24 results
Associations of alcohol and cannabis use with change in posttraumatic stress disorder and depression symptoms over time in recently trauma-exposed individuals
- Cecilia A. Hinojosa, Amanda Liew, Xinming An, Jennifer S. Stevens, Archana Basu, Sanne J. H. van Rooij, Stacey L. House, Francesca L. Beaudoin, Donglin Zeng, Thomas C. Neylan, Gari D. Clifford, Tanja Jovanovic, Sarah D. Linnstaedt, Laura T. Germine, Scott L. Rauch, John P. Haran, Alan B. Storrow, Christopher Lewandowski, Paul I. Musey, Phyllis L. Hendry, Sophia Sheikh, Christopher W. Jones, Brittany E. Punches, Michael C. Kurz, Robert A. Swor, Lauren A. Hudak, Jose L. Pascual, Mark J. Seamon, Elizabeth M. Datner, Anna M. Chang, Claire Pearson, David A. Peak, Roland C. Merchant, Robert M. Domeier, Niels K. Rathlev, Paulina Sergot, Leon D. Sanchez, Steven E. Bruce, Mark W. Miller, Robert H. Pietrzak, Jutta Joormann, Diego A. Pizzagalli, John F. Sheridan, Steven E. Harte, James M. Elliott, Ronald C. Kessler, Karestan C. Koenen, Samuel A. McLean, Kerry J. Ressler, Negar Fani
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 54 / Issue 2 / January 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 13 June 2023, pp. 338-349
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Several hypotheses may explain the association between substance use, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression. However, few studies have utilized a large multisite dataset to understand this complex relationship. Our study assessed the relationship between alcohol and cannabis use trajectories and PTSD and depression symptoms across 3 months in recently trauma-exposed civilians.
MethodsIn total, 1618 (1037 female) participants provided self-report data on past 30-day alcohol and cannabis use and PTSD and depression symptoms during their emergency department (baseline) visit. We reassessed participant's substance use and clinical symptoms 2, 8, and 12 weeks posttrauma. Latent class mixture modeling determined alcohol and cannabis use trajectories in the sample. Changes in PTSD and depression symptoms were assessed across alcohol and cannabis use trajectories via a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance.
ResultsThree trajectory classes (low, high, increasing use) provided the best model fit for alcohol and cannabis use. The low alcohol use class exhibited lower PTSD symptoms at baseline than the high use class; the low cannabis use class exhibited lower PTSD and depression symptoms at baseline than the high and increasing use classes; these symptoms greatly increased at week 8 and declined at week 12. Participants who already use alcohol and cannabis exhibited greater PTSD and depression symptoms at baseline that increased at week 8 with a decrease in symptoms at week 12.
ConclusionsOur findings suggest that alcohol and cannabis use trajectories are associated with the intensity of posttrauma psychopathology. These findings could potentially inform the timing of therapeutic strategies.
Anthropogenic hillslope terraces and swidden agriculture in Jiuzhaigou National Park, northern Sichuan, China
- Amanda Henck, James Taylor, Hongliang Lu, Yongxian Li, Qingxia Yang, Barbara Grub, Sara Jo Breslow, Alicia Robbins, Andrea Elliott, Tom Hinckley, Julie Combs, Lauren Urgenson, Sarah Widder, Xinxin Hu, Ziyu Ma, Yaowu Yuan, Daijun Jian, Xun Liao, Ya Tang
-
- Journal:
- Quaternary Research / Volume 73 / Issue 2 / March 2010
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 201-207
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Small, irregular terraces on hillslopes, or terracettes, are common landscape features throughout west central China. Despite their prevalence, there is limited understanding of the nature of these topographic features, the processes that form them, and the role humans played in their formation. We used an interdisciplinary approach to investigate the geology, ecology, and cultural history of terracette development within Jiuzhaigou National Park, Sichuan Province, China. Terracettes occur on south facing, 20° slopes at 2500 m elevation, which appears to coincide with places people historically preferred to build villages. Ethnographic interviews suggest that traditional swidden agricultural cycles removed tree roots, causing the loess sediments to lose cohesion, slump, and the terrace risers to retreat uphill over time. This evidence is supported by landslide debris at terracette faces. Archaeological analysis of terracette sites reveal remains of rammed spread soil structures, bones, stone tools, and ceramics dating from at least 2200 years before present within a distinct paleosol layer. Radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence dating of terracette sediments ranged in age from between 1500 and 2000 14C yr BP and between 16 and 0.30"ka, respectively. These multiple lines of evidence indicate a long history of human habitation within Jiuzhaigou National Park and taken together, suggest strong links between terracette formation and human-landuse interactions.
Respiratory syncytial virus prophylaxis in children with cardiac disease: a retrospective single-centre study
- Michelle Butt, Amanda Symington, Marianne Janes, Susan Steele, LouAnn Elliott, Catherine Chant-Gambacort, Tapas Mondal, Bosco Paes
-
- Journal:
- Cardiology in the Young / Volume 24 / Issue 2 / April 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 April 2013, pp. 337-343
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objectives
To examine the characteristics of congenital heart disease patients hospitalised with respiratory syncytial virus infection after prophylaxis and determine the associated comorbidities and the incidence of breakthrough respiratory syncytial virus infections.
Study designThis is a retrospective, single-centre study that was conducted over a period of 7 years. Respiratory syncytial virus infection was identified by classification codes and confirmed by virological tests. Data on baseline demographics, cardiac anomalies, other underlying disease, criteria for hospitalisation, type of respiratory illness and management, complications, and palivizumab prophylaxis were analysed by standard descriptive methods and comparative statistics.
ResultsA total of 30 patients were enrolled. The majority were ≤2 years (n = 24). The mean admission age was 15.1 months (standard deviation = 18.3). In all, 90% were acyanotic, 40% had haemodynamically significant disease, and 60% had ≥1 underlying medical illness. Patients were admitted with: respiratory distress (86.7%), hypoxaemia (66.7%), fever (60%), inability to maintain oral intake (36.7%), and apnoea (16.7%). More than 50% required mechanical ventilation and intensive care with a median stay of 11 days (range: 1–43); the length of hospital stay for all children was 10 days (range: 1–65). Complications included: concurrent bacterial sepsis (20%), electrolyte abnormalities (16.7%), and worsening pulmonary hypertension (13.3%). Of 10 infants ≤2 years with haemodynamically significant heart disease, four had received prophylaxis. There was one death, which was attributed to respiratory syncytial virus infection.
ConclusionsOverall, 185 infants ≤2 years with haemodynamically significant cardiac disease received prophylaxis. In all, six qualifying infants missed immunisation and were hospitalised. Breakthrough respiratory syncytial virus infections occurred in 2.2%, demonstrating good efficacy of palivizumab in this population compared with the original, multi-centre, randomised trial.
Contributors
-
- By Aakash Agarwala, Linda S. Aglio, Rae M. Allain, Paul D. Allen, Houman Amirfarzan, Yasodananda Kumar Areti, Amit Asopa, Edwin G. Avery, Patricia R. Bachiller, Angela M. Bader, Rana Badr, Sibinka Bajic, David J. Baker, Sheila R. Barnett, Rena Beckerly, Lorenzo Berra, Walter Bethune, Sascha S. Beutler, Tarun Bhalla, Edward A. Bittner, Jonathan D. Bloom, Alina V. Bodas, Lina M. Bolanos-Diaz, Ruma R. Bose, Jan Boublik, John P. Broadnax, Jason C. Brookman, Meredith R. Brooks, Roland Brusseau, Ethan O. Bryson, Linda A. Bulich, Kenji Butterfield, William R. Camann, Denise M. Chan, Theresa S. Chang, Jonathan E. Charnin, Mark Chrostowski, Fred Cobey, Adam B. Collins, Mercedes A. Concepcion, Christopher W. Connor, Bronwyn Cooper, Jeffrey B. Cooper, Martha Cordoba-Amorocho, Stephen B. Corn, Darin J. Correll, Gregory J. Crosby, Lisa J. Crossley, Deborah J. Culley, Tomas Cvrk, Michael N. D'Ambra, Michael Decker, Daniel F. Dedrick, Mark Dershwitz, Francis X. Dillon, Pradeep Dinakar, Alimorad G. Djalali, D. John Doyle, Lambertus Drop, Ian F. Dunn, Theodore E. Dushane, Sunil Eappen, Thomas Edrich, Jesse M. Ehrenfeld, Jason M. Erlich, Lucinda L. Everett, Elliott S. Farber, Khaldoun Faris, Eddy M. Feliz, Massimo Ferrigno, Richard S. Field, Michael G. Fitzsimons, Hugh L. Flanagan Jr., Vladimir Formanek, Amanda A. Fox, John A. Fox, Gyorgy Frendl, Tanja S. Frey, Samuel M. Galvagno Jr., Edward R. Garcia, Jonathan D. Gates, Cosmin Gauran, Brian J. Gelfand, Simon Gelman, Alexander C. Gerhart, Peter Gerner, Omid Ghalambor, Christopher J. Gilligan, Christian D. Gonzalez, Noah E. Gordon, William B. Gormley, Thomas J. Graetz, Wendy L. Gross, Amit Gupta, James P. Hardy, Seetharaman Hariharan, Miriam Harnett, Philip M. Hartigan, Joaquim M. Havens, Bishr Haydar, Stephen O. Heard, James L. Helstrom, David L. Hepner, McCallum R. Hoyt, Robert N. Jamison, Karinne Jervis, Stephanie B. Jones, Swaminathan Karthik, Richard M. Kaufman, Shubjeet Kaur, Lee A. Kearse Jr., John C. Keel, Scott D. Kelley, Albert H. Kim, Amy L. Kim, Grace Y. Kim, Robert J. Klickovich, Robert M. Knapp, Bhavani S. Kodali, Rahul Koka, Alina Lazar, Laura H. Leduc, Stanley Leeson, Lisa R. Leffert, Scott A. LeGrand, Patricio Leyton, J. Lance Lichtor, John Lin, Alvaro A. Macias, Karan Madan, Sohail K. Mahboobi, Devi Mahendran, Christine Mai, Sayeed Malek, S. Rao Mallampati, Thomas J. Mancuso, Ramon Martin, Matthew C. Martinez, J. A. Jeevendra Martyn, Kai Matthes, Tommaso Mauri, Mary Ellen McCann, Shannon S. McKenna, Dennis J. McNicholl, Abdel-Kader Mehio, Thor C. Milland, Tonya L. K. Miller, John D. Mitchell, K. Annette Mizuguchi, Naila Moghul, David R. Moss, Ross J. Musumeci, Naveen Nathan, Ju-Mei Ng, Liem C. Nguyen, Ervant Nishanian, Martina Nowak, Ala Nozari, Michael Nurok, Arti Ori, Rafael A. Ortega, Amy J. Ortman, David Oxman, Arvind Palanisamy, Carlo Pancaro, Lisbeth Lopez Pappas, Benjamin Parish, Samuel Park, Deborah S. Pederson, Beverly K. Philip, James H. Philip, Silvia Pivi, Stephen D. Pratt, Douglas E. Raines, Stephen L. Ratcliff, James P. Rathmell, J. Taylor Reed, Elizabeth M. Rickerson, Selwyn O. Rogers Jr., Thomas M. Romanelli, William H. Rosenblatt, Carl E. Rosow, Edgar L. Ross, J. Victor Ryckman, Mônica M. Sá Rêgo, Nicholas Sadovnikoff, Warren S. Sandberg, Annette Y. Schure, B. Scott Segal, Navil F. Sethna, Swapneel K. Shah, Shaheen F. Shaikh, Fred E. Shapiro, Torin D. Shear, Prem S. Shekar, Stanton K. Shernan, Naomi Shimizu, Douglas C. Shook, Kamal K. Sikka, Pankaj K. Sikka, David A. Silver, Jeffrey H. Silverstein, Emily A. Singer, Ken Solt, Spiro G. Spanakis, Wolfgang Steudel, Matthias Stopfkuchen-Evans, Michael P. Storey, Gary R. Strichartz, Balachundhar Subramaniam, Wariya Sukhupragarn, John Summers, Shine Sun, Eswar Sundar, Sugantha Sundar, Neelakantan Sunder, Faraz Syed, Usha B. Tedrow, Nelson L. Thaemert, George P. Topulos, Lawrence C. Tsen, Richard D. Urman, Charles A. Vacanti, Francis X. Vacanti, Joshua C. Vacanti, Assia Valovska, Ivan T. Valovski, Mary Ann Vann, Susan Vassallo, Anasuya Vasudevan, Kamen V. Vlassakov, Gian Paolo Volpato, Essi M. Vulli, J. Matthias Walz, Jingping Wang, James F. Watkins, Maxwell Weinmann, Sharon L. Wetherall, Mallory Williams, Sarah H. Wiser, Zhiling Xiong, Warren M. Zapol, Jie Zhou
- Edited by Charles Vacanti, Scott Segal, Pankaj Sikka, Richard Urman
-
- Book:
- Essential Clinical Anesthesia
- Published online:
- 05 January 2012
- Print publication:
- 11 July 2011, pp xv-xxviii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Successful Development in Social Context
- Delbert S. Elliott, Scott Menard, Bruce Rankin, Amanda Elliott, William Julius Wilson, David Huizinga
-
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006
-
This is a study of successful youth development in poor, disadvantaged neighborhoods in Denver and Chicago - a study of how children living in the worst neighborhoods develop or fail to develop the values, competencies and commitments that lead to a productive, healthy responsible adult life. While there is a strong focus on neighborhood effects, the study employs a multicontextual model examining both the direct effects of the neighborhood ecology, social organization and contexts embedded in the neighborhood. The unique and combined influence of the neighborhood, family, school, peer group and individual attributes on developmental success is estimated. The view that growing up in a poor, disadvantaged neighborhood condemns one to a life of repeated failure and personal pathology is revealed as a myth, as most youth in these neighborhoods are completing the developmental tasks of adolescence successfully.
2 - Growing Up in Denver and Chicago: The MacArthur Neighborhood Study
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 11-32
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
The Neighborhood Study is one of a series of integrated studies about youth development in multiple social contexts – neighborhoods, families, schools, and peer groups. This work was undertaken by the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Successful Adolescent Development. This study developed and tested the most detailed and comprehensive model of neighborhood influences on families, schools, peer networks, and individual developmental outcomes. Denver and Chicago were selected as study sites and probability samples of neighborhoods in each city were selected as study neighborhoods. The rationale for selecting these two cities and the neighborhoods in each city is described.
A neighborhood is both a physical place and a social context; its boundaries have both geographical and social dimensions. Different ways of identifying geographical boundaries are explored and different census-based boundaries are compared with resident's perceived boundaries. Based on this analysis of the validity of different approaches to identifying neighborhoods, we decided to use census block groups and tracts to define and select neighborhoods for this study.
In Denver, 33 neighborhoods (census block groups) were selected with an average size of 27 square blocks. The samples of youth and families from each of these neighborhoods contained, on average, 19 families and 25 youth for a total sample of 662 families and 820 youth aged 10—18. Forty neighborhoods (census tracts) were selected in Chicago, with an average size of 14 square blocks.
7 - Family Influences: Managing Disadvantage and Promoting Success
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 161-202
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
The family is added to our model of contextual effects and we estimate the power of this new, multilevel contextual model to account for neighborhood-level and individual-level rates of successful youth development. Parents are assumed to play the dominant role in socialization and development, particularly in early childhood. Some are very skilled and effective in directing the developmental progress of their children; others are not. Our concern in this chapter is to understand how the neighborhood influences the form and quality of parenting, how it shapes parenting practices and supplements or limits the type and quality of resources available to the family, and how it structures the experiences and events in the lives of both parents and children. Moreover, we test the widely held idea that a strong, effective family can buffer youth from the effects of neighborhood Disadvantage, physical deterioration and disorganization; and its corollary, that the combination of a bad neighborhood and a dysfunctional, ineffective family have particularly disastrous effects on youth development.
We focus on four characteristics of families: (1) family social and economic resources, (2) family dysfunction, (3) parenting practices, and (4) the normative and value climate in the family. Families living in Disadvantaged and/or Deteriorated Neighborhoods had fewer resources (Income and Support Networks) and poorer Parenting Practices than families living in more Advantaged and Well-Kept Neighborhoods, and these two features of the family context were the strongest predictors of successful youth development outcomes at the neighborhood level.
4 - The Effects of Growing Up in a Bad Neighborhood: Initial Findings
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 55-100
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
How much difference does it make if one grows up in a disadvantaged neighborhood as compared to an affluent neighborhood? Does living in a physically deteriorated neighborhood as compared to a well-cared-for neighborhood undermine a successful course of development? These are the questions answered in this chapter, testing the model of neighborhood effects outlined in the last chapter.
We used two measures of successful development that were common to both Denver and Chicago: Prosocial Competence and Problem Behavior. The first is a composite measure combining five subscales measuring school grades, prosocial activities, self-efficacy, importance of school and work, and expected educational attainment. The second is a negative indicator and includes self-reports of delinquent behavior, drug use, and arrests. Three additional success measures are used for Denver. Personal Competence and Prosocial Behavior are expanded versions of Prosocial Competence, separating attitudinal indicators of competence from behavioral indicators and including several additional subscales. The final measure, On Track, measures the probability that a youth is “on track” developmentally for making a successful transition into adult roles.
Three classifications of neighborhoods are developed based on levels of income (Advantaged, Moderate, and Poor), disadvantage (Advantaged, Modest, and Disadvantaged) and deterioration (Deteriorated and Well-Kept). The appropriateness of using racial mix as an indicator of neighborhood disadvantage is examined and confirmed. Disadvantage is more strongly related to youth development than Poverty alone when compared on the Denver site.
8 - School Climate and Types of Peer Groups
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 203-242
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
After early childhood, the school and the peer group begin to compete with the family and neighborhood as primary socializing contexts. Schools provide important training and opportunities for the development of both social and academic competencies. However, they are also contexts in which youth are exposed to different lifestyles, to drugs, violent or aggressive behavior of other students, and a new status system with its own unique performance demands. Good schools facilitate a successful course of development and bad schools undermine this type of success. The characteristics of the neighborhood immediately surrounding the school, the neighborhoods from which the school draws its students, and the characteristics of the families of those students, all combine to influence the school's social and academic environment. In this chapter, we identify two dimensions of the school context: the learning environment which we refer to as a Positive School Environment, and the level of safety or risk of violence in the school referred to as School Violence/Safety. Mechanisms linking features of the neighborhood and family contexts to the school environment and, in turn, characteristics of the school climate to successful developmental outcomes, are identified.
With the onset of puberty, the peer group emerges as the most influential interactional setting for patterns of adolescent behavior and an important influence on other dimensions of successful development. The neighborhood and the school are the two primary contexts in which peer groups are formed and interact, largely in response to characteristics of these two social settings.
List of Tables and Figures
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp vi-ix
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Author Index
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 381-387
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
9 - What Matters Most for Successful Youth Development?
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 243-273
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
In earlier chapters we focused on critical features of the neighborhood, family, school, and peer group and the unique and overall contribution of each context to our success outcomes. Now with the full model explicated, we can specify which variables in each context are most important for predicting and understanding successful development. And we can address the major questions posed in Chapter 1 – What factors contribute to a successful course of development in disadvantaged, poor neighborhoods? Are the conditions and processes that account for success in disadvantaged neighborhoods the same or different from those that account for success in advantaged neighborhoods? To answer these questions, we estimate the directly explained variance (d) for each contextual characteristic and each overall context, assigning the large shared variance effect from our earlier analyses to specific factors and contexts.
As predicted in Chapter 5, neighborhood Disadvantage per se, has no negative effect on youth development outcomes at the neighborhood level. Its influence is mediated entirely by the type of neighborhood Organization, and to some extent by the quality of the school. However, a deteriorated, run-down neighborhood does have a negative effect on neighborhood success rates, at least for some outcomes. Organized Neighborhoods make a substantial contribution to a successful course of development, as does a good family context (particularly Parenting Practices and Family Resources), a safe school with a positive climate, and a positive peer group.
6 - The Effects of Neighborhood Organization and Culture
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 129-160
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
In the last chapter, we argued that socioeconomic disadvantage and physical deterioration influence youth development primarily through the patterns of social interaction among residents in the neighborhood. Over time, this interaction gives rise to a particular type of social organization and culture. A neighborhood with a strong institutional presence, informal networks of residents that promote a positive development and discourage dysfunctional behavior, consensus on neighborhood norms and values, and the ability to resist the introduction of drugs, crime and other negative influences in the neighborhood, is organized to promote a positive course of youth development. This type of organization/culture can protect youth from the potential negative effects of disadvantage and deterioration. Typically, however, disadvantaged neighborhoods have a weak and ineffective organization and unsupportive culture, as these demographic conditions tend to undermine and restrict social interaction between residents. The evidence for this set of relationships is presented in this chapter.
Measures of the organizational and cultural features of a neighborhood that provide a positive, supportive environment for youth development are described and include: Institutional Effectiveness, Informal Networks, Neighborhood Bonding and Control, Normative and Value Consensus, (limited) Illegal Modeling, and (limited) Illegal Performance Opportunities. A composite measure, General Organization, comprised of all six individual scales is also described. A neighborhood organizational typology is also developed using the six organization/culture measures, classifying neighborhoods as Organized, Regular, Weak, and Disorganized.
As expected, neighborhoods that are Disadvantaged and Deteriorated tend to be poorly organized and have unsupportive, sometimes nonconventional or deviant cultures.
Appendix A
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 305-348
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
1 - Growing Up in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 1-10
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
We have this one little guy, 13 years old … You can just see him, every day, trying to decide which is more glamorous, the Youth Council or the Foote Street Posse. The Foote Street Posse boys offer him five hundred dollars a week to be a lookout. All we offer is knowledge. They win, hands down, most every time.
Finnegan, Cold New World, 1998:26INTRODUCTION
There is widespread concern that the social fabric of American community life has deteriorated, and this breakdown in neighborhood quality is directly responsible for the high rates of youth crime, substance abuse, unemployment, teenage pregnancy, welfare dependence, and mental health problems that characterize many of our inner-city neighborhoods. The neighborhood is generally assumed to play an essential role in raising children, and when the strong interpersonal ties, shared socialization values and processes, and effective appropriation and utilization of community resources fail to materialize or develop in the neighborhood, children are put at risk for poor developmental outcomes and dysfunctional lifestyles. The saying, “It takes a village to raise a child,” captures this perspective on the importance of neighborhoods for a successful course of child and youth development.
This is the perspective typically taken by youth and parents in the study reported in this book. For both, the neighborhood is seen as an important context that shapes family and peer activities and individual developmental outcomes. The following exchange took place in a focus group meeting in one of our Chicago study neighborhoods.
Acknowledgments
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp xvii-xviii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
10 - Successful Development in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 274-304
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
We have invested millions of dollars to hire researchers to conduct failure studies of the poor. These researchers take their notebooks into low-income communities and tally how many people are on drugs and in prison, how many young girls are pregnant and how many youths have dropped out of school. They do not look for models of success – families that, in spite of similar circumstances, have raised children who have refused the lures of drugs and gangs, who have stayed in school, have not had babies out of wedlock…. Scholars on both the left and right make comfortable livings detailing the pathologies of the poor without ever talking with a single poor person.
(Woodson, The Triumphs of Joseph, 1998:10)INTRODUCTION
In this chapter we will look backward and forward: back to the questions we raised when we initiated this study on successful development in poor, disadvantaged neighborhoods, and forward to the program and policy implications of our findings. We do not provide a detailed summary of findings here (see the Synopsis and Discussion Sections of the individual chapters), but rather a broad overview of findings and a discussion of the general issues they raise for present and future policy and programs designed to improve youth development outcomes for those living in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Some of the more unusual or unexpected findings are also considered in more detail here.
Appendix B
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 349-352
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Unstandardized regression coefficients estimate the influence of a predictor on an outcome using whatever units the variables were originally measured in (feet, pounds, inches, number of people, or an arbitrary scale score, for instance). If we denote the unstandardized regression coefficient as b, then a one unit increase in the predictor is associated with a b unit change in the outcome. For example, from Table A8.2, a one unit change in the index of Neighborhood Deterioration is associated with a -.012 unit change in student status, and a one unit change in Neighborhood Bonding/Control is associated with a 0.015 unit change in student status. Because both Neighborhood Deterioration and Neighborhood Bonding/Control are measured as standard deviations (in other words, the standard deviation is the unit of measurement), and because student status is measured as a proportion of respondents in the neighborhood enrolled in school, then a one standard deviation increase in Neighborhood Deterioration is associated with a decrease (because of the negative sign) of .012, or 1.2 percent, in the proportion or percentage, respectively, of respondents who are either enrolled in school or have graduated high school; and a one standard deviation increase in Neighborhood Bonding/Control is associated with an increase (positive coefficient) of .015, or 1.5 percent, in the proportion or percentage of respondents either enrolled in school or graduated from high school.
When both the predictor and the outcome are measured as standard deviations, the resulting coefficient is a standardized coefficient.
Contents
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp v-v
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
3 - Good and Bad Neighborhoods for Raising Children
- Delbert S. Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, Scott Menard, University of Colorado Boulder, Bruce Rankin, Koç University, Istanbul, Amanda Elliott, University of Colorado Boulder, William Julius Wilson, Harvard University, Massachusetts, David Huizinga, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Good Kids from Bad Neighborhoods
- Published online:
- 06 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 04 September 2006, pp 33-54
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
SYNOPSIS
Some neighborhoods are good places to raise children. Living in these areas increases the chances that children will grow up to be healthy, responsible, and productive adults. Other neighborhoods are bad places to raise children – places where they are exposed to violence, dysfunctional lifestyles, negative role models, unfriendly neighbors, and poor quality schools. Children living in these neighborhoods may have little opportunity to acquire the personal skills and experiences necessary for effective participation in mainstream community life. In this chapter, we identify features that distinguish between good and bad neighborhoods as environments for raising children and adolescents.
Three features of the neighborhood influence the course of development for children: (1) its demographic composition, (2) the condition of its physical environment, and (3) its social organization and culture. We focus on the first two features in this chapter and on the third in Chapter 5. The set of compositional conditions associated with bad neighborhoods we refer to as neighborhood disadvantage. The physical condition is called neighborhood deterioration. Concentrated poverty is one indicator of disadvantage, but there are also other compositional or demographic characteristics of a neighborhood that have negative influences on youth development. We identify these characteristics and describe the mechanisms linking each of these demographic compositional features to developmental processes and outcomes. The extent to which these conditions cluster in a neighborhood defines its level of disadvantage.
The other defining characteristic of a bad neighborhood is its physical condition.