Search

In this chapter an ecological framework is proposed for understanding the development of individual differences in aggression and violence from childhood to adulthood. The model is based on three organizing hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that aversive social behaviors and threats can function to “coerce” the immediate social environment (i.e., microdynamics) such that aggressive behavior is strengthened over time (Patterson, 1982). The second hypothesis is that some aggressive individuals join within social networks; as such, aggression amplifies in lethality and frequency through social contagion dynamics (i.e., macrodynamics) and then culminates in violence (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011). The third hypothesis is that aggression and violence are predictable and preventable and that interventions that target the key micro- and macrodynamic social processes relevant to each developmental period can reduce individual levels of aggression and prevalence of aggression and violence in the community (Biglan, 2003). In this chapter, each hypothesis is discussed in the context of developmental patterns of aggression and violence.

The gap between efficacy trials and real-world implementation is often wider than we realize, and is bridged most effectively when careful consideration is given to the (a) qualities of the intervention that facilitate implementation, (b) external environmental influences on implementation success, (c) characteristics of intervention infrastructure that allow for sustainable implementation, and (d) qualities of the recipients that influence the degree and fidelity of implementation (Feldstein & Glasgow, 2008). We discuss the lessons learned while adapting the Ecological Approach to Family Intervention and Treatment (Dishion & Stormshak, 2007), a family-centered preventive intervention model delivered in public middle schools, for large-scale implementation in an effectiveness trial. We also share our experiences related to the challenges that arise when adapting an intervention model for large-scale dissemination and to share insights we have gained through this first-hand experience.

The face of forensic psychology and psychiatry is changing, notably as it is applied to children and adolescents. As suggested in the material in this handbook, there is heightened potential to improve criminal detection practices and use experimental design to test the effectiveness of correctional and treatment services. Unfortunately, there is less evidence of efforts to improve organizational communication (e.g., schools, correctional facilities, police, probation offices, etc.) to facilitate tracking and service provisions for children and adolescents within and across geographical boundaries. Scientific advances in genetics, experimental longitudinal designs, neuroimaging, informatics, and intervention science are core to continued innovation in forensic psychology and psychiatry.

What do parents do to establish, maintain, or aUer the developmental course of their teenager? Which dimensions of parenting lead to maladaptive outcomes in children? These are among the most perplexing questions in research on adolescent problem behavior. The two most studied variables in this area are parental family-management strategies (Patterson, 1982; Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992) and the affective connection between parent and child, described as either the attachment relationship or the parent-child bond (Bowlby, 1969; Elliott, Huizinga, & Ageton, 1985; Hirschi, 1969). The family-management perspective emphasizes minimizing coercive and conflicted parent-child exchanges that contribute to antisocial and other problem behaviors. Researchers who emphasize the parent-child relationship consider it to be the key to an adolescent's success in other relationships throughout the life span. A more comprehensive view integrates multiple dimensions of parenting on child and adolescent social development. Baumrind (1985) considers parenting to have two dimensions: warmth (relationship quality) and control

Findings from research on antisocial children present a paradox. Studies reveal that the antisocial child is disliked by peers (Coie & Kupersmidt, 1983; Dishion, 1990; Dodge, 1983), and lacks critical social, academic, and problem-solving skills (Dishion, Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Patterson, 1984; Freedman, Rosenthal, Donahue, Schlundt, & McFall, 1978; Patterson, 1982). The social skill deficits are not surprising, given that antisocial behavior in childhood is also associated with coercive parenting (Patterson, 1986), and generally poor family management practices (Loeber & Dishion, 1983; McCord, McCord, & Howard, 1963; Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992; West & Farrington, 1973). These findings paint a picture of a child or adolescent who has difficulties getting along with people.

This chapter is divided into four main sections. The introduction covers a very brief history of the first organized efforts to treat children’s problems. It also includes information from epidemiological studies of conduct disorders in children. The second section consists of a summary of two of the primary theories that currently inform the majority of the treatment and prevention studies for antisocial children. These include parent training therapy and variants of social skills training that may emphasize a variety of skill deficits ranging from poor peer relations to anger control and deficits in cognitive processes.