Childhood-limited versus persistent antisocial behavior: Why do some recover and others do not? the TRAILS study
The Journal of Early Adolescence , Volume 29 - Issue 5 p. 718- 742
Possible differences between childhood-limited antisocial youth and their stable high-antisocial counterparts were examined. Children were 11 years old at wave 1 (T1) and 13.5 at wave 2 (T2). At both waves, the same parent, teacher, and self-reports of antisocial behavior were used. Stable highs and childhood-limited antisocial youth differed somewhat in family and individual background. Stable highs had less effortful control, perceived more overprotection, had a higher level of familial vulnerability to externalizing disorder, and lived less often with the same parents throughout their lives than the childhood-limited group. Both groups had similar levels of service use before T1, but after that period, the childhood-limited youth received more help from special education needs services than from problem behavior services, and vice versa for stable highs. The results suggest that the childhood-limited antisocial youth recovered not only from antisocial behavior but also from academic failure, peer rejection, and internalizing problems.
|, , , ,|
|The Journal of Early Adolescence|
|Organisation||Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam|
Veenstra, R, Lindenberg, S, Verhulst, F.C, & Ormel, J. (2009). Childhood-limited versus persistent antisocial behavior: Why do some recover and others do not? the TRAILS study. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(5), 718–742. doi:10.1177/0272431608325501