The Jamaica Youth Survey · The Jamaica Youth Survey emphasises five core competencies linked to...

The Jamaica Youth Survey

Assessing Core Competencies and Risk for

Aggression among Jamaican Youth

J U L I E M E E K S G A R D N E R , K I R K R . W I L L I A M S ,

N A N C Y G . G U E R R A , I A N W A L K E R

Introduction

THERE IS GLOBAL INTEREST in promoting healthy youth development and

preventing antisocial and problem behaviour during adolescence.' Not only

is positive development an important goal in its own right, linked to academic

achievement and socioeconomic success,^ but many social and emotional

competencies also decrease risk for antisocial behaviours that compromise

individual health and development and exact costs for society.' Among

adolescent problem behaviours, rising rates of youth violence worldwide have

been a particular cause for concern and are considered a major public health

problem. Nowhere is this problem more severe than in the Caribbean region,

where homicide rates for this age group are among the highest in the world.^

Within the Caribbean, the highest documented homicide rates are in Jamaica,

at approximately 60 per 100,000 islandwide, rising to 140 per 100,000 in

inner-city communities of Kingston, the capital city.'

Focusing on Jamaica, these high rates of violence, particularly among

youth, have been accompanied by repeated calls to develop and implement

effective programmes. International donors, governmental ministries, health

systems, and non-profit agencies have pushed for the development of empir-

ically supported programmes and policies to prevent and mitigate aggression

and violence from the early years through adolescence and beyond. There is

a clear need for greater monitoring and evaluation of programmes which target

35

36 Julie Meeks Gardner, Kirk R. Williams, Nancy G. Guerra, Ian Walker

youth, and a policy mandate to this effect might be useful. However, to date,the majority of available programmes have not been carefully evaluated, mak-ing it difficult to differentiate programmes that are popular and/or garnermedia attention from those that demonstrate evidence of effectiveness. InJamaica and elsewhere in the Caribbean, there has been relatively little progressin developing coordinated responses to youth violence prevention and con-ducting rigorous scientific studies of programme outcomes.

An important first step in building capacity for this type of evaluation is todevelop a reliable and valid youth self-report assessment tool to measure riskand to establish programme impact. This includes long-term impact onaggressive and violent behaviours as well as short-term effects on proposedmediators of change, that is, those attitudes, skills and beliefs that are targeteddirectly by the intervention because of their association with aggression andviolence. Further, given that many youth violence prevention programmesemphasise positive youth development, these mediators should reflect corecompetencies for positive development that are protective against youthviolence and also lead to productive engagement in society, greater health,and enhanced well-being.

There is debate regarding the relevant contributions of various factors

THE JAMAICA YOUTH SURVEY 37

within youth development, especially as regards antisocial behaviour, and

about interventions which can improve outcomes.^ We do not review that

literature here, rather we underscore the need to have in place an instrument

which has been shown to be valid and reliable within the cultural context in

order to properly assess both contributing factors and interventions in a

systematic and repeatable way. The present study reports on the development

and validation oí the. Jamaica Youth Survey. This survey was developed as part

of a project funded by the World Bank to evaluate individual-level

programmes for promoting well-being and preventing violence among teenage

boys and girls (ages 12-18 years) in Jamaica. Short-term outcomes included

five core competencies for healthy development that have been linked empir-

ically with aggression and violence (described below) and that typically are

targeted by community-based positive youth development and prevention

programmes. Long-term outcomes emphasised distinct types of aggressive and

violent behaviour and aggressive propensity (intent to behave aggressively).

All items and scales were modified from previously validated instruments.

Although a number of youth development studies have been carried out

in the Caribbean, we are unaware of any other detailed assessments of instru-

ments for measuring this kind of risk in the Caribbean.

Core competencies, healthy development, and violenceprevention

The Jamaica Youth Survey emphasises five core competencies linked to healthy

development and prevention of youth problem behaviours including violence.

As described elsewhere,^ there is a substantial empirical literature linking each

competency with adjustment and prevention outcomes. Although the bulk

of that research has been conducted on non-Caribbean youth, research with

Jamaican youth suggests that they are also important in promoting health and

preventing problems during childhood and adolescence.^ From a more global

perspective, these social-emotional competencies have been viewed as key indi-

cators of health, well-being, and performance in society, including academic

achievement throughout childhood and adolescence and socioeconomic

success in adulthood.^

Positive sense ojself. An important marker of adjustment for adolescents is


the development of a coherent and pro-social identity grounded in personal

accomplishments, connections to family and community, and a productive

role in society. We have operationalised positive sense of self as including an

affective component reflected in global self-esteem (one's personal regard and

feelings towards self) as well as a general sense of self-efficacy, defined as

agency, purpose, and hopefulness for the future.

Self-control: An essential component of adjustment is the ability to

effectively control one's feelings (emotional self-control) and behaviours

(behavioural self-control). Low levels of self-control (particularly the ability

to control angry and impulsive behaviours) have been implicated in aggressive

behaviour from a very early age'° and have been proposed as leading causes of

delinquency and criminality."

Decision-making skills: There is a robust empirical literature linking mature

social problem-solving and decision-making skills with both adjustment and

prevention of youth problem behaviours. Maturity of judgment is evident in

solutions that involve careful assessment of problems, consideration of alter-

nate solutions, review of consequences, and concern for how one's actions

impact others.'^

Moral system of belief: In addition to discrete problem-solving skills, youth

develop underlying cognitive schema or normative beliefs about the appro-

priateness of behaviours with moral consequences (e.g., harm to others, harm

to society). These beliefs involve concepts such as fairness, equity and personal

responsibility, as well as moral prescriptions for the acceptability of aggressive

and violent behaviours.^'

Pro-social connectedness: For youth navigating the transition to adulthood,

positive role models or mentors provide an important grounding in a larger

supportive community. Research has shown that youth with more pro-social

bonds are less likely to be involved in violence and delinquency and more

likely to be productively engaged in society.'4

Aggression and aggressive propensity

By definition, aggression is a heterogeneous set of behaviours aimed at harm-

ing others, with violence being the extreme case.'' Non-physical aggression

includes yeUing, teasing, threatening, insulting someone, shaming, saying

THE JAMAICA YOUTH SURVEY

mean things, and excluding socially. Physical aggression includes pushing,

shoving, fighting, throwing objects, slapping, and using a weapon. There are

many scales that measure self-reported aggressive behaviour, typically over a

defined period and measured in frequency of behaviour.'^ However, aggres-

sion and violence are low base rate behaviours, meaning that even the most

violent youth do so only infrequently. An alternate approach to assessing

aggressive behaviour involves determining one's 'threshold' for aggression,

that is, the likelihood that specific provocations would result in aggressive

responses. Towards this end, we included a scale to measure individual thresh-

old or propensity for aggression.

Methods overview

The data utilised in the present study were collected during 2007-2008 as part

of an evaluation sponsored by the World Bank. Sites included the Kingston

YMCA programme for males, and the Women's Centre of Jamaica Founda-

tion (WCJF) programme for females. A research team from the University of

the West Indies (UWI), Mona collected all data. The ethics committee of the

UWI approved the study and data collection procedures.

Participants

Male sample: All boys who were participating in the YMCA intervention or

were currendy on a wait list to participate were invited to participate in the

survey data collection. Of the 149 intervention pardcipants eligible to complete

the survey, 128 boys (86%) received parental permission and youth assent. The

research team was also able to locate and receive permission from a total of 55

boys on the wait list to participate. Thus, data were collected from 183 boys

from the intervendon and wait list control groups. The total male sample

ranged in age from 12 to 17 years, and all participants were from poor, urban

communities.

All boys who had graduated from the YMCA intervention within the

previous five years and for whom contact information was available were con-

sidered to be eligible for the graduate sample. From this list, youth were


randomly selected and invited to participate until a total sample of 60 youthwas achieved. The research team contacted eligible youth, the study procedureswere explained, and parental permission (for youth under age 18) and youthassent were solicited. To establish an equivalent community control samplethat had not participated in an intensive intervention programme during theadolescent years, we worked with a community agency for street youth toidentify eligible male participants. We were able to identify, secure permission,and collect data on a comparable sample of 60 community control youth.Thus, data were collected from 120 boys from the intervention and commu-nity control groups. However, the age range (12-28) for this sample farexceeded that for the YMCA intervention and wait list sample (12-18). Hence,30 cases 19 years of age or older were dropped from the graduate sample (N =30), leaving a total male sample size of 273 for this analysis.

Female sample: All girls who were participating in the WCJF programmeat the time of the current study were eligible to be interviewed. The pro-gramme served pregnant or new mothers, operating in seven main centresand six outreach centres throughout Jamaica. Of the 130 girls deemedeligible and initially contacted to participate, 120 (92%) received parentalpermission and youth assent. A comparison sample of 75 high-school-agefemales was also selected to complete the assessment, drawn from the samesecondary schools which the WCJF participants previously attended but whowere not pregnant or new mothers and not participating in WCJF pro-grammes. Thus, data were collected from 195 girls from both the WCJFprogramme and comparison high schools. The total female sample ranged inage from 12 to 18 years.

Data collection procedures

All participants were interviewed individually by one of six interviewers fromthe research team using the questionnaires. The field coordinator for theresearch team observed approximately 6% of the interviews to ensure thatthe materials were presented correctly, item wording was followed, probeswere used, and participants' questions were handled appropriately. No diffi-culties in the administration of the surveys were noted.

A few boys, selected by the researchers and staff, were further interviewed


with open-ended questions regarding their participation in the programme or

wish to participate, and their own perceptions of the programme and their

progress. Excerpts from these interviews are shown in the text box.

The Jamaica Youth Survey

The 107-item instrument was intended to measure five core competencies (55

items), aggressive behaviour (15 items), and propensity for aggression (20

items). There were also additional items to assess demographic and family

information, previous gang history, masculinity/aggression, and intervention

response (17 items), although these are not considered in the present analyses.

The instrument was designed to be interviewer-administered, though a highly

literate sample should be able to answer the questions on their own. The meas-

ure is available from the first author.

For each of the five core competencies, we adapted items/scales from pre-

viously validated instruments tapping similar constructs, resulting in 55 items

to assess core competencies. For each of these items, respondents answered on

a 4-point scale ranging from "i" (strongly disagree) to "4" (strongly agree).

We also reverse-coded 19 of these items to protect against response set (the

tendency to repeat the same responses). Higher scores indicate higher levels

of competency.

Positive sense of self To measure general self-esteem (affect towards self), we

included 9 items from the Rosenberg Modified Self-Esteem Scale.'-' A sample

item is, "I feel that I have a number of good qualities (good things about me)."

To assess self-efficacy, we included 5 items from the Cognitive Autonomy and

Self-Evaluation (CASE) Inventory.'^ A sample item is, "I think my life has

'purpose' or meaning {I think that there is a reason for my life).''

Self-control: We adapted 5 items from the Boxer Impulsivity Scale.'? These

items tapped impulsive responding and control over angry feelings. A sample

item is, "I can do things to calm down when I am angry or excited." Three

items were developed specifically for this survey that assessed delay of gratifi-

cation. A sample item for delay of gratification was, "It is hard to wait for

something I want."

Decision-making skills: Items were adapted from the Cognitive Autonomy

and Self-Evaluation (CASE) Inventory.^" Eight items tapped a range of


decision-making skills, including searching for relevant information, generat-

ing many alternate solutions, and considering consequences for self and others.

A sample item was, "I consider different choices before making up my mind

about something."

Moral system of belief: The format and items from the Normative Beliefs

about Aggression Scale^' were used to generate a 14-item scale of moral system

of belief. Respondents were asked whether it was right or wrong to engage in

behaviours that caused harm to others and society, including fighting with

others, taking advantage of people, cheating, breaking promises, and not being

productively engaged in society. A sample item was, "It is important to have

a job and be a good worker."

Pro-social connectedness: This ii-item scale was derived from two measures

of perceived social support: the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social

Support^^ and the Presence of Caring Scale.̂ ^ These items tapped the extent

to which individuals had adult mentors, or support, and were aware of pro-

social opportunities in their communities. A sample item was, "I know an

adult I can turn to for help when something is bothering me or I am worried

about something."

Self-reported aggressive hehaviour: For aggressive behaviour, we used 15 items

tapping verbal aggression, physical aggression, indirect aggression, and weapon

carrying. Respondents were asked to indicate how often in the past month

they had engaged in these behaviours with responses on a 4-point scale: "i"

(never), "2" (once or twice), "3" (3-5 times), and "4" (6 or more times). This

format was adapted from the Academic Centres of Excellence Youth Violence

Self-Report Scale.^^ Items also measured aggression against males and aggres-

sion against females separately. A sample item was, "In the last month, how

many times have you shoved or pushed a male? a female?" An average score

was calculated by summing across and dividing by the total number of items,

with higher scores reflecting a higher frequency of aggression and vice versa.

Aggressive propensity: We used 20 items from the "What Would Make You

Fight?" scale to measure the propensity for youth to engage in aggressive

behaviour. This scale has been developed and validated by the Academic

Centres of Excellence (ACE) Cross-site Analytical Tools Working Group.^5

The underlying logic of this measure is that youth will vary in their threshold

for aggression, meaning some will resort to physical aggressive behaviour with

less provocation than others. Respondents were asked whether they would


"hit or fight with a male (or female) if he (or she) engaged in ten different

provocative behaviours, for example, hit you first, shouted at you or called

you names, gave you a dirty look, spread rumours and lies about you behind

your back, or took something of yours without asking". Respondents answered

on a 4-point scale:"i" (never), "2" (I might), "3" (I probably would) and "4"

(Yes, for sure). An average score was calculated by summing across and divid-

ing by the number of items calculated.

Results

Personal reports

In order to gain some insight into the background of the youth who partici-

pated in the instrument development, focus group discussions were

conducted. Some illustrative quotations from these are shown in the text box.

These show some of the experiences of violence, family life, struggles with

school, and also ordinary concerns or activities of young people.

Voices of youth who participated in the instrument development

The questionnaire seeks to collect quantitative data about youth, including

aggression, home background, experiences of violence. These quotations from

young men are illustrative of their backgrounds and perceptions.

"I used to fight every day, two times, three times, for any reason. But notagain — things change. Why you fight? Some people get on your nerves andmy temper can't take it. Now, not so much."

"I was very young and my uncle got shot and died. We were very close,when my mother start to beat me, he would come over and ask her why.One day when I was eleven, me and my uncle was ketchin' up fire to keepaway mosquito. One car come park up on the bridge with two man. Oneman come out with a gun and shot mi uncle. He get five shot, one in himchest. He die. It make me feel very, very, very bad. Me run away . . . I tellmyself when I go into the army, I going hunt him down and kill him, 'causeI mark his face. That's what I tell myself. But he might dead already."

Continues on next page


"I live with my mother, brother and sister, four of us. When she is down,I do things around the house, clean, wash clothes, cook, cook for every-body. I can cook!"

"Once you get into this badness, death is the only way out."

"You make a wrong move, you pay for it."

"Somebody do something bad to somebody you love, the rage tek you andyou could end up killing somebody and regret what you did."

"My friend, he is in his early twenties and always show me how to draw.Always show me new things. He practise and take about five hours anddraw his friend. It look just like her."

"One night somebody named E. was keeping a dance, two lanes were keep-ing dance. Police came to lock off the sound and one lane ask the policefor a bligh so they only lock off one dance. Man from the other lane comeround and fire shot, say is we call police to lock off their sound. E. got shotin his head and dead. His brothers went over and shot two person. Policecome back and say, afi:er we give you bligh you start war. But people seepolice was wearing Reeboks so they know is not real police. Everybody startto run, all man who can't even walk find himself up a tree. A woman nameP. had a gun and shoot a man. I jump zinc fence until I reach home."

"I like to draw and play videogames. My mother buy me a PlayStation."

"Everybody has a girlfriend. Most girls have a boyfriend, even more thanone! All schoolers, even from basic school."

Analysis plan

The primary objective of the analysis was to establish the reliability and validity

of the core competency, aggressive behaviour and aggressive propensity meas-

ures. Reliability was determined by calculating the internal consistency of each

measure. Establishing concurrent validity required using a previously validated

and widely accepted criterion variable, with a plausible rationale as to why it

should be related to the core competency measures. Even though the positive

sense of self scale consisted of both the Rosenberg Modified Self-Esteem Scale


(14) and the Cognitive Autonomy and Self-Evaluation (CASE) Inventory (15),

the former scale meets the requirements of a criterion variable for the concur-

rent validity analysis. The rationale for anticipating empirical relations between

the self-esteem scale and the other core competency measures is straightfor-

ward: the more youth feel efficacious about their immediate and future lives,

and the more they feel competent in their decision-making, their social

connections with others, and their ability to control their actions and emo-

tions, the more they will feel positive affect toward themselves.

As described previously, evaluative items pertaining to forms of physical

and verbal aggression dominated the moral system of belief scale. Hence, the

concurrent validity of this measure was determined by estimating the empirical

relation between this scale and the indices of aggressive behaviour and aggres-

sive propensity. All concurrent validity analyses were conducted using

Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression.

Internal consistency and concurrent validity of the

Jamaica Youth Survey

The results of the internal consistency analysis are presented in Table i. With

the exception of the self-control and decision-making measures, those coeffi-

cients were well above the standard cutoff for "acceptable" internal consistency

(.70). Moreover, a comparison of the coefficients across the two samples

indicated substantial similarity by gender. A further examination of the two

exceptions suggested that the reverse-coded items were problematic; that is,

they were not interrelated vnth the positively worded items. Hence, they were

excluded, and the alpha coefficients were re-calculated. As noted in parentheses

in Table i, those coefficients for self-control and decision-making either exceed

the acceptability standard (.71 and .73, respectively, for females) or at least

approach that standard (.69 for both measures concerning the male sample).

The OLS regression results bearing on the concurrent validity of the self-

control, decision-making, and pro-social connectedness measures are shown

in Table 2. The estimated effects of these measures on the self-esteem scale

were all statistically significant and positive in direction, as expected. Those

effects were strongest in magnitude for the measures of self-control and

pro-social connectedness.


Table 1: Tests of internal consistency (alpha coefficients) of the core competency,

aggressive behaviour, and aggressive propensity measures

Measures

Positive sense of self

Self-control^

Decision-making'

Moral system of belief

Pro-social connectedness

Aggressive behaviour

Aggressive propensity: Female

Aggressive propensity: Male

'Alpha coefficients in parentheses were calculated with reverse-coded items removed.

Females

(N = 195)

.78

.41 (.71)

.70 (.73)

.86

.85

.84

.75

.73

Males

(N = 273)

.73

.51 (.69)

.66 (.69)

.86

.85

.84

.75

.81

Table 2: Concurrent validation: Estimated effects of the measures of core competen-

cies on the measure of self-esteem

Measures

Panel A

Self-control

Decision-making


Panel B

Self-control

Decision-making


b

.270

.159

.229

.269

.120

.211

se

Females (N = 195)

.075

.076

.071

Males (N = 273)

.057

.056

.057

Beta

.251*

.147*

.231*

.270*

.130*

.233*

Note: Intercept for the females equation = 1.171, and the R2 = .228. Intercept for the

males equation = 1.305, and the R2 = .232.

*p < .05.


Table 3: Concurrent validation: Estimated effects of the measure of moral system of

belief on the measures of aggressive behaviour and aggressive propensity

(female and male)

Measures

Panel A




Panel B




b

-.163

-.441

-.340

-.202

-.206

-.410

se Beta

Females (N = 195)

.090

.092

.097

-.129

-.326*

-.245*

Males (N = 273)

.082

.079

.104

-.148*

-.157*

-.233*

R2

.017

.106

.060

.022

.025

.054

Intercept

2.114

3.340

3.002

2.285

2.270

3.379

Note: *p < .05.

The results of the concurrent validity analysis for the moral system of belief

measure are displayed in Table 3. The estimated effects of this measure on

self-reported aggressive behaviour and both versions of the aggressive propen-

sity measure (a female versus a male provocateur) were statistically significant

and negative in direction within the male sample, as expected. Although

cconsistently in the anticipated direction (negative) within the female sample,

moral system of belief was not significantly associated with self-reported

aggression. Rather, it had a statistically significant estimated eflfect only on the

two versions of the aggressive propensity measure.

Linkages between core competencies and aggression: Do

self-esteem and moral system of belief mediate relations?

Two additional analyses were conducted to bring evidence to bear on this

question, using the two criterion variables incorporated in the concurrent


Table 4: Potential mediation: Estimated effects of the measure of self-esteem on

the measures of aggressive behaviour and aggressive propensity

(female and male)

Measures

Panel A




Panel B




b

-.235

-.059

-.132

-.086

-.207

-.226

se Beta

Females (N = 195)

.082

.089

.091

-.202*

-.048

-.103

Males (N = 273)

.085

.081

.109

-.061

-.154*

-.125*

R2

.041

.002

.011

.004

.024

.016

Intercept

2.282

2.029

2.255

1.002

2.235

2.754

Note: * p < .05.

validation analyses. Both rest on the assumption that building core compe-

tencies may not directly or immediately reduce the propensity and/or

occurrence of aggression, but their influence might be mediated by these

criterion variables. First, empirical relations were estimated between the

self-esteem scale and the indices of self-reported aggression and aggressive

propensity, since all core competency scales were shown to be significantly

associated with self-esteem. Second, the effects of the core competency meas-

ures on the moral system of belief scale were estimated. Results for self-esteem

are presented in Table 4.

The measure of self-esteem had a significant and negative estimated effect

on self-reported aggressive behaviour for females but not for males. Con-

versely, it had a significant and negative estimated effect on both versions of

the aggressive propensity measure for males but not for females. In all cases,

the estimated effects were in the direction expected (negative), although

the effect sizes were relatively small in magnitude. Nonetheless, these find-

ings have promise for future research specifying and estimating the mediating


Table 5: Potential mediation: Estimated effects of the measures of core competencies

on the measure of moral system of belief

Measures

Panel A


Self-control

Decision-making


Panel B


Self-control

Decision-making


b

.198

.082

.351

.189

.198

.138

.291

.215

se

Females (N = 195)

.078

.063

.065

.062

Males (N = 273)

.070

.052

.054

.053

Beta

.170*

.083

.352*

.207*

.170*

.135*

.309*

.232*

Note: Intercept for the females equation = 1.087, and the R2 = .374. Intercept for the

males equation = .853, and the R2 = .414..

*p<.05.

influences of building core competencies on aggression, especially since the

aggressive propensity and self-reported aggression measures were significantly

and positively associated for females (female provocateur r = .374, p < .000

and male provocateur r = .433, p < .000) and for males (female provocateur

r = .484, p < .000 and male provocateur r = .432, p < .000).

The findings bearing on the potential mediating influences of the core com-

petencies on aggressive behaviour and aggressive propensity via moral system

of belief are presented in Table 5. All of the estimated effects in both samples

were positive in direction, suggesting that self-efficacy, decision-making skills,

self-control, and pro-social connectedness were linked to greater disapproval

of aggressive and analogous behaviours. Moreover, with one exception

(self-control for females), all estimated effects were statistically significant and

similar by gender.


Discussion

A new scale for measuring core competencies, propensity for aggression, and

aggressive behaviour was evaluated with a sample of male and female Jamaican

youth between the ages of 12 and 18. Each of the scales demonstrated adequate

reliability for both males and females. The scales performed quite consistently

across both genders. Concurrent validity was established by significant rela-

tions between the core competencies and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale^^

and between the moral system of belief scale and both aggressive propensity

and aggression. Additional analyses suggest that self-esteem and moral system

of belief may serve as mediators between core competencies, positive youth

development, and prevention of aggression. Of course, the proposed mediators

(or core competencies) included in the Jamaica Youth Survey are not exhaus-

tive, and simply represent a recent framework for highlighting some of the

more important social and emotional competencies that also have been linked

to positive health outcomes and prevention of youth problems.^'' In more

economically disadvantaged communities and countries, additional skills may

be required to successfully navigate daily life that are not included in this meas-

ure. Further, specific culturally linked attitudes, values, and beliefs may have

a particular influence vis-à-vis a specific type of behaviour.

An innovative feature of this assessment is the inclusion of a measure of

propensity for aggression. Given that aggression is a relatively stable and

low-base-rate behaviour, it may be difficult for brief or even longer-term

interventions to yield changes in actual behaviour. Further, self-reports of

behaviour, particularly for at-risk youth enrolled in alternative programmes,

may be highly subject to demand characteristics resulting in under-reporting.

The propensity for aggression scale focuses on 'triggers' for aggression and

attempts to measure an individual's threshold for responding with aggressive

and/or violent behaviours. A challenge for violence prevention programmes

is not to prevent aggression or violence under all circumstances (aggression is

an adaptive response under some conditions) but to make it less likely,

particularly in response to trivial conflicts. The Jamaica Youth Survey thus

provides a number of scales to measure distinct but complementary interven-

tion outcomes and can be a useful tool for establishing risk and evaluat-

ing health promotion and prevention programmes in Jamaica and the

Caribbean. WR

THE JAMAICA YOUTH SURVEY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by the World Bank. We thank project coordinator Joan Thomas,

research assistant Amika Wright, field assistants Doniesha Burke, Janet DeSouza, Sacha-

Marie Hill, Debbie-Ann Pryce, Shanza-Lee Reid and Yakeisha Townsend, administrator

Marva Campbell, secretary Marilyn Brown and driver Merrick Thomas. We sincerely

appreciate the cooperation and time of the youth, their parents, teachers and schools.

NOTES

1. Sophie Naudeau et al., "Programs and Policies that Promote Positive Youth Devel-

opment and Prevent Risky Behaviors: An International Perspective", in Core Com-

petencies to Prevent Problem Behaviors and Promote Positive Youth Development: New

Directions in Child and Adolescent Development, ed. Nancy G. Guerra and Catherine

Bradshaw (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008), 75-87.

2. James Heckman, Schools, Skills, and Synapses, Discussion Paper No. 3515 (Chicago:

American Bar Association, 2008).

3. Nancy G. Guerra and Catherine Bradshaw, eds.. Core Competencies to Prevent Prob-

lem Behaviors and Promote Positive Youth Development: New Directions in Child and

Adolescent Development (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008), 122.

4. World Bank, Crime, Violence and Development: Trends, Costs and Policy Options in

the Caribbean (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2007).

5. Jamaica Constabulatory Force, "Crime Statistics", http://www.jcf.gov.jm/CrimeS-

tatistics/tabid/399/DefauIt.aspx (accessed October 2009).

6. World Bank, Caribbean Youth Development: Issues and Policy Directions (Washing-

ton, DC: World Bank, 2003); Robert W. Blum and Marjorie Ireland, "Reducing

Risk, Increasing Protective Factors: Findings from the Caribbean Youth Health ^\ii-

yty', Journal of Adolescent Health 35 (2OO4):493-5OO; Kai A.D. Morgan and Stacy

N. Brodie-Walker, "Impact of Environment and Behaviour on Self-Esteem in

Jamaican Adolescent Girls", West Indian Medical Journal 57 (2008): 470-75; Arthur

G. Richardson, Caribbean Adolescents and Youth: Contemporary Issues in Personality

Development and Behaviour (New York: Caribbean Diaspora Press, 1999).

7. Naudeau et al., "Programs and Policies that Promote Positive Youth Development

and Prevent Risky Behaviors"; Guerra and Bradshaw, Core Competencies to Prevent

Problem Behaviors.

8. Julie M. Meeks-Gardner, Christine A. Powell, and Sally M. Grantham-McGregor,

"Determinants of Aggressive and Prosocial Behaviour among Jamaican Schoolboys",

West Indian Medical Journal ^6 (2007): 34-41.

9. Heckman, Schools, Skills, and Synapses.


10. Terrie E. Moffitt, "Life-Course Persistent and Adolescence-Limited Antisocial

Behavior: A io-Year Research Review and a Research Agenda", in The Causes of Con-

duct Disorder and Serious Juvenile Delinquency, eds. B. Lahey, T.E. Moffitt, and A.

Caspi (New York: Guilford, 2003), 49-75.

11. Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi, A Ceneral Theory of Crime (Stanford: Stan-

ford University Press, 1990).

12. Kenneth A. Dodge and Gregory S. Pettit, "A Biopsychosociai Model of the Devel-

opment of Chronic Conduct Problems in Adolescence", Developmental Psychology

39 (2003): 349-71.

13. Nancy G. Guerra and L. Rowell Huesmann, "A Cognitive-Ecological Model of

Aggression", Revue Internationale de Psychologie Social 17 (2004): 177-203.

14. J. David Hawkins et al., "Preventing Adolescent Health-Risk Behaviors by Strength-

ening Protection during Childhood", Archives of Pédiatrie and Adolescent Medicine

153 (1999): 226-324.

15. Nancy G. Guerra and Melinda Leidy, "Lessons Learned: Recent Advances in the

Prevention and Treatment of Childhood Aggression", in Advances in Child Devel-

opment and Behavior, ed. R. Kail (Boston: Elsevier, 2008), 287-330.

16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes,

Beließ and Behaviors amongYouth: A Compendium of Assessment Tools (Atlanta: CDC,

1998, 2005).

17. Mark Rosenberg, Society and the Adolescent Self-image (Princeton: University Press,

1965).

18. Thomas Beckert, "Cognitive Autonomy and Self-evaluation in Adolescence: A

Conceptual Investigation and Instrument Development", North American Journal

of Psycholog)! <) (2007): 579-94.

19. Paul Boxer et al., "Coping with Exposure to Violence: Relations to Aggression and

Emotional Symptoms in Three Urban Sivœp\cs'\ Journal of Child and Eamily Studies

17 (2008): 881-93.

20. Beckert, "Cognitive Autonomy and Self-evaluation in Adolescence".

21. Boxer et al., "Coping with Exposure to Violence".

22. L Rowell Huesmann, and Nancy G. Guerra, "Social Norms and Children's Aggres-

sive 'S>e]:ia.vioT," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72 (1997): 408-19.

23. Janie Canty-Mitchell, and Gregory D. Zimet, "Psychometric Properties of the

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support in Urban Adolescents", Amer-

ican Journal of Community Psychology zS (2000): 391-400.

24. J. Fred Springer and Joel L. Philips, Individual Protective Factors Index: A Measure

of Adolescent Resiliency (Folsom: EMT Associates, 1995).

25. Wing Yi Chan and David Henry, Initial Analyses of the "What Would Make You

Eight?" (WWMYF) Measure, Working paper of the Academic Centers of Excellence

Cross-Site Analytic Tools Working Group, 2009.


26. Rosenberg, Society and the Adolescent Self-image.

27. Naudeau et al., "Programs and Policies that Promote Positive Youth Development

and Prevent Risky Behaviors"; Heckman, Schools, Skills, and Synapses; Guerra and

Bradshaw, Core Competencies to Prevent Problem Behaviors.

Copyright of Caribbean Quarterly is the property of Caribbean Quarterly and its content may not be copied or

emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.

However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

The Jamaica Youth Survey · The Jamaica Youth Survey emphasises five core competencies linked to...

Documents

Transcript of The Jamaica Youth Survey · The Jamaica Youth Survey emphasises five core competencies linked to...