Method. Participants included 1,744 adolescents (50% female; 91% African American/Black) between the ages of 10 and 19 (M = 14.50). These adolescents were recruited from 22 elementary and high schools (grades 6, 8, 10, 12) during the spring of 2018 within one urban community on the southeast side of Chicago, Illinois. Promotive processes included perceptions of safety, rewards and opportunities for prosocial involvement and behaviors, and attachment across neighborhood, family, and school contexts. A LPA was conducted in Mplus software. Logistic regression and analysis of variance were conducted to examine associations between classes and violent and mental health outcomes.
Results. Adolescents reported clinical levels of mental health symptoms (37% anxiety, 22% depression, 28% anger), engaged in physical fighting (48%), violent delinquency (68%), or nonviolent delinquency (55%), and 27% experienced bullying. A four-class model fit the data best, including: 1) youth with high levels of promotive factors (Highly Promotive; 37%), 2) youth with average levels of promotive factors (Average Levels; 34.8%), 3) youth with low levels of promotive factors within the neighborhood and school, but high levels within the family (Low Neighborhood and School, High Family, 11.7%), and 4) youth with low levels of promotive factors within the neighborhood and family, but average levels at school (Low Neighborhood and Family, Average School, 16.4%). Youth in the Low Neighborhood and Family, Average School context reported the highest levels of mental health symptoms. Youth in the Low Neighborhood and Family, Average School and Low Neighborhood and School, High Family profiles reported higher levels of physical fighting, delinquency, and bullying than the Highly Promotive class.
Discussion. These results highlighted groups of youth with varying levels of promotive factors across community, school, and family contexts. Youth in the Highly Promotive class had the lowest levels of mental health symptoms and experiences with violence. However, as youth moved towards average or low levels in one or multiple contexts, they reported more adverse outcomes. Implications for violence prevention programs that address promotive factors across these three contexts will be discussed.