

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Community vs. Family Social
Capital
(Coleman,1988; Ferguson, 2006)


Family social
capital
: relationships
between
parents

& children (time
,
effort,
resources

&
energy parents invest)


Community
social
capital
: family
interactions

&
relationships
with

surrounding community (both
residents and institutions)


Social relationships


Civic engagement


Trust & safety


Religiosity


4

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Components of Community Social
Capital and
Child
Well
-
being



Social Relationships


Indicators of social capital were
associated with positive
behavioral outcomes for at
-
risk preschool
children.
(Runyan et
al.,
1998a)


5

5


Civic Engagement


More exchanges of resources & sharing of childcare occurred in
neighborhoods with higher levels of participation & activism.
(
Garbarino

& Sherman, 1980; Sampson et al., 1999)



Trust and Safety


Mothers who felt safe were more likely to rate their neighborhoods
as more positive places to raise children. (
Garbarino

and Sherman,
1980)


High social trust in neighborhoods can break the existing link
between neighborhood impoverishment and delinquent activity.
(Putnam, 2000)


9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Limitations of Previous Studies


Cross
-
sectional


Confounded/combined
indicators of family and
community social
capital


Confused
social capital and social support

6

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Purpose of the Present Study


To determine if informal social control and/or
social cohesion & trust reduce aggression &
delinquency in a longitudinal cohort of
maltreated 12, 14, and 16 year olds

7

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010


LONGSCAN: Longitudinal
Studies of Child
Abuse and
Neglect
(Runyan
et al
.,
1998b)



A 20
-
year study of

causes & consequences
of child
maltreatment


A consortium of 5

sites
(EA, SO, MW, NW, SW) sharing
data collection methods, instruments, data management

& analysis


Face to face interviews at ages 4, 6, 8, 12, 14,
16, 18


Data sources for this study:


A
-
CASI interviews with child subjects and caregivers
(ages 12, 14, & 16)


CPS records (birth through age 12)



8

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Preliminary Studies


Runyan

et al. (1998a) found

family
and community social capital
were associated with improved behavioral outcomes for at
-
risk
children
.


Saluja

et al. (2003) did not find

that social
capital

(
neighborhood
trust, engagement in child
-
rearing and helpfulness) moderated
the association between maltreatment

& child
depression/anxiety or
aggression.


Yonas

et al. (2010) found

collective
efficacy (informal social
control/neighborhood involvement) moderated
the

impact
of
neglect, but not

abuse,
on aggression at
age 12.



9

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Measurement


Controls


Time invariant
-

child gender, race, & site


Time variant
-

caregiver education (ages 12, 14, 16)


Independent Variables


Maltreatment
reports
-

birth through age
12 re
-
coded
using
MMCS (English et al., 2005)


Caregiver depressive symptoms (
Radloff

1997)
-

ages
12, 14, & 16


Moderator


Social capital (Knight et al., 2008)
-

ages 12, 14, 16


Dependent Variable


Child Behavior Checklist Externalizing Behavior (T
-
Score)
-

caregiver report based on aggression
&
delinquency subscales (Achenbach, 1991)
-

ages 12,
14, & 16




10

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Caregiver Depression in the
LONGSCAN sample

11


Maternal depressive symptoms predicted child
maltreatment (Thompson, 2006)
and

child’s internalizing
& externalizing problem scores. (Dubowitz et al., 2001)


Maternal depressive symptoms related to mothers
perception of child’s emotional and behavioral
functioning. (Black et al., 2002)


Caregiver depressive symptoms were among the
adverse experiences that significantly increased the
odds of health problems in maltreated 12 year olds.
(Flaherty et al., 2009)


9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Proposed Moderator: Social Capital


Quality of Neighborhood, Residential Stability and
Organizational & Religious Affiliation (Knight et al., 2008)
-

has
37 items rated on a 4
-
point
Likert

scale (strongly disagree [1] to
strongly agree [4]).


For the purpose of this study, 10 items corresponding with
Collective Efficacy (Sampson et al., 1997) were used to create
two subscales:


Informal Social Control
(5 items; alpha = .82)


Example: “How strongly do you agree that neighbors could be
counted on to intervene if children were skipping school &
hanging out on a street corner?”


Social Cohesion and Trust
(5 items; alpha = .83)


Example: “How strongly do you agree that people around
here are willing to help their neighbors?”



12

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Analysis


Generalized estimating equations (GEE)


a method of analyzing correlated data that otherwise
could be modeled as a generalized linear model
(
Zeger

& Liang, 1986)


examined the effects of social capital & depression,
and their interactions, on externalizing behaviors of
maltreated and non
-
maltreated adolescents

13

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

14

Descriptive Statistics by

Maltreatment History (
N

= 1125)

14

Time Invariant Variables*

No Maltreatment

Maltreatment

n

%

n

%

Child’s Gender


Male


Female


160

180


30

31


383

402



70


69

Child’s Race



White


African
-
American


Other



55

247


38


20

40

17


224

378

183



80


60


83

Site



䕡獴


䵩摷敳e


卯畴h


Southwest


Northwest


138


98


96


0


8


60

48

50


0


4



93

108

100

274

210



40


52


51

100


96

*
Time Invariant variables are specific to baseline.



p<.001

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

15

Descriptive Statistics by

Maltreatment History (cont’d.)

15

Time Variant

Variables*

Age 12

Age 14

Age 16

No
Maltx

No
Maltx

No
Maltx

Maltx

No
Maltx

Maltx

C’giver

Education


< High School


>

High School/GED

n (%)

71 (30%)

211(30%)

n (%)

166 (70%)

502 (70%)

n (%)

66 (30%)


157 (70%)

n (%)

229 (33%)

476 (67%)

n (%)

57
(30%)

132
(70%)

n (%)

177
(29%)

444 (71%)


Please Note:
Remainder of table presents means and (standard deviations).

C’giver

Depression



M

# of Symptoms

10.8 (9.2)

11.6 (10.4)

10.7 (9.5)

11.9 (10.5)

10.8 (9.1)

12.7 (10.6)

Collective Efficacy


M

Social Control


M

Social
Coh
./Trust

2.9

(0.6)

2.8 (0.6)

3.0

(0.6)

2.9 (0.6)

2.9 (0.5)

2.8 (0.5)

2.9 (0.5)

2.9 (0.5)

3.0 (0.5)

3.0 (0.5)

2.9 (0.6)

2.9 (0.5)

CBCL T
-
Score



M

Ext. Behaviors

8.6 (7.3)

13.4 (10.2)

8.4 (8.1)

13.6 (10.7)

7.9 (8.3)

12.3 (11.0)

*
Time Variant variables are specific to age 12, 14, & 16 time points.



p<.01



p<.001

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

GEE Model 1: Informal Social Control

16


Caregiver Depressive Symptoms

significant for
maltreated subjects [b=.42 (.16),
p

=.01] but non
-
significant for non
-
maltreated subjects [b = .05 (.21),
p

= .78]


Informal Social Control

was non
-
significant for
maltreated subjects [b=.03 (.84),
p

=.96] & non
-
maltreated subjects [b =
-
1.16 (.82),
p

= .15]


Interaction

between Informal Social Control and
Depressive Symptoms was non
-
significant for both
maltreated [b =
-
.05 (.05),
p

= .35] & non
-
maltreated
subjects [b = .06 (.07),
p

= .34]


9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

GEE Model 2: Social Cohesion and Trust

17


Caregiver Depressive Symptoms

significant for
maltreated subjects [b=.65 (.17),
p

=.00] but non
-
significant for non
-
maltreated subjects [b = .27 (.18),
p

= .13]


Social Cohesion and Trust

was non
-
significant for
maltreated subjects [
p

=.82] & non
-
maltreated
subjects [
p

= .31]


Interaction

between Social Cohesion and Trust and
Depressive Symptoms was significant for maltreated
subjects [b =
-
.13 (.05),
p

= .01] but non
-
significant
for non
-
maltreated subjects [
p

= .89].


9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

SCT x DEP Interaction for Maltreated
Subjects (
p

= .01)

18

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Low
High
CBCL Externalizing Behaviors

Low Social Cohesion/Trust
High Social Cohesion/Trust

Caregiver Depressive Symptoms

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Conclusions


Neither Informal Social Control nor Social
Cohesion & Trust had significant main effects
on adolescent aggression & delinquency at
ages 12, 14, and 16 among children
maltreated before age 12.


For subjects maltreated before age 12, high
Social Cohesion and Trust

significantly
reduced the impact of caregiver depressive
symptoms on aggression & delinquency at
ages 12, 14, & 16.


19

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

Limitations and Future Directions


Limitations


Represents
families involved,
or at
risk of being involved,
with
the child
welfare system


Did not analyze maltreatment sub
-
types


Did not assess adolescents perceptions of collective efficacy


Did not assess adolescent self
-
reported delinquency and
aggression


Future Directions


Examine the effects of collective efficacy by type of
maltreatment, as well as self reports of maltreatment


Examine other behavioral outcomes, such as substance abuse,
criminal justice involvement and violence




20

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

References

Achenbach TM (1991).
Manual for the Youth Self
-
Report and 1991 Profile
. Burlington, VT:
University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry
.

Black MM, Papas MA, Hussey JM, Dubowitz H, Kotch JB, Starr, RH. Behavior problems
among preschool children born to adolescent mothers: effects of maternal depression
and perceptions of partner relationships. J Clinical Child
Adolesc

Psychol

2002;31(1):16
-
26.

Coleman
J (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. In:
Dasgupta

P,
Serageldin

I, eds. Social capital: A
Multifaceted Perspective. Washington
, DC: World
Bank; pp. 13

39.

Dubowitz H, Black MM, Kerr MA, Hussey JM,
Morrel

TM, Everson MD, Starr RH. Type and
timing of mothers’ victimization: Effects on mothers and children. Pediatrics

2001;107(4):728
-
735.

English
D,
Bangdiwala

K, Runyan D. The dimensions of maltreatment: Introduction.
Child
Abuse & Neglect
2005;29(5):
441
-
460.

Ferguson KM. Social capital and children’s wellbeing: a critical synthesis of the
international social capital literature
.
Int

J Soc Welfare
2006;15:2

18
.

Flaherty EG, Thompson R, Litrownik AJ, Zolotor AJ, Dubowitz H, Runyan DK, English DJ,
Everson MD. (2009). Adverse childhood exposures and reported child health at age 12.
Academic Pediatrics 2009; 9(3):150
-
156.



21

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

References (cont’d.)

Garbarino

J, Sherman D. High
-
risk neighborhoods and high
-
risk families: The human
ecology of child maltreatment. Child Development 1980;51:188

198.

Knight ED, Smith JS, Martin L, Lewis T, & the LONGSCAN Investigators (2008). Measures
for assessment of functioning and outcomes in longitudinal research on child abuse,
volume 3: Early adolescence (ages 12
-
14). Retrieved from the LONGSCAN web site
http://www.iprc.unc.edu/longscan

Putnam RD. Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital.
Journal of Democracy
1995(Jan);6(1): 65
-
78.

Putnam RD (2000).
Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.
New
York: Simon & Schuster.

Radloff

LF. Sex differences in depression: The effects of occupation and marital status.

Sex Roles
1997;1:249

265.

Runyan

DK, Hunter WM,
Socolar

RS,
Amaya
-
Jackson L, English D,
Landsverk

J,
Dubowitz

H, Browne DH,
Bangdiwala

SI, Mathew RM. Children who prosper in unfavorable
environments: The relationship to social capital.
Pediatrics
1998a;101(1): 12

18.

Runyan

DK, Curtis P, Hunter W, Black MM,
Kotch

JB,
Bangdiwala

S. LONGSCAN: A
consortium for longitudinal studies of maltreatment and the life course of children.
Aggression & Violent Behavior: A Review Journal

1998b;3:275
-
285.

Saluja

G,
Kotch

J, Lee L
-
C. Effects of child abuse and neglect: Does social capital really
matter?
Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine
2003;15:681
-
686.




22

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010

References cont’d.


Sampson RJ,
Morenoff

JD, Earls F. Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of collective
efficacy for children.
American Sociological Review
1999;64:633

660.

Sampson

RJ,
Raudenbush

SW,
Earls

F.
Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel
Study of Collective Efficacy
. Science
1997;277:918
-
924.

Thompson R. Exploring the link between maternal history of childhood victimization and
child risk of maltreatment. J Trauma Practice 2006;5(2):57
-
72
.


Yonas

MA, Lewis T, Hussey JM, Thompson R
,
Newton R, English D, Dubowitz H.
Perceptions of neighborhood collective efficacy moderate the impact of maltreatment
on aggression. Child Maltreatment 2010;15(1):37
-
47.

Zeger

SL, Liang, K
-
Y. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.
Biometrics 1986;42:121
-
130.



Visit
www.iprc.unc.edu/longscan/
for more
information about LONGSCAN

23

9/28/2010

ISPCAN 2010