Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Poster #21 - Examining Inhibitory Control and Social Contexts in Late Childhood as Predictors of Adolescent Antisocial Behavior

Fri, March 24, 8:30 to 9:15am, Salt Palace Convention Center, Floor: 1, Hall A-B

Abstract

Low inhibitory control – reduced capacity to plan future action and suppress a prepotent, dominant response – is considered a risk factor for antisocial behavior based on links with impulsivity and difficulty resisting temptation (DeLisi & Vaughn, 2014). Despite a strong link between inhibitory control and antisocial behavior, contextual factors at home and neighborhood levels may moderate this association. Living in a more dangerous environment may exacerbate the link, whereas contexts in which youth are supported and well-supervised may be protective (Sampson et al., 2002). For example, youth with low inhibitory control may be less likely to engage in antisocial behaviors when neighbors exhibit strong social ties or when parents are more knowledgeable about their whereabouts (Laird et al., 2003). The current study examined inhibitory control, neighborhood danger and unity and parental monitoring in late childhood as predictors of adolescent antisocial behavior. We also examined whether these contextual factors moderated the association between inhibitory control and antisocial behavior.
Participants were 731 youth who participated in a randomized controlled trial of a family-based parenting program for children at risk for developing early conduct problems. At age 10.5, parents reported on: their child’s inhibitory control on the Temperament in Middle Childhood Questionnaire (Simonds et al, 2004) and perceptions of neighborhood unity and danger on the Me and My Neighborhood Questionnaire (Ingoldsby & Shaw, 2002). Also at age 10.5, youth reported on parental monitoring and knowledge on the Monitoring Questionnaire (Stattin & Kerr, 2000). At 14 and 16 years, youth rated their involvement in antisocial activities (e.g., stealing, fighting) on the Adolescent Self-Report of Deviancy (Elliot et al, 1985).
To examine our aims, we used structural equation modeling using Full Information Maximum Likelihood estimation with robust standard errors, a method robust to missing data and non-normality. All models controlled for child gender, race, and ethnicity, gross annual family income, primary caregiver’s education, and intervention status. In sensitivity analyses, we also controlled for age 10.5 antisocial behavior. First, we found inhibitory control independently negatively predicted greater antisocial behavior at ages 14 and 16 (Table 1). Second, both greater neighborhood danger and lower neighborhood unity independently positively predicted antisocial behavior at age 16, with greater neighborhood danger and lower parental monitoring also independently predicting greater antisocial behavior at age 14. All results remained significant accounting for previous antisocial behavior, except for the association between neighborhood danger and antisocial behavior at age 14.
Finally, we found a significant interaction between neighborhood danger and inhibitory control in predicting antisocial behavior at age 14 (B=-.104, 95% CI[-.202, -.006]): inhibitory control only negatively predicted antisocial behavior at high and mean, but not low levels of neighborhood danger (Figure 1). The current study demonstrates that inhibitory control and contextual factors in late childhood contribute unique variance to adolescent antisocial behavior and that neighborhood danger can exacerbate the link between low inhibitory control and antisocial behavior. Children with low inhibitory control living in dangerous neighborhoods may struggle to avoid risky contexts or to select more positive, adaptive settings and experiences.

Authors