Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Introduction: In Colombia, many adolescents have experienced violence related to the decades-long armed conflict in the country and have witnessed or been directly victimized by violence in their communities. Although extant research has examined how armed conflict and community violence independently contribute to higher levels of externalizing behaviors (Barber & Schluterman, 2009; Overstreet, 2000), no research has examined how these various forms of violence may interact to impact adolescent outcomes. It is possible that armed conflict, which adolescents in this study experienced prior to data collection, may amplify, sensitize, or inoculate (Rudolph & Flynn, 2007) the effects of ongoing and proximal exposure to community violence. This study examines whether armed exposure moderates the impact of community violence exposure on adolescent externalizing behaviors. Additionally, given the differential rates of armed conflict exposure by geographical region in Colombia, we will examine group differences for urban and rural adolescents.
Methods: Anonymous survey data were collected from 3,483 adolescents (52% female; M age = 14.09), in 12 public high schools in both urban (53.3%) and rural (46.7%) municipalities in the coastal region of Colombia. Students reported the degree to which they witnessed community violence (Richters & Martinez, 1990), experienced community violence victimization (Nadel et al., 1996), and had been exposed to armed conflict (Macksound, 1992). Externalizing behaviors were measured using a latent variable with three indicators: delinquency (Eccles & Barber, 1990), aggression (Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System [YRBSS], 2015), and drug and alcohol use (YRBSS, 2015). Using structural equation modeling in Mplus8, we examined main effects of witnessing, victimization, and armed conflict exposure on externalizing behaviors. We also tested interactions between armed conflict and community violence witnessing and community violence victimization. Finally, we employed multigroup analyses to determine whether results differed for urban and rural adolescents.
Results: Urban and rural adolescents who experienced higher levels of armed conflict, community violence witnessing, and community violence victimization reported higher levels of externalizing behavior than students less exposed to violence (Figure 1). Armed conflict did not moderate the relation between community violence victimization and externalizing for rural or urban adolescents. Armed conflict did, however, moderate the relation between witnessing and externalizing for urban, but not rural, students. For urban students who experienced more armed conflict, the relation between witnessing community violence and externalizing was exacerbated (Table 2), reflecting the stress-amplification model (Rudolph & Flynn, 2007).
Discussion: As Colombia enters a post-conflict period, there is an increased focus on supporting adolescents affected by violence. It is essential that such support considers the various forms of violence that adolescents experience, and how they may operate uniquely and in conjunction with one another to affect adolescent outcomes. In particular, adolescents with prior armed conflict exposure may be at additional risk for aggression, delinquency, and drug and alcohol use as they witness ongoing community violence in cities. Future research should continue to disentangle the impact of various contextual stressors that adolescents experience, particularly in high-violence settings.