The Experts below are selected from a list of 7710 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Christopher J. Ferguson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Video Games and Youth Violence: A Prospective Analysis in Adolescents
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2011Co-Authors: Christopher J. FergusonAbstract:The potential influence of violent video games on Youth Violence remains an issue of concern for psychologists, policymakers and the general public. Although several prospective studies of video game Violence effects have been conducted, none have employed well validated measures of Youth Violence, nor considered video game Violence effects in context with other influences on Youth Violence such as family environment, peer delinquency, and depressive symptoms. The current study builds upon previous research in a sample of 302 (52.3% female) mostly Hispanic Youth. Results indicated that current levels of depressive symptoms were a strong predictor of serious aggression and Violence across most outcome measures. Depressive symptoms also interacted with antisocial traits so that antisocial individuals with depressive symptoms were most inclined toward Youth Violence. Neither video game Violence exposure, nor television Violence exposure, were prospective predictors of serious acts of Youth aggression or Violence. These results are put into the context of criminological data on serious acts of Violence among Youth.
-
a multivariate analysis of Youth Violence and aggression the influence of family peers depression and media Violence
The Journal of Pediatrics, 2009Co-Authors: Christopher J. Ferguson, Claudia San Miguel, Richard D HartleyAbstract:Objective To examine the multivariate nature of risk factors for Youth Violence including delinquent peer associations, exposure to domestic Violence in the home, family conflict, neighborhood stress, antisocial personality traits, depression level, and exposure to television and video game Violence. Study design A population of 603 predominantly Hispanic children (ages 10-14 years) and their parents or guardians responded to multiple behavioral measures. Outcomes included aggression and rule-breaking behavior on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), as well as violent and nonviolent criminal activity and bullying behavior. Results Delinquent peer influences, antisocial personality traits, depression, and parents/guardians who use psychological abuse in intimate relationships were consistent risk factors for Youth Violence and aggression. Neighborhood quality, parental use of domestic Violence in intimate relationships, and exposure to violent television or video games were not predictive of Youth Violence and aggression. Conclusion Childhood depression, delinquent peer association, and parental use of psychological abuse may be particularly fruitful avenues for future prevention or intervention efforts.
James A. Mercy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
centers for disease control and prevention s expert panel on protective factors for Youth Violence perpetration background and overview
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2012Co-Authors: Jeffrey E Hall, James A. Mercy, Thomas R. Simon, Rolf Loeber, David P FarringtonAbstract:Abstract The CDC Expert Panel on Protective Factors for Youth Violence Perpetration was convened to review and advance the status of etiologic and prevention research on direct protective and buffering protective factors for Youth Violence perpetration. The current paper introduces Phase One of the panel's work, which focuses on direct protective factors and includes the papers in this supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. This paper provides the context for the panel's work, describes its practical and theoretic importance, and summarizes why independently defined direct protective factors and risk factors are important for the advancement of our understanding of Youth Violence and its prevention. Lastly, this paper briefly describes the organization of the work of the panel as well as the research products that comprise the contents of the supplement.
-
PREVENTING Youth Violence: What Works?*
Annual Review of Public Health, 1998Co-Authors: Arthur L. Kellermann, Dawna Fuqua-whitley, Frederick P. Rivara, James A. MercyAbstract:▪ Abstract Between 1985 and 1992, serious Youth Violence in the United States surged to unprecedented levels. The growing use of firearms to settle disputes has contributed to this phenomenon. Youth are most often victimized by one of their peers. In response to this problem, a wide variety of programs have been implemented in an attempt to prevent Youth Violence or reduce its severity. Few have been adequately evaluated. In general, interventions applied between the prenatal period and age 6 appear to be more effective than interventions initiated in later childhood or adolescence. Community-based programs that target certain high-risk behaviors may be beneficial as well. A sustained commitment to evaluation research is needed to identify the most effective approaches to Youth Violence prevention.
-
Youth Violence as a public health problem
1993Co-Authors: James A. MercyAbstract:VioLit summary: OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article by Mercy was to review recent research on American Youth Violence within the context of public health. METHODOLOGY: A non-experimental literature review was conducted. The author defined Youth as 12 to 24 year-olds. FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: The author began by reporting recent statistics on Youth arrest rates and homicide rates (both victims and offenders), including racial/ethnic breakdowns. Youth Violence in America since the mid-1980's has escalated. Minority Youth homicide rates had dramatically increased. Youth arrest rates for violent crimes (including homicide) had substantially increased. Homicide offender and victim average ages had dropped. Finally, increases in firearm homicides were argued to have caused most of the recent increases in Youth homicide rates. The author argued that the public health sector was best suited to lead efforts in the prevention of injuries and deaths that result from Youth Violence. Public health added a prevention focus to this issue. Public health brought a scientific model of problem solving. Public health had the possibility of mobilizing a variety of resources toward the prevention of Youth injuries and deaths. Keeping these points in mind, the author outlined a prevention strategy for Youth Violence. The Center for Disease Control offered a specific two-part strategy: 1) activities to reduce Youths' immediate risks of perpetrating and being victimized, and 2) activities to reduce younger children's (up to 10 years old) risks of perpetrating and being victimized. The Center for Disease Control implemented different stages of the following 6 kinds of activities. First, data collection and surveillance activities monitored and documented levels and locations of Youth Violence and related injuries. Second, risk factor identification activities categorized both protective and risk factors relating to Youth Violence. Third, evaluation research assessed the outcomes of various intervention programs. Fourth, community demonstration programs increased the ability for local and state agencies to deliver successful Youth Violence interventions. Fifth, training programs built up teams of qualified leaders and facilitators. Finally, public awareness activities increased public knowledge of Youth Violence as a public health issue and the intervention/prevention programs that were being tested. AUTHOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS: The author recommended that communities take the initiative in requesting that the Center for Disease Control bring demonstration projects to address their local Youth Violence problems. EVALUATION: In general, this article provides a persuasive argument for both studying and confronting the problem of Youth Violence within the context of public health. Though written in 1993, this piece may still provide useful statistics and solution models for current grant proposals. In conclusion, this piece addresses important issues, but more recent statistics are required in order to reassess the validity of the author's arguments. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado) KW - Literature Review KW - Public Health Approach KW - Juvenile Homicide KW - Juvenile Injury KW - Juvenile Offender KW - Juvenile Violence KW - Juvenile Victim KW - Victimization Prevention KW - Victimization Rates KW - Victimization Incidence and Prevalence KW - Violence Prevention KW - Violence Rates KW - Violence Incidence and Prevalence KW - Injury Prevention KW - Injury Rates KW - Injury Incidence and Prevalence KW - Statistical Data KW - Juvenile Victim KW - Prevention Recommendations KW - Prevention Program KW - Program Recommendations KW - Homicide Prevention KW - Homicide Rates KW - Homicide Incidence and Prevalence
John H Laub - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the unprecedented epidemic in Youth Violence
Crime and Justice, 1998Co-Authors: Philip J Cook, John H LaubAbstract:The epidemic of Youth Violence that began in the mid-1980s has been demographically concentrated among black male Youths: the homicide-commission rate for this group increased by a factor of about 4.5. A number of patterns stand out: one of every four or five serious crimes of Violence, and one of ten homicides, are committed by juveniles who are less than age eighteen; the proportion of arrests for violent crimes, however, that involved juveniles (20 percent) was about the same in 1994 as in 1965. A decline in the adolescent population has been balanced by an increase in rates of arrest. Youths kill more often than they are killed, and there is a great deal of crossover killing (in both directions) between adolescents and older people. The claim that the explosion in Youth Violence can be attributed to "superpredators," with each cohort having greater prevalence of such fiends than the last, does not accord well with available data. There is a clear indication of increased gun availability during the epi...
Earl S. Hishinuma - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Essential elements for community engagement in evidence-based Youth Violence prevention.
American journal of community psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Tai-an Miao, Karen Umemoto, Deanna Gonda, Earl S. HishinumaAbstract:In the field of Youth Violence prevention, there has been increasing emphasis on "evidence based" programs and principles shown through scientific research as reaching their intended outcomes. Community mobilization and engagement play a critical role in many evidence-based programs and strategies, as it takes a concerted effort among a wide range of people within a community to alter behavior and maintain behavioral change. How do concerned individuals and groups within a community engage others within and outside of that community to effectively plan, develop and implement appropriate EB programs as well as evaluate the outcomes and impacts of locally developed programs yet to be proven? The authors discuss five elements essential for community engagement in evidence-based Youth Violence prevention based on their work in a university-community partnership through the Asian/Pacific Islander Youth Violence Prevention Center (API Center), a National Academic Center for Excellence on Youth Violence Prevention Center supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They include: (a) aligning EBPs with a community's shared vision and values; (b) establishing an inclusive environment for the planning, implementation and evaluation of EBPs; (c) nurturing collaboration for increased effectiveness and efficacy of EBPs; (d) building adequate leadership and community capacity to develop and sustain EBPs; and (e) building a learning community for evaluation and self-reflection. The authors propose placing greater emphasis on "evaluative thinking" and organizational capacity for evaluation as we pursue evidence-based practices for Youth Violence prevention. This is especially important for ethnic groups for which an evidence base is not well established.
-
Moving Toward Comprehensiveness and Sustainability in a Social Ecological Approach to Youth Violence Prevention: Lessons from the Asian/Pacific Islander Youth Violence Prevention Center
American Journal of Community Psychology, 2009Co-Authors: Karen Umemoto, Charlene K. Baker, Susana Helm, Tai-an Miao, Deborah A. Goebert, Earl S. HishinumaAbstract:Youth Violence is a serious public health problem affecting communities across the United States. The use of a social ecological approach has helped reduce its prevalence. However, those who have put the approach into practice often face challenges to effective implementation. Addressing social ecology in all its complexity presents one obstacle; the ability of private non-profit and public agencies to sustain such comprehensive efforts presents another. Here, we provide an example of our efforts to prevent Youth Violence. We worked with the Asian/Pacific Islander Youth Violence Prevention Center (APIYVPC) and two communities on O`ahu. We provide a case example from the Asian/Pacific Islander Youth Violence Prevention Center (APIYVPC) of our work, in collaboration with two communities on O`ahu, to develop and implement a Youth Violence prevention initiative that is becoming both comprehensive and sustainable. We illustrate the incremental nature of what it means to be comprehensive and we underscore the importance of reaching sustainability as the project unfolds.
Marc A Zimmerman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
community engagement in Youth Violence prevention crafting methods to context
The Journal of Primary Prevention, 2016Co-Authors: Susan Morrelsamuels, Martica Bacallao, Meredith Bower, Shelli Brown, Marc A ZimmermanAbstract:The purpose of the Youth Violence Prevention Centers (YVPC) Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is to reduce Youth Violence in defined high-risk communities through the implementation and evaluation of comprehensive, evidence based prevention strategies. Within this common framework, each YVPC varies in its structure and methods, however all engage communities in multiple ways. We explore aspects of community engagement employed by three centers that operate in very different contexts: a rural county in North Carolina; a suburban area of Denver, Colorado; and an urban setting in Flint, Michigan. While previous research has addressed theories supporting community involvement in Youth Violence prevention, there has been less attention to the implementation challenges of achieving and sustaining participation. In three case examples, we describe the foci and methods for community engagement in diverse YVPC sites and detail the barriers and facilitating factors that have influenced implementation. Just as intervention programs may need to be adapted in order to meet the needs of specific populations, methods of community engagement must be tailored to the context in which they occur. We discuss case examples of community engagement in areas with varying geographies, histories, and racial and ethnic compositions. Each setting presents distinct challenges and opportunities for conducting collaborative Violence prevention initiatives and for adapting engagement methods to diverse communities. Although approaches may vary depending upon local contexts, there are certain principles that appear to be common across cultures and geography: trust, transparency, communication, commitment. We also discuss the importance of flexibility in community engagement efforts.
-
organizational empowerment in community mobilization to address Youth Violence
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2008Co-Authors: Derek M Griffith, Julie Ober Allen, Marc A Zimmerman, Susan Morrelsamuels, Thomas M Reischl, Sarah E Cohen, Katie A CampbellAbstract:Community mobilization efforts to address Youth Violence are often disconnected, uncoordinated, and lacking adequate resources. An organizational empowerment theory for community partnerships provides a useful framework for organizing and evaluating a coalition's community mobilization efforts and benefits for individual organizations, partnerships, and communities. Based on a qualitative analysis of steering committee interviews and other primary data, the results of a case study suggest that the intraorganizational infrastructure; interorganizational membership practices and networking; and extraorganizational research, training, and organizing activities facilitate the community mobilization efforts of the Youth Violence Prevention Center in Flint, Michigan. The organizational empowerment framework, and its focus on organizational structures and processes, illustrates the importance of recognizing and incorporating the organizational systems and structures that provide the foundation on which a community mobilization effort may build. This framework also highlights how organizational structures and processes are central components of multilevel strategies for organizing and mobilizing community efforts to address Youth Violence.
