72. Violence And Bullying Among Adolescent Males: Profiles of Risk And Protective Factors

Abstract

Violence and bullying among males have become major public health problems. Factors associated with violent and bullying behavior occur across levels of adolescents’ social ecologies. However, researchers have not examined how risk and protective factors may co-occur in unique patterns to increase the likelihood adolescent males might engage in school violence or physical bullying perpetration. In a population-based sample of adolescent males, we addressed two research questions: (1) How do common risk and protective factors co-occur among adolescent males? (2) How are different risk/protection profiles associated with school violence and physical bullying perpetration among adolescent males? Data came from the population-based 2016 Minnesota Student Survey. The analytic sample included 63,818 male students in grades 8, 9, and 11; 69% were White. The dependent variables were violence perpetration in the last 12 months and bullying perpetration in the last 30 days (1=any, 0=none). Latent class analysis was used to derive the independent variable, groups of students with distinct profiles of 22 behavioral, intrapersonal, and family risk factors, and family and school/community protective factors (e.g., social connectedness and safety indicators). Controls included grade, race/ethnicity, free/reduced-priced lunch, and region. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses examined how students in each risk/protection profile differed on violence and bullying perpetration. Participants clustered into five groups: high-risk, low safety, low teacher connectedness (7.2%); high-risk, moderate safety, low connectedness (10.5%); moderate-risk, high safety, moderate connectedness (18.0%); low-risk, moderate safety, high parent connectedness (31.0%); and low-risk, high safety, high connectedness (33.0%). All the classes significantly differed from each other on the violence and bullying perpetration outcomes, except the high-risk, moderate safety, low connectedness and high-risk, low safety, low teacher connectedness classes. These two classes demonstrated the highest probabilities for school violence (0.27 and 0.31, respectively) and bullying perpetration (0.39 for both). The moderate-risk, high safety, moderate connectedness group showed average levels on the outcomes (school violence: 0.18; bullying perpetration: 0.28), while the low-risk, moderate safety, high parent connectedness class showed slightly below average levels of school violence (0.11) and bullying perpetration (0.20). Finally, the low-risk, high safety, high connectedness class was least likely to engage in school violence (0.04) and bullying perpetration (0.11), compared to the other classes. Results of logistic regression analyses confirmed that, compared to the low-risk, high safety, high connectedness class, youth in the high-risk, moderate safety, low connectedness group had the highest odds of all classes for school violence (OR = 9.15, 95% CI: 8.36, 10.02) and bullying perpetration (OR = 5.57, 95% CI: 5.20, 5.97). Students reporting the highest levels of behavioral, intrapersonal, family, and school risk factors; lowest levels of school and neighborhood safety; and lowest levels of connectedness to adults showed the greatest odds of engaging in school violence and bullying perpetration. Further, lower levels of social connectedness appear more strongly associated with violence and bullying outcomes than lower levels of school/neighborhood safety. Practitioners working with high-risk adolescent males should attempt to strengthen their connections with prosocial adults to help prevent involvement in violent and bullying behaviors.