Ethnic differences in the risk assessment of chronic violence review of the literature

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2021.101553Get rights and content

Abstract

Youth violence is a phenomenon that plagues our way of life both locally and internationally, leading to costly consequences. Youth violence ranks among the top five causes of death among youth. Risk assessment tools that measure the future risk of violence have been developed to identify at-risk youth, allowing risk-reduction measures to be implemented to reduce the risk of chronic violence. Some researchers interested in determining the level of risk in certain individuals concern themselves solely with the assessment of risk, while others attempt to determine possible solutions to the issues. However, the development and evolution of risk assessment for future violence among youth should not become stagnate, as there are both gender and ethnicity differences that must be considered when approaching risk assessment and the reduction of future risk of violence.

Introduction

Violence among youth both locally and internationally, whether as victims or perpetrators, is becoming an increasing concern in society. Violence among youth is both pervasive and costly and leads to considerable loss of life among the involved young people (Seal et al., 2014). As of the time of the current study homicide was the second leading cause of death for young adults aged 15–24 years, and the leading cause of death among minority young people (Seal et al., 2014). Young people in the United States both perpetrate and experience much higher rates of violence when compared to young people in other developed countries (Bushman et al., 2016). Youth homicide rates in the United States are 30–40% higher than in other countries with comparable income. It has also been found that more United States young people die from homicide each year than from cancer, heart disease, congenital disabilities, flu and pneumonia, respiratory diseases, stroke, and diabetes combined (Bushman et al., 2016).

Section snippets

Youth violence

In 2001, the Surgeon General expressed an urgent need to address youth violence in the United States due to its increasingly devastating toll (Brookmeyer et al., 2006). Suicide and homicide are the second and third leading causes of injury-related death in the United States; furthermore, homicide risk increases dramatically during adolescence (Juvenile Offenders and Victims, 2014). Researchers have shown that there are increasingly high rates of violent behavior among young people in the US,

Risk assessment of violence

Risk assessments for violence are meant to predict the probable risk of an individual committing future acts of violence (Seifert, 2015). The history of risk assessment for violence began through the use of interviews alone, but researchers began using more sophisticated measures during the 1990s (Seifert, 2015). Researchers now show that using unguided clinical judgment for the risk assessment of future violence is not accurate beyond chance levels, or that these assessments were comparable to

Assessment measures for youth violence

Although there are dozens of assessment available measures for researchers and clinicians to predict youth violence, it is beyond the scope of this article to describe and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each one. For the purpose of this article, the researcher examined several assessments and determined that the Child and Adolescent Risk/Needs Evaluation (CARE-2), should be the preferred assessment tool, based on review of the 3 most prominent assessment tools; weighing their strengths

Risk and resiliency models

Resiliency theory is based on the premise that there are factors during childhood and adolescence that impact the probability of conducting behaviors that can positively or negatively affect an adolescent's well-being and health (Van Breda, 2001). Risk factors negatively affect the child's well-being and health, while resilience, or promotive, factors are those that can help the child negate the effects of risk factors and promote healthy development. Resiliency can also be conceptualized as

Conceptual patterns of individual resilience

There are four conceptual patterns of individual resilience described in the literature: dispositional, relational, situational, and philosophical (Van Breda, 2001). The dispositional pattern of resilience involves the individual's ego-related psychosocial attributes, which support resilience, and includes attributes that support a resilient disposition towards life stressors, a sense of autonomy or self-reliance, a sense of self-worth, good physical health, and good physical appearance. This

Risk and resilience factors

Those who study risk and promotive/resilience factors have instituted a five-group system to include individual, peer interaction, family, school, and community (Stoddard et al., 2013).

Individual risk factors that are believed to increase aggression and the probability of violence:

Negative life eventsImpulsivity
Negative Attitudes Towards the FutureRisk Taking/Sensation Seeking
Internalizing Behaviors (anxiety, withdrawal)Beliefs Supportive of Violence
Externalizing Behaviors

Youth subgroups

Some subgroups of youth have specific risk factors for their respective group. An international study found that 5% of juvenile offenders committed the majority of violent crimes (Mulder et al., 2010). Furthermore, those in this 5% are most likely found in the lifelong trajectory and tend to continue their criminal careers into adulthood. For this subgroup of juvenile offenders, there are specific risk factors that contribute to recidivism. Family risk factors for the juvenile offender group

Ethnic differences in risk and resilience

Researchers have shown that certain ethnic groups, such as Hispanic and African-American adolescents, are at a distinctly higher risk for involvement in various forms of violence, accompanying social sequelae, negative health impacts, incarceration, and homicide (Stoddard et al., 2013). Death is the greatest consequence of violent behavior, and homicide is the leading cause of death in African-American adolescents. In a recent study, Stoddard et al. (2013) found that three-fourths of urban

Summary

There is a lack of current research describing risk and resilience factors for youth violence in several key areas. This article has reviewed the static and dynamic factors accounting for youth violence, as well as the five domains of risk and resilience that affect risk for youth violence. Currently, the CARES-2 assessment instrument is the best available tool, however, the CARES-2 can be improved to even better serve the needs of youth from different cultural and ethnic groups. The authors

Declaration of competing interest

None.

References (59)

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP)

    Youth risk behavior surveillance. Youth violence results

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP)

    Youth violence

  • K.K. Childs et al.

    Examining the validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) for predicting probation outcomes among adjudicated juvenile offenders

    Behavioral Sciences & the Law

    (2013)
  • V. de Vogel et al.

    Assessing protective factors in forensic psychiatric practice: Introducing the SAPROF

    International Journal of Forensic Mental Health

    (2011)
  • K.A. Dodge et al.

    A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence

    Developmental Psychology

    (2003)
  • O.W. Edwards et al.

    A positive youth development model for students considered at-risk

    School Psychology International

    (2007)
  • L.M. Estrada-Martínez et al.

    Examining the influence of family environments on youth violence: A comparison of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, non-Latino Black, and non-Latino White adolescents

    Journal of Youth and Adolescence

    (2011)
  • A.A. Fagan et al.

    What works in youth violence prevention: A review of the literature

    Research on Social Work Practice

    (2013)
  • S. Fergus et al.

    Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk

    Annual Review of Public Health

    (2005)
  • A. Forth et al.

    Hare psychopathy checklist: Youth version PCL: YVTM

  • J.A. Fredricks et al.

    Participation in extracurricular activities in the middle school years: Are there developmental benefits for African American and European American youth?

    Journal of Youth and Adolescence

    (2008)
  • N. Garmezy et al.

    The study of stress and competence in children: A building block for developmental psychopathology

    Child Development

    (1984)
  • C.H. Hall

    Kinship ties: Attachment relationships that promote resilience in African American adult children of alcoholics

    Advances in Social Work

    (2007)
  • J.D. Hawkins et al.

    Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1992)
  • K.F. Hicks

    Violence in adolescence

    Child Psychology Journal

    (2012)
  • R.D. Hoge et al.

    Youth level of service/case management inventory- YLS/CMITM

  • G.H. Hollister-Wagner et al.

    Adolescent aggression: Models of resiliency

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (2001)
  • Juvenile Offenders and Victims

    National report

  • T.M. Kennedy et al.

    Latino adolescents’ community violence exposure: After-school activities and familismo as risk and protective factors

    Social Development

    (2013)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text