*3.3.2 Individual promotive/resilience factors*


## *3.3.3 Peer risk factors*


### *3.3.4 Peer interaction promotive/resilience factors*


### *3.3.5 Family risk factors*



#### *3.3.6 Family promotive/resilience factors*


### *3.3.7 School risk factors*


#### *3.3.8 School promotive/resilience factors*


### *3.3.9 Community risk factors*


#### *3.3.10 Community promotive/resilience factors*


While many have utilized the five-group risk/resilience factors categories, others have broken the factors into three domains including contextual, interpersonal, and individual-level domains [14]. Each of the domains includes various subcategories that encompass several levels of risk/resilience factors. Contextual factors consist of community characteristics including environment, socio-economic status, and safety. Interpersonal factors include styles of parenting and exposure to substance abuse, from peers or parents. Individual factors consist of their cognitive ability and substance use during developmental years [14]. However, other researchers use four primary risk factor domains, including individual, peer/school, family, and violent histories. The individual risk factors consist of anxiety, depression, hopelessness, high-stress level, low self-esteem, lack of self-control, inadequate coping skills, substance abuse, and high-risk behaviors. Destructive peer bonding, low level of school satisfaction, school goals not being met, inadequate peer support, and low sense of belonging, are all peer/school risk factors. Family risk factors include lack of family support, family distress, weak bonds with parent/guardian, and parental substance use. Violent history risk factors include victimization, violent behavior, or exposure to violence [15].

#### **3.4 Conceptual patterns of individual resilience**

In terms of resilience patterns, four conceptual patterns have been described in the literature dispositional, relational, situational, and philosophical [9]. Each conceptual pattern signifies different factors that may impact an individual's resilience. Dispositional patterns of resilience focus on the ego-related psychosocial attributes and attributes that support healthy dispositions toward life stressors. Some of the attributes considered are an individual's sense of autonomy, self-worth, good selfimage, and being physically healthy. This pattern implies that a person with high selfesteem or a positive self-image can avoid environmental or situational risk factors. The relational pattern includes an individual's role in society and social relationships while focusing on the individual's perception of how others view them.

Situational patterns show that some adolescents can manage stress by using problem-solving skills and evaluating situations and responses. This is evaluated by pairing an individual and a stressful situation and noting their response to the situation. While the philosophical pattern focuses mainly on the individual's belief system, such as their worldview or life paradigm. The individual's belief system can power their response to stressful situations and possibly avoid risky behaviors or violent reactions.

Risk models have been utilized for various reasons; however, there are limitations to risk models as they often do not provide an accurate explanation of developmental processes and how to conduct problems develop. With that in mind, the biopsychosocial transactional development model has been suggested for at-risk youth, as it explores genetic predispositions including genetic predispositions of aggression, conduct disorder, and delinquency [16]. Among all species, males display more aggressive traits versus their female counterparts, which is an example of biopsychosocial

*Perspective Chapter: The Assessment of Youth Violence DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106069*

predispositions. Another aspect of the biopsychosocial transactional development model is the socio-cultural factors including familial, neighborhood, and subcultural aspects of development [16]. There are several theories associated with risk assessment, which causes the conflict of what assessment more accurately predicts violence in low, medium, or high-risk individuals.

The Positive Youth Development (PYD) model is another risk and resilience model, that focuses on strength-based approaches and positive characteristics [17]. The developmental assets framework reinforces the PYD model by focusing on 40 developmental assets that assist in adolescents reaching their potential. The developmental assets consist of 20 external and 20 internal assets that set benchmarks for student outcomes. External assets include support, empowerment, boundaries, and expectations, that are experienced through positive interactions with other individuals and institutions. The internal assets encompass an individual's characteristics that encourage positive internal growth including a commitment to learning, positive values, social competence, and positive identity [17]. Over the years the Positive Youth Development model has become more popular. Researchers have identified PYD as promising in reviewing programs to prevent teenage violence [18].

#### **4. Youth subgroups**

Adolescent risk factors may vary depending on their respective subgroups. A study completed internationally found that 5% of juvenile offenders committed more violent crimes when compared to adult offenders of violent crimes [19]. Additionally, 5% were more likely to be found in the lifelong trajectory of criminal activity, as it continues into adulthood. Within the 5% subgroup, there are specific family, peer, and individual risk factors that can contribute to recidivism. Family risk factors include uninvolved parenting styles, lack of empathy or support, and the absence of parents. The peer risk factors consist of peer rejection, peer deviance, and adolescent novelty seeking. Individual risk factors include low intelligence, current or previous violent behavior, personality characteristics, psychopathology, and substance abuse [19].

Adolescents involved in dating violence and victimization are another subgroup of violent youth offenders, which includes specific family, individual, and schoolrelated risk factors [20]. A framework was constructed by Makin-Byrd et al. [20] that indicated risk factors and pathways to dating violence and victimization. Based on the framework, the first pathway suggests that adolescents who exhibit non-compliant and aggressive behavior that may lead to dating violence, have experienced harsh coercive parenting styles with a poor parent–child relationship. While the previously mentioned risk factors are still valid, the second pathway includes a generalized pattern of aggressive responses in school, which may lead to dating violence or victimization [20].

Exposure to violence is considered a core risk factor, as child abuse has an incident rate of 16% in the United States [21]. Experiencing or witnessing physical abuse during childhood can cause maladaptive thinking patterns and have a negative impact in adulthood, according to research [22]. An individual can be exposed to violence through direct victimization, physical/threatened abuse or witnessing victimization or violence. Being exposed to violence has correlated with socio-behavioral problems, including substance use, suicidal behavior/ideations, and aggressive/violent behavior [23]. Empirical evidence has shown that adverse

childhood experiences, primarily physical abuse, and future violent behavior in adulthood, have a relationship [22]. Additionally, victims of physical abuse in childhood are twice as likely to abuse their intimate partners in adulthood which is an indicator of dating violence in adolescence.

Another risk factor for future acts of violence is attachment problems or disorders. This is due to the impact it can have on an individual's empathy level. In early childhood, attachment supports the development of the brain, communication skills, and the ability to form relationships [24]. When an adolescent develops attachment, it allows the individual to learn social skills including cooperating as a group, following group rules, and adapting. However, two paths can disrupt the individual's ability to develop attachment. If a child has suffered abuse or neglect or suffers from an untreated mental illness or autism, it can inhibit the individual from bonding with caregivers. Severe problems can develop when an attachment is disrupted such as concerns with skill development, self-concept, self-management, interpersonal skills, emotional regulation, and development of pro-social values [24].

It has been suggested that parental attachment plays a key role in predicting juvenile offenses [25]. The parental attachment has been established as a primary bond between a child and society, according to the control theory. The research suggests that strong affective bonds between child–parent can deter juvenile delinquency, poor bonding is associated with juvenile delinquency, and is also a predictor [24, 25]. The weak attachment has also been linked to inadequate empathy and the commission of acts of serial violence against others [24]. Additionally, exposure to violence was linked to poor parental attachment, future acts of violence, behavioral problems, impulsivity, sexual assault, attachment disorders, poor social skills, and school behavior problems [4].

#### **4.1 Gender differences in risk and resilience**

Data obtained from the 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Study, a self-report questionnaire used by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, shows that 30% of boys, as compared to 17% of girls, report having been in a physical fight during the previous year [26]. This research is indicative of an almost 50% higher rate of violence among males than among females, a difference which is worth consideration, considering that males and females report many of the same risk factors toward violence [27]. Socializing agents have been shown to be different among males and females. This is seen when caretakers encourage certain behaviors in adolescents such as females being encouraged in caretaking and relationship management, versus males being encouraged in autonomy, instrumentality, and goal-directed behavior [28].

While there have many studies on the risk factors of adolescents and children, few have included an adequate sample of female subjects to draw conclusions concerning the moderating role of gender when the other, known risk factors remain constant [27]. Studies which do study gender tend to do so as a primary risk factor, rather than as a moderating risk factor in the commission of violent crimes. This remains true in recent literature, despite findings that certain risk factors, such as trauma, being the victim of a violent act and being involved in a dysfunctional relationship carry much more weight in females as a precursor to committing violent acts than they do among males [29]. The fact that few studies include an adequate representation of females or consider differences in how various risk factors affect females versus males lessens the validity of these studies when attempting to develop a theory of risk factors among females [30].

#### *Perspective Chapter: The Assessment of Youth Violence DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106069*

Among females, being the victim of violence in the home is likely to cause revictimization later in life, while in males, it is likely to lead to violence against others [29]. Female youth who grow up in a home with an absent or abusive father are much more likely to be the victim of dating violence as adolescents and young adults [31]. Males in the same situation are more likely to act out violently against others [31]. In single family or abusive/neglectful families, children are much more likely to become involved in alcohol or drugs, which increased the risk of behaving violently in both genders, and of female youth being victimized, particularly by a romantic or dating partner [31].

Males are often more likely to be perpetrators and victims of physical bullying than females [32]. Males are often socialized into coping with anger through aggression in an overt or physical way, while females often respond to anger by inflicting aggression on others personal relationships or psychological wellbeing [33]. This suggests that parents who reinforce aggression, physically or verbally, as a method of managing anger or negative emotions, can increase the chances the adolescent using aggression or violence in the future. However, research is limited on the correlation of cause of violent behavior and gender differences.

Poverty seems to affect both male and female youth negatively, but in different ways. While poverty-stricken male youth tend to act out violently against others, female youth are at an increased risk of being victimized by others [31]. This is particularly true if they are raised in a family where the father is either absent or is abusive to the mother and/or the children [31]. Females tend to internalize abuse, while males tend to act out against others when they have been the victims of abuse [31]. Females blame themselves; males blame the abuser—it affects them differently, but still makes both groups more likely to either abuse others or to be the victims of further abuse [31].

#### **4.2 Ethnic differences in risk and resilience**

When predicting future acts of aggression or violence, previous research lacked knowledge concerning risk and protective factors associated with racial or cultural differences. A recent study compared violent trends in adolescents among the Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Non-Latino Black, and Non-Latino White adolescents. The results indicated that White youth were at the lowest risk, while Puerto Rican youth are at the highest risk of perpetrating severe violence, compared to the other ethnicities included in the study [34]. While each ethnicity carries its own set of risk and protective factors, some factors can have an impact on all adolescents regardless of cultural or ethnic differences. Being a witness or victim of violence at home or among peers has proven to put youth at increased risk of involvement in acts of violence. Abuse in early childhood has been proven to desensitize youth to violence, making it appear appropriate to use violence as a solution to a conflict [35]. Additionally, adolescents with gang affiliations are more susceptible to violent acts, when compared to those without affiliations [35]. Seeley's (2010) research also suggested that Latino youth are more likely to be involved in a gang, followed by Non-Latino Black, and Non-Latino White youth. The following sections will discuss the risk and resilience factors of African American, Latino, and White adolescents.

#### **4.3 Risk and resilience factors in white youth**

The risk and resilience factors White adolescents face are similar to those in other ethnic groups but are often overlooked. Adolescents who are from single-parent or

abusive homes increase the possibility of violent behavior (CDCP, 2012). The chances are greater for acts of violence or gang involvement, in White adolescents who participate in drug or alcohol use. Additionally, white male adolescents in abusive or violent households can be an indicator of future violent behavior, while females are more likely to become involved in violent relationships (CDCP, 2012). The top indicator for future acts of violence among White adolescents is parental neglect/absence and violence (CDCP, 2012). Homicide is one of the leading causes of death among White adolescents [36]. White youth is less likely to die from homicide than African American or Latino youth, due to peer/gang violence. It is more likely for White youth to die because of familial abuse or neglect when compared [36].

#### **4.4 Risk and resilience factors in African American youth**

African American and Hispanic adolescents have a higher risk of being involved in acts of violence, resulting in social sequelae, negative health impacts, incarceration, and homicide, according to research [8]. Death is the leading cause of death in African American adolescents. A study published by Stoddard et al. [8], found that three-fourths of the urban youth population reported peer violence to the emergency department. Urban stress and mental health perspectives are that African American youth are affected because of discrimination, racism, and stress-inducing factors, including oppression, expansion of drugs, using violence as a solution to a problem, and greater exposure to violence [37]. Approximately 79% of violent crimes occur in urban communities, with 80–90% of urban youth witnessing or being a victim of a violent crime [37]. Youth exposed to abuse or violent crimes are more likely to present aggressive behaviors and potentially become victimizers. Along with a primary parental figure(s) having a substance abuse problem or neglectful can dramatic Discrimination and oppression have been a reoccurring risk factor for future acts of violence, in the African American culture. The impact of discrimination and oppression has resulted in many internalizing racist attitudes, leading to mutual disrespect, internal communal conflict, and Black-on-Black violence [38]. African Americans are not among the only minority populations to be victims of discrimination or oppression, but there is a lack of research on other ethnic groups and the impact it has made on their culture.

However, strong ethnic identity and high self-esteem have been identified as resilience factors. Resilience factors aid in reducing internalizing behaviors and create better-coping skills and problem-solving strategies. Additional resilience factors among the African American youth include strong family presence, spiritual/ religious beliefs, and positive social involvement. Research has suggested that youth involved in extracurricular activities through the church, school, or community organizations is a positive deterrent from violent behavior in all cultures [39]. Many extracurricular activities involve guidelines or rules to be able to continue participation, holding the adolescents accountable for their actions or behaviors. Family, including extended family, plays a major role in many African American adolescents' lives. Many reporting to have several caregivers throughout development, implying a strong support system [40]. Research has found that parenting style can be a risk or protective factor for chronic violence. For example, controlling parenting styles among African American households tend to be adaptive and protective within high-risk environments which suggests that a controlling parenting style may assist in African American youth to recover from committing assaultive behavior [41].

### **4.5 Risk and resilience factors in Latino youth**

Within the research, the Latino/Hispanic populations are inadequately represented as many of the studies are broken down into Caucasian, African American, or Other. Individuals of the Latino population have their own distinct risk and protective factors. The Latino population is growing rapidly compared to other ethnic groups, due to immigration and the high rate of family growth (CDCP, 2012). Studies have suggested that acculturation and speaking Spanish at home are important protective factors to keep in mind when considering future acts of violence [42]. This is an important consideration due to some households only speak Spanish and do not learn the English language, this makes it difficult for their children in academic and social situations. Low academic achievements are commonly attributed to living in poverty, which increases the likelihood of being exposed to violence [36]. Latino adolescents who have positive role models of their own or from other cultures are less likely to become involved in violent behavior. Resilience factors among the Latino population include positive peer relations, academic achievements, communication skills, and living above poverty [34].

The Latino community has been identified as having high levels of parental involvement and belonging to peer groups, which unlike other ethnicities has been found to be a risk factor [43]. Studies suggest that many parents in the Latino community are reluctant to trust those of other cultures and resist accepting or seeking beneficial assistance for their children. However, the Latino youth has shown a greater acceptance of help, implying that parental involvement inhibits Latino youth from seeking help from non-Latino individuals or entities [44]. While a strong ethnic identity is important for the self-esteem it can be beneficial to Latino youth to interact with individuals of multiple cultures as it prevents involvement in violent behaviors, while promoting a sense of community. Research has suggested that large peer groups of predominantly one race can lead to an increased chance of gang involvement or other criminal behavior [44]. Homicide is the second leading cause of death among the Latino population, with accidental injury being the first (CDCP, 2012). Research must be continued to determine risk and protective factors among the Latino population and to form preventative measures for the betterment of the Latino population's emotional and physical wellbeing.
