Escuela y Delincuencia5

Problem Behavior in Adolescence 1
Covariance of Problem Behaviors in Adolescence
Kathryn C. Monahan
J. David Hawkins
Social Development Research Group
School of Social Work
University of Washington
Prepared for
The National Academies of Science
Science of Adolescence
This work was supported by a research grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01
DA015183-07) with co-funding from the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the Center for
Substance Abuse Prevention.

Covariance of Problem Behaviors in Adolescence
Adolescents engage in a number of problem behaviors, including reckless driving,
antisocial and criminal behavior (Farrington, 2009; Piquero, Farrington, & Blumstein, 2003),
alcohol use (Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2009), drug use (Chassin, Hussong,
& Beltran, 2009), and risky sexual behavior (Sundet, Magnus, Kvalem, Broonesby, &
Bakkenteig, 1989). The prevalence of these problem behaviors during adolescence is quite high.
In the United States about 17% of adolescents meet diagnostic criteria for mental, emotional, and
behavioral disorders. Six million young people receive treatment services annually for mental,
emotional, or behavioral problems. These problems affect one in five families and cost $247
million annually (National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009). Motor vehicle
crashes remain the number one cause of death among youth ages 15 - 20 (Santelli, Lowry,
Brener, & Robin, 2000). For both official arrest records and self-reported delinquency,
involvement in antisocial behavior peaks in the mid to late teenage years. In 2008, 1,171,365
juveniles were arrested in the United States (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2009, table 35).
That same year, data from the Monitoring the Future national school-based survey showed that,
among 12th graders, 47% had used some illicit drug in their lifetime, 72% had consumed alcohol,
and 20% were current smokers (Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2009).
Approximately half of all sexually transmitted infections occur between the ages of 15 and 24,
and 20% - 30% of adolescents report not using a condom or other contraceptive the last time
they had sexual intercourse (Hoefferth, 1990; Santelli, Lowry, Brener, & Robin, 2000). In 2006,
nearly 750,000 girls between the ages of 15 and 19 become pregnant, a 3% increase in teen
pregnancy since 2005 (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Notably, the majority of teen
pregnancies are unplanned (Henshaw, 1998).

The widespread prevalence of problem behaviors during adolescence is troubling because
these behaviors can have concurrent and long-term consequences for youth development,
including failure to complete high school, underemployment, incarceration, long-term substance
abuse, sexually transmitted infections (STI), and unplanned parenthood. While many youths
navigate adolescence without negative consequences of problem behaviors, problem behaviors
become chronic for others, increasing the likelihood of adversity in multiple domains including
physical health, life expectancy, psychosocial adjustment, and successful transition to adulthood
(Lindberg, Boggess, & Williams, 2000). Indeed, adolescence is marked by greater involvement
in problem behaviors than either earlier or later developmental periods and problem behaviors
tend to co-occur in adolescence compared to earlier and later developmental periods (Gillmore et
al., 1991; McGee & Newcomb, 1992). The developmental patterning of problem behaviors
during adolescence across multiple problem behaviors has led some to suggest that these various
behaviors represent a syndrome of “problem behaviors” (Jessor & Jessor, 1977).
This paper provides an illustrative review of research on covariation in problem
behaviors during adolescence. First, we highlight the extant literature on the covariance of
problem behaviors. Second, we discuss the developmental specificity of this covariation. Next,
we examine factors that predict multiple types of problem behaviors as well as specific types of
problem behavior. In general, research indicates that covariance of problem behaviors peaks
during adolescence and that a number of risk factors are common or shared predictors of
different types of problem behaviors. These data suggest that prevention policies and programs
that focus on reducing shared risk factors for problem behaviors should diminish multiple types
of adolescent problem behaviors.

Covariance of Problem Behaviors
Jessor’s problem behavior theory (Jessor & Jessor, 1977; Jessor et al., 2003) suggests that
problem behaviors during adolescence are highly correlated and that these separate behaviors are
indicators of a syndrome of adolescent problem behavior indicative of a more general lifestyle
(Jessor, 1987a). Empirical evidence supports the proposition that involvement in one type of
problem behavior is often correlated with other problem behaviors (National Research Council
and Institute of Medicine, 2009). Delinquency is highly correlated with defiance, truancy, school
misbehavior, problem sexual behavior, academic failure, drop out, teenage pregnancy, and
violence (Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Delbert S Elliott, Huizinga, & Menard, 1989; D. S. Elliott &
Morse, 1986, March; Farrington, 2009; Jessor & Jessor, 1977; Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, &
Schulenberg, 2009; Michael D. Newcomb et al., 2002; Resnick et al., 1997; Zabin, Hardy,
Smith, & Hirsch, 1986), both in the United States (Barone et al., 1995) and internationally
(Fergusson, Horwood, & Lynskey, 1994). Delinquency and drug use are also linked to reckless
driving in adolescence (Osgood, Johnston, O'Malley, & Bachman, 1988). Substance use in
adolescence is highly related to early initiation of sexual activity (Bentler & Newcomb, 1986;
Donovan & Jessor, 1985; D. S. Elliott & Morse, 1986, March; Zabin, Hardy, Smith, & Hirsch,
1986), risky sexual behavior (Duncan, Strycker, & Duncan, 1999; Fortenberry, 1995; Guo et al.,
2002; Leigh & Stall, 1993), and low educational performance (Bachman, O'Malley, & Johnston,
1978; Jessor, 1987a; Smith & Fogg, 1978). Bingham and Crockett (1996) found that risky sexual
behavior (multiple sexual partners and failure to use condoms) was highly correlated with
antisocial behavior, cigarette smoking, alcohol use, and illicit drug use among adolescents
(Bingham & Crockett, 1996). Early onset of sexual intercourse is associated with lower
likelihood of contraceptive use (Coker, 2009) and greater number of sexual partners during
adolescence (Durbin, DiClemente, Siegel, & Krasnovsky, 1993). In general, correlations among
problem behaviors are high. For example, one recent study found that among eighth-grade
students, delinquency was correlated with substance use and sexual behavior (r = .90 and r = .38,
respectively; p < .05), and that substance use and sexual behavior were also correlated (r = .48; p
< .05). Moreover, academic failure in the 12th grade is moderately correlated with 8th grade
delinquency, substance use, and sexual behavior (r’s .16 to .37; p < .05) (Huang, White,
Kosterman, Catalano, & Hawkins, 2001).
Problem behaviors covary over time as well. For example, trajectories of alcohol and
cigarette use correlate with trajectories of marijuana use, delinquency, and academic problems
across adolescence. A study of 1,000 youth aged 11 to 17 followed annually for 5 years found
that the mean level of alcohol use was correlated with levels of marijuana use and delinquency (r
= .69 and r = 16., respectively; p < .05), and that increases in alcohol use were highly correlated
with increases in marijuana use and delinquency over time (r = .66 and r = .49, respectively, p <
.05). Levels of marijuana use and delinquency were also related (r = .62, p < .05), as well as the
slope of marijuana use and delinquency over time (r = .47). Notably, alcohol use, marijuana use,
and delinquency were also related to academic problems: greater substance use or delinquency
was associated with more academic problems (r’s = .03-.24, p < .05), and increases in substance
use or delinquency were linked with increases in academic problems over time (r’s = .31-.36, p <
.05) (Duncan, Duncan, & Strycker, 2000). Using a longitudinal sample of 808 community youth,
Huang and colleagues (2001) found that aggressive behavior and alcohol use were correlated
concurrently across time (i.e., age 14 aggression and alcohol use r = .55; age 15 aggression and
alcohol use r = .44; age 16 aggression and alcohol use r = .37; and age 14 aggression and alcohol
use r = .37). Furthermore, aggression and alcohol use were correlated over time. For example,
alcohol use at age 14 was significantly correlated with subsequent aggression at age 15 (r = .36),
age 16 (r = .24), and age 17 (r = .21) (Huang, White, Kosterman, Catalano, & Hawkins, 2001).
In a study of 257 youth followed for a year and a half (range 14 - 17 years at baseline), similar
correlations were noted between alcohol use and other substances over time, but findings also
were extended to substance use. Level of alcohol use was correlated with risky sexual behavior
(r = .24; p < .05), but rate in change of alcohol use was unrelated to changes in risky sexual
behavior. However, increases in cigarette use were related to increases in risky sexual behavior
(r = .43, p < .05) (Duncan, Strycker, & Duncan, 1999). Thus, in general, there is evidence of a
strong correlation between various types of problem behavior in adolescence.
In Jessor’s original conception of problem behavior syndrome theory, all problem
behaviors were proposed to be manifestations of a single underlying first-order trait or factor. To
fully test Jessor’s problem behavior theory, some have sought to determine whether the
correlation among problem behaviors in adolescence can be accounted for by a single, first-order
latent construct, which would imply that the same underlying factor accounts for all problem
behaviors. Jessor and colleagues reported that a single first-order latent factor accounted for the
positive intercorrelations among problem behaviors in both adolescence and early adulthood
(Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1988). In a meta-analysis of studies on
various forms of antisocial behavior, Loeber and Schmaling (1985) also found that various forms
of antisocial behavior could be accounted for by a single dimension. Other studies have also
found that the covariation among diverse behaviors, including educational underachievement,
delinquent behavior, substance use, and sexual behavior, can be adequately modeled by a single
higher order factor (Cooper, Wood, Orcutt, & Albino, 2003; Duncan, Duncan, & Strycker,
2000).
The early findings on general problem behavior syndrome used simple, single indicators
of each problem behavior (Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1988). Other
investigators using more detailed and complete assessments of various types of problem behavior
found that a single first-order solution provided a relatively poor fit compared to second-order
latent factor models1 (McGee & Newcomb, 1992; Michael D. Newcomb et al., 2002). When a
second-order latent factor was introduced, there was again evidence for a general underlying
construct shared by all types of problem behavior included in these studies. In addition, the
results suggested that problem behaviors are more strongly related within domain (e.g., various
delinquent acts are more correlated with each other than they are with substance use), though at a
higher level, the second order, all are related. When a second-order latent factor is introduced to
account for general problem behavior, many of these studies find excellent fit across problem
behaviors. That is, various domains of problem behavior are found to load onto a larger general
problem behavior factor across a wide variety of behaviors including school trouble, drug use,
sexual activity, delinquency, risky health behaviors, and academic performance (McGee &
Newcomb, 1992; Michael D. Newcomb et al., 2002; Petridou et al., 1997). Notably, this general
problem behavior factor does not appear to vary across ethnicity, sex, or age from ages 12 to 17
(Petridou et al., 1997). While earlier studies (i.e., Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Donovan, Jessor, &
Costa, 1988) with fewer indicators of problem behaviors lacked the ability to capture both the
unique and shared aspects of problem behaviors, more recent studies with multiple indicators of
different types of problem behaviors indicate that various domains of problem behaviors cluster
1
Chi-square difference tests indicated significantly better fit for a second-order solution; Fit
statistics across final models: CFI > .93, NFI > .91, RMSEA < .07.
together and are generally well captured by a single higher order factor, providing evidence for a
problem behavior syndrome.
Finally, the examination of covariance among problem behavior has been extended
beyond externalizing types of problem behavior (e.g., delinquency, drug use, risky sexual
behavior) to other health-related behaviors. Problem behaviors including delinquency and
substance use are modestly correlated with health behaviors, including dieting, exercise, regular
sleep, and seatbelt use in junior high (r’s = -.17 to -.37) and high school (r’s = -.19 to -.35)
(Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1991). Some studies have found that disordered eating is associated
with other problem behaviors. Among females followed annually from early to late adolescence,
increases in substance abuse, eating disorder, and antisocial behavior were all associated. Initial
levels of substance use and antisocial behavior predicted increases in each other – while initial
levels of eating disorder predicted increases in substance abuse problems (Measelle, Stice, &
Hogansen, 2006). However, the correlation between behavior problems like delinquency and
health-related behaviors (dieting, lack of exercise, and safety behaviors) is noticeably weaker
than the association between delinquency and substance use (Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1991;
Measelle, Stice, & Hogansen, 2006).
Although a preponderance of evidence suggests that problem behaviors such as
delinquency, substance use, and risky sexual behavior (early sexual behavior, condom use,
number of sexual partners) are components a general syndrome of problem behavior in
adolescence, some have cautioned against overstating the case for a single problem behavior
syndrome (Farrell, Sullivan, Esposito, Meyer, & Valois, 2005; McCord, 1990; Resnicow, Ross-
Gaddy, & Vaughan, 1995; Willoughby, Chalmers, & Busseri, 2004). As a specific example,
Elliott and colleagues (1989) found in the National Youth Study that that many delinquent
youths were not drug users, indicating that involvement in one type of problem behavior is not
perfectly related to other types of problem behaviors.
Covariance of Problem Behavior Across Development
Involvement in different types of problem behavior increases throughout adolescence, but
the initiation and course of these behaviors varies with the behavior in question. For instance,
involvement in delinquent behavior, on average, increases in early adolescence, peaks around
age 17, and declines rapidly thereafter (Farrington, 2009). Substance use typically increases
through adolescence and peaks in prevalence between ages 18 and 24 (Chassin, Hussong, &
Beltran, 2009). In the United States, the average age for first sexual intercourse is estimated to be
17 years for males and 16 for females (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2010; Centers for Disease
Control, 2002). This raises questions about how the covariation of problem behaviors changes
over the course of adolescence.
Few studies have examined this question specifically. In general, covariation of problem
behaviors is weak in late childhood and early adolescence, increases in strength throughout
adolescence, and as youth enter adulthood, begins to weaken. In a series of studies on a
longitudinal sample of youth from across adolescence, Gillmore and colleagues (1991) examined
the structural nature of deviant behavior, alcohol use, marijuana use, illicit drug use, and trouble
at school among sixth graders (ages 11 - 12). Results indicated that the variety of problem
behavior – school troubles, delinquency, and substance use – could not be accounted for by a
first-order factor (Gillmore et al., 1991). However, in this sample, by the eighth grade, school
problems, delinquency, polydrug use, and sexual involvement were all highly correlated
(Michael D. Newcomb et al., 2002). In another study, Lytle and colleagues examined smoking,
poor dietary choices, and low physical activity patterns, and found that the clustering of these
problems became stronger as youth aged from Grades 8 through 12 (Lytle, Kelder, Perry, &
Klepp, 1995). It is less clear how problem behaviors cluster as youth transition out of
adolescence, with some studies suggesting that problem behaviors may become more
heterogeneous and less correlated as adolescents transition into adulthood (McGee & Newcomb,
1992; Michael D. Newcomb & Bentler, 1988; Osgood, Johnston, O'Malley, & Bachman, 1988),
while other work suggests that problem behavior syndrome remains intact into adulthood
(Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1988).
One longitudinal study examined the covariance among problem behaviors at four ages
from early adolescence to adulthood (McGee & Newcomb, 1992). Different indices of problem
behavior were examined at each age: in early adolescence, drug use, academic orientation, and
social nonconformity were examined. In late adolescence, drug use, academic orientation, social
non-conformity, sexual involvement, and criminal behavior were examined. In early adulthood,
drug use, social nonconformity, sexual involvement, and criminal behavior were examined. In
adulthood, drug use, social nonconformity, sexual involvement, and criminal behavior were
examined. Results indicated that in early adolescence, social nonconformity was most strongly
related to a common problem behavior factor. During late adolescence and early adulthood, drug
use and sexual involvement (age at first intercourse, number of sexual partners, STI infections,
and pregnancy) were most strongly related to the general problem behavior factor. Finally, in
adulthood, drug use was most strongly related to the common problem behavior factor, followed
by criminal behavior, social nonconformity, and number of sexual partners. Of particular note,
during late adolescence, each of the measured problem behaviors made approximately equal
contributions to a general problem behavior factor. In other developmental periods this was not
the case. Different types of problem behavior covary more strongly in adolescence than in earlier
or later developmental periods.
Part of the reason for this developmental variation in covariation among problem
behaviors may be due to the developmental pattern and sequencing of problem behaviors. One
perspective on how problem behaviors are related is a cascade model of development (Masten et
al., 2005), which suggests that problem behaviors in one domain are likely to cascade into
problems in other types of domains and this association is likely to be bidirectional. To illustrate,
general conduct problems in late childhood predict academic problems in adolescence, which, in
turn, predict later externalizing behaviors in adolescence (Masten et al., 2005). In short,
academic problems can be both a consequence of and a contributor to externalizing problems.
Masten and colleagues found this developmental process for both males and females and it was
not attributable to effects of IQ, parenting quality, or socioeconomic characteristics (Masten et
al., 2005).
Another example of a model of the progression of problem behaviors during adolescence
is Kandel’s gateway hypothesis (Kandel & Davies, 1992). From this perspective, youth begin by
involvement in less serious or socially unacceptable types of problem behavior and progress to
more serious or socially unacceptable types of problem behavior over time. Generally,
adolescents engage in problem behaviors in a developmental sequence, with young people
tending to commit minor delinquent acts before beginning substance use or sexual behavior (D.
S. Elliott, 1994; Huba & Bentler, 1983; Kandel & Davies, 1992; Kuperman et al., 2001). Perhaps
the strongest example of a patterned sequence in the initiation of problem behaviors has been
found in the relation between delinquency and substance use initiation.

The most common sequence of initiation begins with minor delinquency, followed by
either alcohol or tobacco use, followed by marijuana use and more serious delinquency, followed
by use of other illicit drugs (D. S. Elliott, 1994). Prospective longitudinal research has shown
that delinquency is also a positive predictor of problem substance use and substance-related
clinical disorders (Harford & Muthen, 2000; Helene Raskin White, 1990; M. Windle, 1990).
More severe behavioral consequences of delinquency, including substance use and problem use,
may follow from early-starting conduct problems and delinquent activity (Moffitt, 1993;
Patterson & Yoerger, 1997). In turn, alcohol initiation predicts tobacco initiation and visa versa,
and use of either of these substances is predictive of initiation of marijuana use (Hawkins, Hill,
Guo, & Battin-Pearson, 2002; Kandel, 2002). These findings are consistent with developmental
theories positing that antisocial behavior is an important pathway leading to the development of
substance abuse and dependence (R A Zucker, 1994), and that early onset delinquency places a
youth at risk for maladaptive development in multiple domains, including substance use and
risky sexual behavior (Moffitt, 1993; Moffitt, Caspi, Harrington, & Milne, 2002). Importantly,
this sequence has been replicated in retrospective data (Kandel, Yamaguchi, & Chen, 1992),
prospective data (Collins et al., 1994), and international data (Alder & Kandel, 1981).
The progression and associations among problem behaviors may vary with gender. Some
research suggests that involvement in delinquent behavior places females at higher risk for
substance use and problem use than it does males (e.g., Costello, Armstrong, & Erkanli, 2000).
However, there is also evidence that delinquent activity is equally likely to increase risk for
substance use and problem use in males and females (Disney, Elkins, McGue, & Iacono, 1999).
Delinquency as early as age 11 is a positive predictor of alcohol use at age 16 for both males and
females, and alcohol use at age 16, in turn, is a strong predictor of problem substance use at age
18 (Mason, Hitchings, & Spoth, 2007). Mason and colleagues found a positive correlation
between delinquency and problem substance use as young as age 11 that remained consistent
throughout adolescence for males (Mason, Hitchings, & Spoth, 2007).
In addition to the relation between delinquency and substance use, there is evidence for a
development progression among other types of behaviors. For instance, a study of African
American youth found that problems in school predicted drug and alcohol use, which predicted
dropping out (Zimmerman & Schmeelk-Cone, 2003). Other research found that, for sexually
active adolescents, problem behaviors such as delinquency predicted nonuse of condoms
(Biglan, Metzler, Wirt, & Ary, 1990). Use of illicit drugs such as cocaine or heroin, has been
found to increase the likelihood of later suicidal behavior (Kandel, Raveis, & Davies, 1991), the
chances that an adolescent female will become pregnant while unmarried (D. S. Elliott & Morse,
1986, March; Yamaguchi & Kandel, 1987), and the likelihood that a youth will engage in
violence (Hawkins et al., 1998).
It is important to note, however, that the findings on the covariation of problem behaviors
and the developmental sequencing of problem behaviors may be partially due to the problem of
measuring the same construct across time when the meaning or developmental expression of that
construct changes as youth develop. For example, biting and kicking in early childhood are
commonplace and are good measures of aggressive behavior during that time period, but by
adolescence, biting and kicking are rare and are poor measures of aggression. Measuring
aggression the same way in early childhood and adolescence may yield an inaccurate
measurement of the construct at one of those points in time. Thus, it is necessary to introduce
developmentally appropriate indexes or scales for a construct. However, the cost of the addition
of developmentally appropriate indexes of problem behavior is that it becomes difficult to

estimate the equivalence of such age-specific measures. McGee and Newcomb (1992) introduced
developmentally appropriate indexes of problem behavior at each time point (i.e., introducing
sexual behavior as a construct initially in late adolescence), but did so at the cost of
understanding the relation between the exact same indicators across time points. Researchers
must balance the study of homotypic stability (i.e., stability in a trait measured in the same way at
different points in time) and heterotypic stability (i.e., stability examined by developmentally
appropriate markers of the construct at each developmental stage). It is unclear how much the
stronger covariation of problem behaviors during adolescence than at other developmental
periods reflects the limitations of measuring problem behaviors across development.
In sum, research indicates that the covariation between problem behaviors is stronger in
adolescence than in earlier and later developmental periods, although this evidence is tempered
by the methodological limitations of studying the same construct across developmental periods.
Delinquency, substance use, and other problem behaviors including risky sexual behaviors are
most highly correlated in adolescence (McGee & Newcomb, 1992). By adulthood, continuing
substance use is the strongest indicator of a general problem behavior syndrome, which may be
reflective of general desistence from criminal behavior in the 20s. In general, youths desist from
deviant behavior as they transition into adulthood (Farrington, 2009; Piquero, 2008), and risky
sexual behavior declines in young adulthood as youths establish monogamous relationships
(Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2009). In contrast, prevalence of substance use and substance
abuse peak in early adulthood (Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009). This pattern may account
for stronger covariance among problem behaviors in adolescence, when many problem behaviors
are most prevalent.

Risk Factors, Protective Factors and Etiological Mechanisms for Adolescent Problem Behaviors
The greater prevalence of problem behaviors during adolescence does not appear to be
due to differences in the ability to appraise the costs and negative consequences of problem
behaviors compared to adults (Reyna & Farley, 2006), leading some to suggest that increased
problem behavior during adolescence is due to emotional and social factors, rather than cognitive
ones (Cauffman & Steinberg, 2000; Scott, Reppucci, & Woolard, 1995; Steinberg & Cauffman,
1996). Moreover, to the extent that problem behaviors covary in adolescence, the same
emotional and social factors may underlie multiple types of problem behaviors.
According to Jessor’s theory of problem behavior, the underlying cause of externalizing
problems during adolescence is unconventionality – both in a youth’s personality or
characteristics and his or her social environment (Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Menard & Huizinga,
1994). Unconventional individuals are tolerant of deviance in general, are not highly connected
to educational or religious institutions, and tend to be very liberal in their views. Unconventional
environments are those in which a large number of individuals share these same attitudes, and
unconventional individuals in unconventional environments are more likely to engage in a wide
variety of problem behaviors – including use of illegal drugs, sex without the use of
contraceptives, delinquent behavior, and reckless driving (Brack, Brack, & Orr, 1996; Cooper,
2002; Cooper, Wood, Orcutt, & Albino, 2003; Fergusson & Lynskey, 1996; Jakobsen, Rise, Aas,
& Anderssen, 1997; Jessor, 1987b; Spingarn & DuRant, 1996).
Jessor suggested that five domains or sources were necessary to explain adolescent
problem behavior, namely the social environment, perceived environment, personality, (other)
behaviors, and biology/genetics (Jessor, Donovan, & Costa, 1991). Others have identified
possible etiological mechanisms for problem behaviors: risk and protective factors. Risk factors
are defined as predictors of an increased likelihood of problem behavior (Hawkins, Catalano, &
Miller, 1992; Kraemer, Kazdin, Offord, & Kessler, 1997; National Research Council and
Institute of Medicine, 2009). Protective factors predict a decreased likelihood of problem
behavior in the presence of risk exposure (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992; Kraemer, Kazdin,
Offord, & Kessler, 1997; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009; Rutter,
1979).
Predictors of future problem behaviors have been found in the individual (e.g., genetic
predisposition) and in the environments in which young people are socialized, including the peer
group (e.g., friends who use drugs), family (e.g., family conflict), school (e.g., school failure),
and community (e.g., availability of alcohol and drugs). Several theoretical models of
development posit that decreasing risk while increasing protective factors will prevent problem
behaviors (e.g., Catalano & Hawkins, 1996). While risk and protective factors predict the
likelihood of later problem behaviors and precede problem behaviors, they are not necessarily
“causes” of later problem behavior. Some factors may be causally related to problem behavior,
while others may only serve as ‘markers’ for problem behavior. However, the conceptualization
and identification of risk and protective factors provides a starting place for which causal
mechanisms can be identified. The identification of causal or etiological mechanisms requires
theory that links risk factors and protective factors into causal chains, at which point research can
test these hypothesized causal chains. The strongest test of causality is experimental research,
where hypothesized causal variables are manipulated and subsequent effects on problem
behaviors evaluated by comparing intervention and control groups (National Research Council
and Institute of Medicine, 2009).

Longitudinal research has identified a number of common risk factors for antisocial
behavior, substance use, and risky sexual behaviors (Biglan, Brennan, Foster, & Holder, 2004).
These include community disorganization, school failure, family conflict, favorable family and
peer attitudes to drug use and antisocial behavior, and individual variation in impulse control
(Cauffman & Steinberg, 2000; Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Hawkins, Catalano, &
Miller, 1992; Labouvie & McGee, 1986; R. Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, Van Kammen, &
Farrington, 1991; Michael D. Newcomb & Felix-Ortiz, 1992; Michael D. Newcomb, Maddahian,
Skager, & Bentler, 1987; Sampson & Groves, 1989; Werner & Smith, 1992; H. R. White,
Pandina, & LaGrange, 1987). Notably, there is some evidence that the same risk factors
underlying adolescent problem behavior in the United States predict adolescent problem
behavior in other countries, such as China (Jessor et al., 2003; Ma et al., 2008) and Australia
(Hemphill, 2009). Evidence also suggests that most risk factors operate similarly for males and
females (Biglan, Brennan, Foster, & Holder, 2004). For example, although there are sex
differences in self-reported familial parenting practices such as monitoring of children during
adolescence, the relation between familial risk factors and substance use and delinquency does
not differ for males and females (A. Fagan, Van Horn, Antaramian, & Hawkins, 2009).
Table 1 illustrates the predictive relationship between various risk factors and different
types of adolescent problem behaviors (substance abuse, delinquency, teen pregnancy, school
drop out, violence, and depression and anxiety). Check marks denote risk factors that have been
shown to relate to the outcome in at least two longitudinal studies. As seen in the table, many
risk factors for one type of behavior problem, such as substance abuse, also predict other
problems, including delinquency, violence, teen pregnancy, dropping out of school, and
depression and anxiety (Howell, Krisberg, Hawkins, & Wilson, 1995). For example, the risk
factor of “family conflict” has been shown to predict youth substance abuse, delinquency, teen
pregnancy, school dropout, violence and depression, and anxiety. To the extent that this risk
factor is causal, reducing the degree of “family conflict” to which children are exposed could
prevent multiple types of problem behaviors.
It is important to note that some individual and environmental factors can buffer against
risk exposure (Rutter, 1979). Strong attachment to family members, school success, and
opportunities and rewards for prosocial activities protect against involvement in problem
behaviors and are linked to positive development (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992).
Similarly, factors like academic achievement, engagement in school, close familial relationships,
and involvement in religious activities can prevent various types of problem behaviors (Jessor,
Turbin, & Costa, 1998; Jordan & Lewis, 2005). Importantly though, in a large representative
sample of youths from five states, few youths were identified with both high levels of risk and
high levels of protective factors and low levels of risk and low levels of protective factors. The
majority of youth who are exposed to high levels of risk overall have low levels of protection in
their lives (Pollard, Hawkins, & Arthur, 1999). This suggests that interventions seeking to
promote positive behaviors and prevent problem behaviors should include a focus on reducing
risk exposure among children and adolescents as well as on providing greater protection.
Common vs. Specific Risk Factors
In this section we examine key risk factors for involvement in problem behavior during
adolescence across individual, peer, family, school, and community, and discuses if and how
each is related to problem behavior.
Domains of Risk.
Individual risk
One factor that may play a strong role in adolescent risk taking is developmental
immaturity in the ability to control impulses. Problem behaviors are, in part, the result of an
underlying deficit in the ability to control impulses, and, as such, youth who engage in problem
behaviors are often referred to as undercontrolled (e.g., R. W. Robins, John, Caspi, Moffitt, &
Stouthamer-Loeber, 1996). Krueger and colleagues (2009) have suggested that underlying the
associations among substance dependence, antisocial behaviors, conduct disorder, and other
disorders along the externalizing spectrum is a genetically mediated, trait-like vulnerability to
disinhibition manifested as poor impulse control. Within this framework, individuals with less
ability to control their impulses are more likely to engage in a host of problem behaviors.
Impulsivity is a generalized risk factor for educational underachievement, delinquent behavior,
substance use, and sexual behavior (Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Cooper, Wood, Orcutt,
& Albino, 2003; Farrington, 2009). In addition, rank-order individual differences in impulse
control remain relatively stable over development (although the interaction between genes and
environment may change the strength of this association over time (see Krueger et al., 2002;
Krueger et al., 2009; Krueger, Markon, Patrick, Benning, & Kramer, 2007). In early childhood,
youth develop increased ability to self-regulate impulses – and youth who are unable to do so are
at risk for development of conduct problems in childhood (Kochanska, Murray, & Coy, 1997;
Winsler, Diaz, Atencio, McCarthy, & Adams Chabay, 2000). Indeed, the period from
adolescence to early adulthood is marked by comparable developmental increases in the ability
to control impulses, and it is likely that delays in the ability to control impulses contribute to both
initiation and frequency of problem behavior (Monahan, Steinberg, Cauffman, & Mulvey, 2009;
Steinberg et al., 2008; Steinberg & Cauffman, 1996).

In addition to the inability to control impulses, there are a number of robust individual
risk factors for problem behaviors. Early and persistent aggressive behavior places youth not
only at risk for later antisocial behavior, but substance use, risky sexual behavior, and violent
behavior (Biglan, Brennan, Foster, & Holder, 2004; Moffitt, 1993; Moffitt, Caspi, Harrington, &
Milne, 2002). Early onset substance use incurs a range of deleterious outcomes, including further
involvement with substances (Hawkins et al., 1997) and development of substance-related
disorders (B.F. Grant & Dawson, 1997; Bridget F. Grant, Stinson, & Harford, 2001; Nelson &
Wittchen, 1998; Pitkänen, Kokko, Lyyra, & Pulkkinen, 2008; Michael Windle & Wiesner,
2004). Hawkins and colleagues found that the effects of other risk and protective factors,
including parent drinking, proactive parenting, school bonding, and peer alcohol use, were fully
mediated by early age of initiation of alcohol use in predicting alcohol misuse later in
adolescence (Hawkins et al., 1997). Similarly, early onset of sexual intercourse is associated with
lower likelihood of contraceptive use (Coker, 2009) and greater number of sexual partners during
adolescence (Durbin, DiClemente, Siegel, & Krasnovsky, 1993). This pattern of early initiation
of a problem behavior predicting later severity and persistence of that problem behavior is found
across behaviors.
Not only is prior involvement in behavior a strong predictor of subsequent behavior, but
attitudes toward behaviors are robust predictors of subsequent problem behaviors. That is,
individuals who have positive perceptions of substance use are more likely to use substances
(Petraitis, Flay, & Miller, 1995; Schulenberg et al., 1996), and those with positive perceptions of
sexual behavior are more likely to debut sexually (Durbin, DiClemente, Siegel, & Krasnovsky,
1993). Thus, favorable attitudes toward problem behaviors are strong predictors of subsequent
problem behavior during adolescence.

Peer risk
The peer group is a particularly salient social context during adolescence. The importance
of peer groups in adolescence is likely the product of multiple processes, including increases in
the amount of time adolescents spend with peers, in the stated importance of peer relationships
(Brown & Larson, 2009), and in adolescents’ susceptibility to peer influence (Steinberg &
Monahan, 2007). One of the most robust findings in the literature on adolescent antisocial
behavior is that individuals with deviant peers are more likely to engage in antisocial behavior
than individuals without deviant peers (Monahan, Steinberg, & Cauffman, 2009). Similarly, peer
substance use is one of the strongest predictors of adolescent substance use (Brendgen, Vitaro, &
Bukowski, 2000; Farrington, 2009; Heinze, Toro, & Urberg, 2004; Lipsey & Derzon, 1998;
Patterson, Capaldi, & Bank, 1991). Substance-using peers are associated with increased risk of
problem substance use (Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Delbert S. Elliott, Huizinga, &
Ageton, 1985; Oxford, Harachi, Catalano, & Abbott, 2001). Adolescents who believe that their
friends are having sex are more likely to engage in sexual activity (Diamond & Savin-Williams,
2009), and peer involvement in problem behavior predicts lower condom use among sexually
active adolescents (Metzler, Noell, Biglan, & Ary, 1994). Recent experimental evidence suggests
that the mere presence of peers increases problem behavior in laboratory-based tasks among
adolescents (Gardner & Steinberg, 2005). It is not surprising that peer group characteristics are
associated generally with problem behaviors during adolescence and that these effects are found
across problem behavior domains.
Familial risk
Characteristics of the family also impact problem behavior during adolescence. Some
have argued that the early family context in which problem-behaving adolescents are raised
encourages problem behavior as an adaptive response to a hostile environment (Belsky,
Steinberg, & Draper, 1991). Lack of maternal involvement with children and low parental
expectations are associated with drug use (Kilpatrick et al., 2000; Sale et al., 2005), delinquency
(Baumrind, 1985; Farrington, 2009; Penning & Barnes, 1982), and sexual debut (Diamond &
Savin-Williams, 2009). The absence of closeness between parents and children (i.e., the absence
of bonding to family) also has been found to predict alcohol misuse and problem behavior more
generally (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992). In general, youth with permissive parents engage
in higher levels of problem behavior (Barnes, Reifman, Farrell, & Dintcheff, 2000; Chassin,
Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Jessor & Jessor, 1977), at least partially through parental failure to
communicate norms and rules. Moreover, parental attitudes favorable towards problem behaviors
are conveyed to children and can increase risk for these behaviors in children. Youths whose
parents condone or encourage violent behavior are more likely to exhibit violent behavior in
adolescence. Similarly, favorable parental attitudes toward tobacco predict initiation of smoking,
and favorable parental norms toward alcohol predict initiation of alcohol use (Hawkins, Hill,
Guo, & Battin-Pearson, 2002).
Family structure and parenting practices predict condom use among sexually activie
adolescents (Metzler, Noell, Biglan, & Ary, 1994), and lower family rule setting, parental
involvement, and closeness are associated with delinquency and substance use in adolescence
(Catalano & Hawkins, 1996; Metzler, Noell, Biglan, & Ary, 1994). Poor family management
practices (failure to set clear expectations for behavior, lax monitoring of children, and
excessively severe and inconsistent discipline) predict later alcohol misuse (Hansen et al., 1987;
McDermott, 1984; Peterson, Hawkins, Abbott, & Catalano, 1994). Less parental smoking, strict
familial monitoring and rules, and stronger parental bonding have been found to predict lower
risk of daily smoking initiation (Oxford, Harachi, Catalano, & Abbott, 2001). Youth whose
families consistently provided poor family management from early to mid adolescence (ages 11
to 14) have been found to be more likely to follow chronic or late onset, increasing patterns of
violent behavior across adolescence (ages 13 to 18). Importantly, in that study, youths whose
families exhibited poor management in early adolescence, but increased in family management
over time (ages 11-14), had patterns of violence similar to youths whose parents consistently
provided good familial management (Herrenkohl, Hill, Hawkins, Chung, & Nagin, 2006),
suggesting that family management practices in early adolescence may be particularly salient for
preventing problem behaviors later in adolescence (Burt, 2009). Research suggests that good
parenting practices can overcome genetic risks for problem behavior during adolescence (Burt,
2009). In one study, good parental monitoring diminished the association between genetic risk
and problem behavior (Dick et al., 2009).
Although children in single-parent homes are at risk for delinquency and drug use (Blum
et al., 2000; Penning & Barnes, 1982) and are more likely to be sexually active (Paul, Fitzjohn,
Herbison, & Dickson, 2000; Wu & Thomson, 2001), this relation appears to result at least
partially from a decreased ability to monitor children’s behavior when only one adult caretaker is
present in the home. That is, it is not necessarily coming from a single-parent home that predicts
increased risky behavior, but rather, other characteristics of parenting that are more likely to
occur in single-parent families. Indeed, other factors, such as conflict among family members,
appear to be more salient predictors of risky behavior than being from a single-parent home,
leading some to suggest that other risk factors are more important to understanding problem
behavior than family structure (Paul, Fitzjohn, Herbison, & Dickson, 2000).
Finally, familial history plays a strong role in predicting subsequent problem behavior
during adolescence (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992). In general, children who come from a
family with a history of crime are more likely to be criminally active; children of alcoholics are
more likely to abuse substances; and children of teenage mothers are more likely to become
teenage parents themselves. Some of this overlapping risk may be genetic (as demonstrated for
alcoholism) and some may be environmental influence (Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Hill,
Hawkins, Catalano, Abbott, & Guo, 2005).
School risk
Adolescents spend the majority of their day in school and how they feel about and
perform in school has important implications for problem behavior. Failure in school has been
identified as predictor of drug use (Chassin, Hussong, & Beltran, 2009; Hawkins, Catalano, &
Miller, 1992), delinquent behavior (Farrington, 2009; Jessor & Jessor, 1977), and early sexual
activity (Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2009). Notably, the relation between school failure and
problem behavior is complicated: youth with conduct problems are more likely to fail at school,
which in turn predicts increased substance use (Feldhusen, Thurston, & Benning, 1973). In
contrast, school attachment and success in school are associated with decreased involvement in
problem behavior (Hawkins, 1997), suggesting that bonding to school may protect against
multiple types of problem behavior.
Similarly, low commitment to school is associated with greater drug use, delinquency,
and sexual behavior (Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2009). The effect of truancy
on drug involvement is positive and significant even after accounting for parental education,
ethnicity, and prior problem behaviors. Other variables pertaining to school attachment, such as
time spent doing homework, extracurricular activities, and perceptions of coursework are also
related to decreased problem behaviors (Friedman, 1983), suggesting that an overall low
commitment to school is broadly predictive of problem behaviors among adolescence (Biglan,
Brennan, Foster, & Holder, 2004).
Community risk
Community characteristics of low socioeconomic status and neighborhood
disorganization are also related to some types of problem behaviors in adolescence. Indicators of
socioeconomic disadvantage, such as poverty, poor housing, and overcrowding, are associated
with increased risk of childhood conduct problems and delinquency, drug use, and risky sexual
behavior (Allison et al., 1999; Bursik & Webb, 1982; Farrington, 2009; Li, Stanton, &
Feigelman, 2000; Petraitis, Flay, & Miller, 1995; Robinson, Klesges, Zbikowski, & Glaser,
1997). However, research on socioeconomic status and drug use is less clear. Parental education
is positively associated with teenage drinking (Biglan, Brennan, Foster, & Holder, 2004) and
marijuana use (Robert A. Zucker & Harford, 1983). In contrast, extreme poverty incurs risk for
alcoholism and drug use among children who are highly antisocial in childhood (Bachman,
Johnston, & O'Malley, 1981). Thus, while socioeconomic status is negatively associated with
delinquency, sexual debut, and contraceptive use, the relation between socioeconomic status and
drug use is less clear. Indeed, when extreme poverty is examined and characteristics of the child
(e.g., prior risk behavior) are taken into account, the association is always negative, such that
extreme socioeconomic deprivation increases risk for a number of problem behaviors (L. N.
Robins & Ratcliff, 1979). In contrast, higher socioeconomic status predicts drug use among
youths without prior behavioral problems.
Finally, disorganized neighborhoods with high population density, high residential
mobility, and physical deterioration are more likely to have high rates of crime (Wilson &
Herrnstein, 1985) and illegal drug trafficking (J. Fagan, Weis, & Cheng, 1988). Community
norms and laws that are favorable toward drug use, criminal behavior, or violence are predictive
of youth involvement in these problem behaviors, possibly through the transmittal and adoption
of these community norms by youths (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992).
Relations among risk domain, developmental variation, and cumulative risk
The mechanisms that underlie problem behavior are complex. Explanations that seek to
understand the etiology of problem behaviors by focusing on only one domain, such as genetics
or family environment, will undoubtedly oversimplify the complexity and varied pathways to
adolescent problem behaviors. There are a number of ways in which risk factors can affect
problem behaviors. First, risk factors have direct effects on problem behaviors. For example,
positive perceptions of sexual behavior may precede and directly affect sexual debut (Durbin,
DiClemente, Siegel, & Krasnovsky, 1993). Similarly, associations with deviant peers directly
impacts one’s own deviant behavior (Monahan, Steinberg, & Cauffman, 2009).
A second way that risk factors can impact problem behavior is through indirect effects.
That is, in addition to or instead of directly impacting problem behavior, the effects of some risk
factors on problem behavior are mediated through other risk factors. Community disorganization
makes it difficult for families to transmit prosocial values for children (Shaw & McKay, 1969).
Thus, living in a disorganized neighborhood is associated with poor family management, which
in turn predicts greater likelihood of having delinquent peers, which is associated with greater
problem behavior (Oxford, Harachi, Catalano, & Abbott, 2001). Conversely, while prosocial
family processes, such as parental rules, parental monitoring, and child attachment to parents
have direct negative effects on substance use initiation, they also have indirect effects on
substance use via their effects on decreasing involvement with antisocial peers. Among families
with prosocial family processes, youth are less likely to affiliate with deviant peers, thus further
protecting against substance use initiation (Oxford, Harachi, Catalano, & Abbott, 2001).
Third, there is evidence that the impact of risk factors on problem behaviors changes
developmentally. For instance, although peers are a very robust predictor of problem behavior
throughout adolescence, as individuals age, the influence of their peers on their problem
behavior wanes (Monahan, Steinberg, & Cauffman, 2009). In a longitudinal study of youth,
Herrenkohl and colleagues found that some constructs are continuously related to violent
behavior from ages 11 to 18 (hyperactivity, low academic performance, peer delinquency, and
availability of drugs). Other risk facts are more salient predictors of violent behavior at younger
ages (poor family management, family conflict, low school commitment, low educational
aspirations, economic deprivation, low neighborhood attachment, economic deprivation, and low
neighborhood attachment) (Herrenkohl et al., 2000).
Finally, while there is evidence that problem behaviors are predicted by a common set of
risk factors observable in childhood (Hawkins, Jenson, Catalano, & Lishner, 1988), it is also the
case that effects of risk factor exposure are cumulative, such that the greater number of risk
factors an individual is exposed to, the greater the likelihood that the individual will develop
drug abuse problems (Bry, McKeon, & Pandina, 1982; M. D. Newcomb, Maddahian, & Bentler,
1986), delinquency (Kolvin, Miller, Fleeting, Kolvin, & Rutter, 1988), and violent behavior
(Hawkins et al., 1998; Herrenkohl et al., 2000). The robustness of the relationship between
exposure to an increasing number of risk factors and increasing likelihood of variety of problem
behaviors is striking (Bry, McKeon, & Pandina, 1982; Michael D. Newcomb, 1995; Pollard,
Hawkins, & Arthur, 1999; Rutter, 1979). Indeed, some have suggested that the number of risk
factors present is a more powerful predictor of problem behavior than the specific risk factors
present (Sameroff, Bartko, Baldwin, Baldwin, & Seifer, 1998). In general, as cumulative risk is
examined, the greater number of risk factors in an individual’s life, the fewer protective factors,
and vice versa, suggesting that risk and protective factors are not independent (Pollard, Hawkins,
& Arthur, 1999). Figure 1 illustrates this relationship, showing that as risk increases, the
prevalence of marijuana use in the last 30 days increases. Of a total sample of approximately
77,000 individuals, at least 100 people at each level of intersection of risk and protection were
required to be included in Figure 1. As shown, few individuals exposed to high levels of risk
were found who also had high levels of protection (Pollard, Hawkins, & Arthur, 1999). Thus, the
count of the number of risk factors a youth experiences across individual, peer, family, school,
and community domains is a strong predictor of involvement in multiple types of problem
behavior during adolescence.
Conclusions
The greatest risks to adolescent health are the behaviors in which adolescents willingly
engage (Ozer, Macdonald, Irwin, Mortimer, & Larson, 2002), such as reckless driving,
delinquency, substance use, and risky sexual behavior. In the extant literature, there is evidence
that such problem behaviors covary during adolescence, such that involvement in multiple types
of problem behavior is likely to occur. While this covariance is not perfect, many youth
simultaneously engage in a number of different problem behaviors, and involvement in one type
of problem behavior is associated with involvement in other types of problem behavior. To the
extent that involvement in one type of problem behavior leads to involvement in other types of
problem behavior, preventive efforts that reduce earlier appearing problem behaviors may affect
multiple problems.
There is strong evidence that certain risk factors are shared predictors of diverse problem
behaviors. For example, impulsivity, poor family management, academic failure, and peers who
engage in problem behavior are risk factors for a number of different types of problem behavior
during adolescence. Other risk factors, such as low socioeconomic status, are associated with
some problem behaviors such as delinquency, but not necessarily others, such as drug use. For
the purposes of working to prevent youth problem behavior, it is likely that prevention programs
that target shared malleable risk factors for diverse adolescent problem behaviors will affect
multiple problems in adolescence.
In fact, there is evidence that targeting risk and protective factors for one type of
problem, such as substance use, can have benefits or “crossover effects,” for a broad range of
adolescent problem behaviors predicted by these risk and protective factors (Ellickson,
McCaffrey, & Klein, 2009). A growing body of research on crossover effects suggests that this
may be true. In the Nurse-Family Partnerships program, nurse home visitors work with families
in their homes during pregnancy and the child’s first 2 years of life. Targeted populations are
low-income, unmarried pregnant women bearing their first child. Fifteen years after the program,
children of nurse-visited women have lower substance use, lower rates of arrest, and lower
instances of running away compared to control children. Moreover, the families in the
experimental condition had lower verified reports of child abuse or neglect, fewer subsequent
births, greater intervals between first and second children, fewer maternal arrests and behavioral
problem due to substance abuse, and lower receipt of federal aid compared to control families
(Olds, Hill, Mihalic, & O'Brien, 1998). The Raising Healthy Children program for teachers,
parents, and children in Grades 1 through 6 was tested in urban elementary schools in the Seattle
Social Development Project. When followed up from 6 to 15 years after the program ended,
those in the intervention condition reported less lifetime violence and heavy alcohol use at age
18, were more likely to have completed high school by age 21, had better occupational and
educational attainment at ages 24 and 27, were less likely to have diagnosable mental health
disorders at ages 24 and 27, and were less likely to engage in a range of sexual risk behaviors as
well to have experienced sexually transmitted infections from adolescence through age 27 when
compared with those who did not receive the program (Hawkins, Catalano, Kosterman, Abbott,
& Hill, 1999; Hawkins, Kosterman, Catalano, Hill, & Abbott, 2005, 2008; Lonczak, Abbott,
Hawkins, Kosterman, & Catalano, 2002). Participation in Life Skills Training, administered in
7th, 8th, and 9th grades, has been found to predict lower probability of alcohol and drug use,
violence, delinquency, problem driving, and HIV risk behavior 10 years after the intervention
(Botvin, Griffin, & Nichols, 2006; Griffin, Botvin, & Nichols, 2004). The CASASTART
(Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows, formerly called Children at Risk) program
targets youth (ages 11 - 13) in high-risk environments and seeks to reduce exposure to drugs and
criminal activity by focusing on decreasing individual, peer group, family, and neighborhood
risk factors. Participation in CASASTART compared to a control group was linked with lower
drug use, lower violent behavior, and lower rates of drug dealing (Harrell, Cavanagh, &
Sridharan, 1998). Participation in the “Preventative Treatment Program” for high-risk males
between ages 7 and 9 was associated with less antisocial behavior, less aggressive behavior, and
greater success in school when compared with controls 3 years post intervention at age 12
(Tremblay et al., 1996). Six years after intervention, youth who participated in the Preventative
Treatment Program reported less drug use, less antisocial behavior, fewer delinquent peers, and
were less likely to be gang members than youths in the control group. The findings from these
preventive interventions indicate that targeting shared risk and protective factors may have
positive effects on a wide range of problem behaviors.
Unfortunately, much research and practice have treated adolescent problem behaviors as
separate and independent, with little consideration of their interconnectedness. This is somewhat
surprising given high levels of covariation across problem behaviors and the evidence regarding
common predictors of multiple risk or problem behaviors. Indeed, one of the greatest challenges
to the study and prevention of youth problem behavior is that research and prevention programs
tend to focus on problem-specific mechanisms and problem-specific prevention programs.
Problem-specific prevention projects tend to be supported by agencies dedicated to that specific
problem topic and published in venues specific to that problem behavior (e.g., research and
prevention programs on substance use among teenagers is funded by the National Institute on
Drug Abuse, with findings often published in drug and alcohol specialty journals, while research
and prevention programs on delinquent or criminal behavior are funded by the National Institute
of Justice or the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention with findings often
published in criminology journals). Perhaps the greatest danger of this is that research on
problem behaviors is segregated into separate domains, risking inadequate attention to the
interrelationships among problem behaviors and shared risk factors for diverse problem behavior
outcomes. As such, there is a need to foster collaborations of researchers who focus on different
domains of problem behavior to promote positive development during adolescence.

Table 1
1
0.9
Num ber of
P rotective
0.8 Factors
e 0.7 0 to 1
c
n 0.6 2 to 3
e
l
a 0.5 4 to 5
v
e
r 0.4 6 to 7
P
0.3 8 to 9
0.2
0.1
0
0 to 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 6 to 7 8 to 9 10+
Number of Risk Factors
Figure 1. Marijuana Use in the Last 30 Days by Number of Self-reported Risk and Protective
Factors
Adapted from Pollard et al., 1999

References
Alan Guttmacher Institute. (2010). U.S. Teenage Pregnancy Statistics: National and State
Trends and Trends by Race and Ethnicity. New York: Author.
Alder, I., & Kandel, D. (1981). Cross-cultural perspectives on developmental stages in
adolescent drug use. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 42, 701-715.
Allison, K. W., Crawford, I., Leone, P. E., Trickett, E., Perez-Febles, A., Burton, L. M., et al.
(1999). Adolescent substance use: Preliminary examinations of school and neighborhood
context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(2), 111-141.
Bachman, J. G., Johnston, L. D., & O'Malley, P. M. (1981). Smoking, drinking, and drug use
among American high school students: correlates and trends, 1975-1979. American
Journal of Public Health, 71(1), 59-69.
Bachman, J. G., O'Malley, P. M., & Johnston, J. (1978). Youth in transition: Vol. VI.
Adolescence to adulthood--change and stability in the lives of young men. Ann Arbor,
MI: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
Barnes, G. M., Reifman, A. S., Farrell, M. P., & Dintcheff, B. A. (2000). The effects of parenting
on the development of adolescent alcohol misuse: A six-wave latent growth model.
Journal of Marriage & the Family, 62(1), 175-186.
Barone, C., Weissberg, R. P., Kasprow, W. J., Voyce, C., Arthur, M. W., & Shriver, T. P.
(1995). Involvement in multiple problem behaviors of young urban adolescents. Journal
of Primary Prevention, 15(3), 261-283.
Baumrind, D. (1985). Familial antecedents of adolescent drug use: a developmental perspective.
NIDA Research Monograph, 56, 13-44.
Belsky, J., Steinberg, L., & Draper, P. (1991). Childhood experience, interpersonal development,
and reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of socialization. Child Development,
62(4), 647-670.
Bentler, P. M., & Newcomb, M. D. (1986). Personality, sexual behavior, and drug use revealed
through latent variable methods. Clinical Psychology Review, 6(5), 363-385.
Biglan, A., Brennan, P. A., Foster, S. L., & Holder, H. D. (2004). Helping adolescents at risk:
Prevention of multiple problem behaviors. New York: Guilford Press.
Biglan, A., Metzler, C. W., Wirt, R., & Ary, D. V. (1990). Social and behavioral factors
associated with high-risk sexual behavior among adolescents. Journal of Behavioral
Medicine, 13(3), 245-261.
Bingham, C. R., & Crockett, L. J. (1996). Longitudinal adjustment patterns of boys and girls
experiencing early, middle, and late sexual intercourse. Developmental Psychology,
32(4), 647-658.
Blum, R. W., Beuhring, T., Shew, M. L., Bearinger, L. H., Sieving, R. e. E., & Resnick, M. D.
(2000). The effects of race/ethnicity, income, and family structure on adolescent risk
behaviors. American Journal of Public Health, 90(12), 1879-1884.
Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., & Nichols, T. D. (2006). Preventing youth violence and
delinquency through a universal school-based prevention approach. Prevention Science,
7(4), 403-408.
Brack, C. J., Brack, G., & Orr, D. P. (1996). Adolescent health promotion: Testing a model using
multidimensional scaling. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 6(2), 139-149.
Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (2000). Deviant friends and early adolescents'
emotional and behavioral adjustment. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10(2), 173-
189.
Brown, B. B., & Larson, J. (2009). Peer relationships in adolescence. In R. M. Lerner & L.
Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology, Vol. 2: Contextual influences on
adolescent development (3rd ed., pp. 74-103). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Bry, B. H., McKeon, P., & Pandina, R. J. (1982). Extent of drug use as a function of number of
risk factors. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 91(4), 273-279.
Bursik, R. J., & Webb, J. (1982). Community change and patterns of delinquency. American
Journal of Sociology, 88(1), 24-42.
Burt, S. A. (2009). Rethinking environmental contributions to child and adolescent
psychopathology: A meta-analysis of shared environmental influences. Psychological
Bulletin, 135(4), 608-637.
Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The social development model: A theory of antisocial
behavior. In J. D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and Crime: Current Theories (pp. 149-
197). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why
adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18(6), 741-
760.
Centers for Disease Control. (2002). Trends in sexual risk behaviors among high school students.
United States, 1991-2001. . Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 41(231), 237-240.
Chassin, L., Hussong, A., & Beltran, I. (2009). Adolescent substance use. In R. M. Lerner & L.
Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology: Vol. 1. Individual bases of
Coker, A. L., McKeown, R. E., Garrison, C. Z., Richter, D. L., Valois, R. F., & Vincent, M. L.
(2009). Correlates and Consequences of Early Initiation of Sexual Intercourse. Journal of
School Health, 64(9), 372-377.
Collins, L. M., Graham, J. W., Rousculp, S. S., Fidler, P. L., Pan, J., & Hansen, W. B. (1994).
Latent transition analysis and how it can address prevention research questions. In L. M.
Collins & L. Seitz (Eds.), NIDA Research Monograph: Vol. 142. Advances in data
analysis for prevention research (pp. 81-111). Washington, DC: National Institute on
Drug Abuse.
Cooper, M. L. (2002). Alcohol use and risky sexual behavior among college students and youth:
Evaluating the evidence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Suppl 14, 101-117.
Cooper, M. L., Wood, P. K., Orcutt, H. K., & Albino, A. (2003). Personality and the
predisposition to engage in risky or problem behaviors during adolescence. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 390-410.
Costello, E. J., Armstrong, T. D., & Erkanli, A. (2000). Report on the developmental
epidemiology of comorbid psychiatric and substance use disorders. Paper presented at
the Assessing the Impact of Childhood Interventions on Subsequent Drug Use
conference, Durham, NC.
Diamond, L. M., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (2009). Adolescent sexuality. In R. M. Lerner & L.
Dick, D. M., Latendresse, S. J., Lansford, J. E., Budde, J. P., Goate, A., Dodge, K. A., et al.
(2009). Role of GABRA2 in trajectories of externalizing behavior across development
and evidence of moderation by parental monitoring. Archives of General Psychiatry,

66(6), 649-657.
Disney, E. R., Elkins, I. J., McGue, M., & Iacono, W. G. (1999). Effects of ADHD, conduct
disorder, and gender on substance use and abuse in adolescence. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 156(10), 1515-1521.
Donovan, J. E., & Jessor, R. (1985). Structure of problem behavior in adolescence and young
adulthood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(6), 890-904.
Donovan, J. E., Jessor, R., & Costa, F. M. (1988). Syndrome of problem behavior in
adolescence: A replication. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(5), 762-
765.
Donovan, J. E., Jessor, R., & Costa, F. M. (1991). Adolescent health behavior and
conventionality-unconventionality: An extension of problem-behavior theory. Health
Psychology, 10(1), 52-61.
Duncan, S. C., Duncan, T. E., & Strycker, L. A. (2000). Risk and protective factors influence
adolescent problem behavior: A multivariate latent growth curve analysis. Annals of
Behavioral Medicine, 22(2), 103-109.
Duncan, S. C., Strycker, L. A., & Duncan, T. E. (1999). Exploring associations in developmental
trends of adolescent substance use and risky sexual behavior in a high-risk population.
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 22(1), 21-34.
Durbin, M., DiClemente, R. J., Siegel, D., & Krasnovsky, F. (1993). Factors associated with
multiple sex partners among junior high school students. Journal of Adolescent Health,
14(3), 202-207.
Ellickson, P. L., McCaffrey, D. F., & Klein, D. J. (2009). Long-term effects of drug prevention
on risky sexual behavior among young adults. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45(2), 111-
117.
Elliott, D. S. (1994). Serious violent offenders: Onset, developmental course, and termination --
The American Society of Criminology 1993 Presidential Address. Criminology, 32(1), 1-
21.
Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Explaining delinquency and drug use.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1989). Multiple problem youth: Delinquency,
substance use, and mental health problems. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Elliott, D. S., & Morse, B. (1986, March). Drug use, delinquency, and sexual activity. Paper
presented at the NIDA Conference on Drug Abuse & Adolescent Sexual Activity,
Pregnancy, and Parenting, Bethesda, MD.
Fagan, A., Van Horn, M. L., Antaramian, S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2009). How Do Families Matter?
Age and Gender Differences in Family Influences on Delinquency and Drug Use.
Fagan, J., Weis, J. G., & Cheng, Y. T. (1988). Delinquency and substance use among inner city
students. New York: New York City Criminal Justice Agency.
Farrell, A. D., Sullivan, T. N., Esposito, L. E., Meyer, A. L., & Valois, R. F. (2005). A Latent
Growth Curve Analysis of the Structure of Aggression, Drug Use, and Delinquent
Behaviors and Their Interrelations Over Time in Urban and Rural Adolescents. Journal
of Research on Adolescence, 15(2), 179-204.
Farrington, D. P. (2009). Conduct disorder, aggression, and delinquency. In R. M. Lerner & L.
adolescent development (3rd ed., pp. 683-722). Hoboken, NJ US: John Wiley & Sons.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2009). Crime in the United States, 2008.

Feldhusen, J. F., Thurston, J. R., & Benning, J. J. (1973). A longitudinal study of delinquency
and other aspects of children's behaviour. International Journal of Criminology &
Penology, 1(4), 341-351.
Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Lynskey, M. T. (1994). The childhoods of multiple
problem adolescents: A 15-year longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 35(6), 1123-1140.
Fergusson, D. M., & Lynskey, M. T. (1996). Adolescent resiliency to family adversity. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37(3), 281-292.
Fortenberry, J. D. (1995). Adolescent substance use and sexually transmitted diseases at risk: A
review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 16(4), 304-308.
Friedman, A. S. (1983). High school drug abuse clients. In Treatment Research Notes. Rockville,
MD: Division of Clinical Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Gardner, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). Peer Influence on Risk Taking, Risk Preference, and Risky
Decision Making in Adolescence and Adulthood: An Experimental Study.
Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 625-635.
Gillmore, M. R., Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Jr., Day, L. E., Moore, M., & Abbott, R.
(1991). Structure of problem behaviors in preadolescence. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 59(4), 499-506.
Grant, B. F., & Dawson, D. A. (1997). Age at onset of alcohol use and its association with DSM-
IV alcohol abuse and dependence: Results from the National Longitudinal Alcohol
Epidemiologic Survey. Journal of Substance Abuse, 9, 103-110.
Grant, B. F., Stinson, F. S., & Harford, T. C. (2001). Age at onset of alcohol use and DSM-IV
alcohol abuse and dependence: A 12-year follow-up. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13(4),
493-504.
Griffin, K. W., Botvin, G. J., & Nichols, T. R. (2004). Long-term follow-up effects of a School-
Based Drug Abuse Prevention Program on Adolescent Risky Driving. Prevention
Science, 5(3), 207-212.
Guo, J., Chung, I.-J., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Abbott, R. D. (2002).
Developmental relationships between adolescent substance use and risky sexual behavior
in young adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 31(4), 354-362.
Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Sobel, J. L., Shelton, D. R., Flay, B., & Johnson, C. (1987). The
consistency of peer and parent influences on tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use among
young adolescents. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10(6), 559-579.
Harford, T. C., & Muthen, B. O. (2000). Adolescent and young adult antisocial behavior and
adult alcohol use disorders: A fourteen-year prospective follow-up in a national survey.
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 61(4), 524-528.
Harrell, A. V., Cavanagh, S. E., & Sridharan, S. (1998). Impact of the Children at Risk Program:
Comprehensive Final Report II. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Hawkins, J. D. (1997). Academic performance and school success: Sources and consequences. In
R. P. Weissberg, T. P. Gullotta, R. L. Hampton, B. A. Ryan & G. R. Adams (Eds.),
Healthy children 2010: Enhancing children's wellness. Issues in children's and families'
lives, Vol. 8 (pp. 278-305). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Kosterman, R., Abbott, R., & Hill, K. G. (1999). Preventing
adolescent health-risk behaviors by strengthening protection during childhood. Archives
of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 153(3), 226-234.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Miller, J. Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol
and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance-
abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 64-105.
Hawkins, J. D., Graham, J. W., Maguin, E., Abbott, R. D., Hill, K. G., & Catalano, R. F. (1997).
Exploring the effects of age of alcohol use initiation and psychosocial risk factors on
subsequent alcohol misuse. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58(3), 280-290.
Hawkins, J. D., Herrenkohl, T., Farrington, D. P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R. F., & Harachi, T. W.
(1998). A review of predictors of youth violence. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Eds.),
Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 106-
146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hawkins, J. D., Hill, K. G., Guo, J., & Battin-Pearson, S. R. (2002). Substance use norms and
transitions in substance use: Implications for the gateway hypothesis. In D. B. Kandel
(Ed.), Stages and pathways of drug involvement. Examining the Gateway Hypothesis (pp.
42-64). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hawkins, J. D., Jenson, J. M., Catalano, R. F., & Lishner, D. M. (1988). Delinquency and drug
abuse: Implications for social services. Social Service Review, 62(2), 258-284.
Hawkins, J. D., Kosterman, R., Catalano, R. F., Hill, K. G., & Abbott, R. D. (2005). Promoting
positive adult functioning through social development intervention in childhood: Long-
term effects from the Seattle Social Development Project. Archives of Pediatrics and
Adolescent Medicine, 159(1), 25-31.
Hawkins, J. D., Kosterman, R., Catalano, R. F., Hill, K. G., & Abbott, R. D. (2008). Effects of
social development intervention in childhood fifteen years later. Archives of Pediatrics
and Adolescent Medicine, 162(12), 1133-1141.
Heinze, H. J., Toro, P. A., & Urberg, K. A. (2004). Antisocial Behavior and Affiliation With
Deviant Peers. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(2), 336-346.
Hemphill, S. A., Smith, R., Toumbourou, J. W., Herrenkohl, T. I., Catalano, R. F., McMorris, B.
J., & Romaniuk, H. (2009). Modifiable determinants of youth violence in Australia and
the United States: A longitudinal study. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of
Criminology, 42(3), 289-309.
Henshaw, S. K. (1998). Barriers to access to abortion services. In L. J. Beckman & S. M. Harvey
(Eds.), The new civil war: The psychology, culture, and politics of abortion. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Herrenkohl, T. I., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Chung, I.-J., & Nagin, D. S. (2006).
Developmental trajectories of family management and risk for violent behavior in
adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39(2), 206-213.
Herrenkohl, T. I., Maguin, E., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Abbott, R. D., & Catalano, R. F.
(2000). Developmental risk factors for youth violence. Journal of Adolescent Health,
26(3), 176-186.
Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Abbott, R. D., & Guo, J. (2005). Family influences
on the risk of daily smoking initiation. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37(3), 202-210.
Hoefferth, S. L. (1990). Trends in adolescent sexual activity, contraception, and pregnancy in the
United States. In J. H. Bancroft & J. M. Reinisch (Eds.), Adolescence and Puberty (pp.
217-233). New York: Oxford University Press.
Howell, J. C., Krisberg, B., Hawkins, J. D., & Wilson, J. J. (Eds.). (1995). A sourcebook:
Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Huang, B., White, H. R., Kosterman, R., Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (2001).
Developmental associations between alcohol and interpersonal aggression during
adolescence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(1), 64-83.
Huba, G. J., & Bentler, P. M. (1983). Test of a drug use causal model using asymptotically
distribution free methods. Journal of Drug Education, 13(1), 3-14.
Jakobsen, R., Rise, J., Aas, H., & Anderssen, N. (1997). Noncoital sexual interactions and
problem behaviour among young adolescents: The Norwegian Longitudinal Health
Behaviour Study. Journal of Adolescence, 20(1), 71-83.
Jessor, R. (1987a). Problem-behavior theory, psychosocial development, and adolescent problem
drinking. British Journal of Addiction, 82(4), 331-342.
Jessor, R. (1987b). Risky driving and adolescent problem behavior: An extension of problem-
behavior theory. Alcohol, Drugs & Driving, 3(3), 1-11.
Jessor, R., Donovan, J. E., & Costa, F. M. (1991). Beyond adolescence: Problem behavior and
young adult development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. L. (1977). Problem behavior and psychological development: A
longitudinal study of youth. New York: Academic Press.
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., & Costa, F. M. (1998). Protective factors in adolescent health behavior.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 788-800.
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Q., Zhang, H., & Wang, C. (2003). Adolescent
problem behavior in China and the United States: A cross-national study of psychosocial
protective factors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13(3), 329-360.
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the
Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings 2008. (NIH
Publication No. 09-7401). from http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs.html
Jordan, L. C., & Lewis, M. L. (2005). Paternal relationship quality as a protective factor. Journal
of Black Psychology., 31(152-171).
Kandel, D. B. (2002). Examining the Gateway Hypothesis: Stages and pathways of drug
involvement. In Stages and pathways of drug involvement: Examining the Gateway
Hypothesis. (pp. 3-15). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kandel, D. B., & Davies, M. (1992). Progression to regular marijuana involvement:
Phenomenology and risk factors for near-daily use. In M. D. Glantz & R. W. Pickens
(Eds.), Vulnerability to Drug Abuse (pp. 211-253). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Kandel, D. B., Raveis, V. H., & Davies, M. (1991). Suicidal ideation in adolescence: Depression,
substance use, and other risk factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20(2), 289-309.
Kandel, D. B., Yamaguchi, K., & Chen, K. (1992). Stages of progression in drug involvement
from adolescence to adulthood: Further evidence for the gateway theory. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol, 53(5), 447-457.
Kilpatrick, D. G., Acierno, R., Saunders, B., Resnick, H. S., Best, C. L., & Schnurr, P. P. (2000).
Risk factors for adolescent substance abuse and dependence: Data from a national
sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(1), 19-30.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K., & Coy, K. C. (1997). Inhibitory control as a contributor to
conscience in childhood: From toddler to early school age. Child Development, 68(2),
263-277.
Kolvin, I., Miller, J. W., Fleeting, M., Kolvin, P. A., & Rutter, M. (1988). Risk/protective factors
for offending with particular reference to deprivation. In Studies of psychosocial risk: The
power of longitudinal data (pp. 77-95). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., & Kessler, R. C. (1997). Coming to terms with the
terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54(4), 337-343.
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2002).
Etiologic connections among substance dependence, antisocial behavior and personality:
Modeling the externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111(3), 411-424.
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., McGue, M., et al.
(2009). Etiologic connections among substance dependence, antisocial behavior, and
personality: Modeling the externalizing spectrum. In Addictive behaviors: New readings
on etiology, prevention, and treatment. (pp. 59-88). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking
antisocial behavior, substance use, and personality: An integrative quantitative model of
the adult externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116(4), 645-666.
Kuperman, S., Schlosser, S. S., Kramer, J. R., Bucholz, K., Hesselbrock, V., Reich, T., et al.
(2001). Developmental sequence from disruptive behavior diagnosis to adolescent
alcohol dependence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158(12), 2022-2026.
Labouvie, E. W., & McGee, C. R. (1986). Relation of personality to alcohol and drug use in
adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54(3), 289-293.
Leigh, B. C., & Stall, R. (1993). Substance use and risky sexual behavior for exposure to HIV:
Issues in methodology, interpretation, and prevention. American Psychologist, 48(10),
1035-1045.
Li, X., Stanton, B., & Feigelman, S. (2000). Impact of perceived parental monitoring on
adolescent risk behavior over 4 years. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(1), 49-56.
Lindberg, L. D., Boggess, S., & Williams, W. (2000). Multiple threats: The co-occurrence of
teen health risk behaviors.: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
Lipsey, M. W., & Derzon, J. H. (1998). Predictors of violent or serious delinquency in
adolescence and early adulthood: A synthesis of longitudinal research. In R. Loeber & D.
P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful
interventions (pp. 86-105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Loeber, R., & Schmaling, K. B. (1985). Empirical evidence for overt and covert patterns of
antisocial conduct problems: A metaanalysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology: An
official publication of the International Society for Research in Child and Adolescent
Psychopathology, 13(2), 337-353.
Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M. S., Van Kammen, W., & Farrington, D. P. (1991). Initiation,
escalation, and desistance in juvenile offending and their correlates. Journal of Criminal
Law and Criminology, 82, 36-82.
Lonczak, H. S., Abbott, R. D., Hawkins, J. D., Kosterman, R., & Catalano, R. F. (2002). Effects
of the Seattle Social Development Project on sexual behavior, pregnancy, birth, and
sexually transmitted disease outcomes by age 21 years. Archives of Pediatrics and
Adolescent Medicine, 156(5), 438-447.
Lytle, L. A., Kelder, S. H., Perry, C. L., & Klepp, K.-I. (1995). Covariance of adolescent health
behaviors: The Class of 1989 study. Health Education Research, 10(2), 133-146.
Ma, H., Unger, J. B., Chou, C.-P., Sun, P., Palmer, P. H., Zhou, Y., et al. (2008). Risk factors for
adolescent smoking in urban and rural China: Findings from the China seven cities study.
Addictive Behaviors, 33(8), 1081-1085.
Mason, W. A., Hitchings, J. E., & Spoth, R. L. (2007). Emergence of delinquency and depressed
mood throughout adolescence as predictors of late adolescent problem substance use.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21(1), 13-24.
Masten, A. S., Roisman, G. I., Long, J. D., Burt, K. B., Obradovic, J., Riley, J. R., et al. (2005).
Developmental cascades: Linking academic achievement and externalizing and
internalizing symptoms over 20 years. Developmental Psychology, 41(5), 733-746.
McCord, J. (1990). Crime in moral and social contexts-The American Society of Criminology
1989 Presidential address. Criminology, 28(1), 1-26.
McDermott, D. (1984). The relationship of parental drug use and parents' attitude concerning
adolescent drug use to adolescent drug use. Adolescence, 19(73), 89-97.
McGee, L., & Newcomb, M. D. (1992). General deviance syndrome: Expanded hierarchical
evaluations at four ages from early adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Consulting &
Measelle, J. R., Stice, E., & Hogansen, J. M. (2006). Developmental trajectories of co-occurring
depressive, eating, antisocial, and substance abuse problems in female adolescents.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(3), 524-538.
Menard, S., & Huizinga, D. (1994). Changes in conventional attitudes and delinquent behavior in
adolescence. Youth & Society, 26(1), 23-53.
Metzler, C. W., Noell, J., Biglan, A., & Ary, D. (1994). The social context for risky sexual
behavior among adolescents. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 17(4), 419-438.
Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A
developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674-701.
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Harrington, H., & Milne, B. J. (2002). Males on the life-course-
persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years.
Development and Psychopathology, 14(1), 179-207.
Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2009). Affiliation with antisocial peers,
susceptibility to peer influence, and antisocial behavior during the transition to adulthood.
Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. P. (2009). Trajectories of antisocial
behavior and psychosocial maturity from adolescence to young adulthood.
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2009). Preventing mental, emotional, and
behavioral disorders among young people: Progress and possibilities. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press.
Nelson, C. B., & Wittchen, H. U. (1998). DSM-IV alcohol disorders in a general population
sample of adolescents and young adults. Addiction, 93(7), 1065-1077.
Newcomb, M. D. (1995). Identifying high-risk youth: Prevalence and patterns of adolescent drug
abuse. In E. Rahdert, D. Czechowicz & I. Amsel (Eds.), Adolescent drug abuse: Clinical
assessment and therapeutic intervention (pp. 7-38). Rockville, MD: National Institute on
Drug Abuse.
Newcomb, M. D., Abbott, R. D., Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, J. D., Battin-Pearson, S., & Hill, K.
(2002). Mediational and deviance theories of late high school failure: Process roles of
structural strains, academic competence, and general versus specific problem behavior.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49(2), 172-186.
Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1988). Consequences of adolescent drug use: Impact on the
lives of young adults. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Newcomb, M. D., & Felix-Ortiz, M. (1992). Multiple protective and risk factors for drug use and
abuse: Cross-sectional and prospective findings. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63(2), 280-296.
Newcomb, M. D., Maddahian, E., & Bentler, P. M. (1986). Risk factors for drug use among
adolescents: concurrent and longitudinal analyses. American Journal of Public Health,
76, 525-531.
Newcomb, M. D., Maddahian, E., Skager, R., & Bentler, P. M. (1987). Substance abuse and
psychosocial risk factors among teenagers: Associations with sex, age, ethnicity, and type
of school. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 13(4), 413-433.
Olds, D., Hill, P., Mihalic, S., & O'Brien, R. (Eds.). (1998). Nurse-Family Partnership:
Blueprints for Violence Prevention, Book Seven. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and
Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.
Osgood, D. W., Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (1988). The generality of
deviance in late adolescence and early adulthood. American Sociological Review, 53(1),
81-93.
Oxford, M. L., Harachi, T. W., Catalano, R. F., & Abbott, R. D. (2001). Preadolescent predictors
of substance initiation: A test of both the direct and mediated effect of family social
control factors on deviant peer associations and substance initiation. American Journal of
Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 27(4), 599-616.
Ozer, E. M., Macdonald, T., Irwin, C. E., Jr., Mortimer, J. T., & Larson, R. W. (2002).
Adolescent health care in the United States: Implications and projections for the new
millennium. In The changing adolescent experience: Societal trends and the transition to
adulthood (pp. 129-174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Patterson, G. R., Capaldi, D. M., & Bank, L. (1991). An early starter model for predicting
delinquency. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of
childhood aggression (pp. 139-168). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Patterson, G. R., & Yoerger, K. (1997). A developmental model for late-onset delinquency. In D.
W. Osgood (Ed.), Motivation and Delinquency. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation
(Vol. 44, pp. 119 177). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Paul, C., Fitzjohn, J., Herbison, P., & Dickson, N. (2000). The determinants of sexual intercourse
before age 16. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(2), 136-147.
Penning, M., & Barnes, G. E. (1982). Adolescent marijuana use: A review. International Journal
of the Addictions, 17(5), 749-791.
Peterson, P. L., Hawkins, J. D., Abbott, R. D., & Catalano, R. F. (1994). Disentangling the
effects of parental drinking, family management, and parental alcohol norms on current
drinking by Black and White adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4(2),
203-227.
Petraitis, J., Flay, B. R., & Miller, T. Q. (1995). Reviewing theories of adolescent substance use:
Organizing pieces in the puzzle. Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 67-86.
Petridou, E., Zavitsanos, X., Dessypris, N., Frangakis, C., Mandyla, M., Doxiadis, S., et al.
(1997). Adolescents in high-risk trajectory: Clustering of risky behaviors and the origins
of socioeconomic health differentials.. Preventive Medicine, 26, 215-219.
Piquero, A. R. (Ed.). (2008). Taking stock of developmental trajectories of criminal activity over
the life course. New York: Springer.
Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., & Blumstein, A. (2003). The criminal career paradigm. Crime
and Justice, 30, 359-506.
Pitkänen, T., Kokko, K., Lyyra, A.-L., & Pulkkinen, L. (2008). A developmental approach to
alcohol drinking behaviour in adulthood: A follow-up study from age 8 to age 42.
Addiction, 103, 48-68.
Pollard, J. A., Hawkins, J. D., & Arthur, M. W. (1999). Risk and protection: Are both necessary
to understand diverse behavioral outcomes in adolescence? Social Work Research, 23(3),
145-158.
Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., et al.
(1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal
Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(10), 823-
832.
Resnicow, K., Ross-Gaddy, D., & Vaughan, R. D. (1995). Structure of problem and positive
behaviors in African American youths. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
63(4), 594-603.
Reyna, V. F., & Farley, F. (2006). Risk and Rationality in Adolescent Decision Making:
Implications for Theory, Practice, and Public Policy. Psychological Science in the Public
Interest, 7(1), 1-44.
Robins, L. N., & Ratcliff, K. S. (1979). Risk factors in the continuation of childhood antisocial
behavior into adulthood. International Journal of Mental Health., 7(3-4), 96-116.
Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient,
overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 157-171.
Robinson, L. A., Klesges, R. C., Zbikowski, S. M., & Glaser, R. (1997). Predictors of risk for
different stages of adolescent smoking in a biracial sample. Journal of Consulting and
Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children's responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W.
Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology: Vol. 3. Social
competence in children (pp. 49-74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
Sale, E., Sambrano, S., Springer, J. F., PeÃ±a, C., Pan, W., & Kasim, R. (2005). Family
Protection and Prevention of Alcohol Use Among Hispanic Youth at High Risk.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(3), 195-205.
Sameroff, A. J., Bartko, W. T., Baldwin, A., Baldwin, C., & Seifer, R. (1998). Family and social
influences on the development of child competence. In M. Lewis & C. Feiring (Eds.),
Families, risk, and competence (pp. 161 185). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-
disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774-802.
Santelli, J. S., Lowry, R., Brener, N. D., & Robin, L. (2000). The association of sexual behaviors
with socioeconomic status, family structure and race/ethnicity among US adolescents.
American Journal of Public Health, 90(1582-1588).
Schulenberg, J., Wadsworth, K. N., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Johnston, L. D., Marlatt,
G. A., et al. (1996). Adolescent risk factors for binge drinking during the transition to
young adulthood: Variable- and pattern-centered approaches to change. In Addictive
behaviors: Readings on etiology, prevention, and treatment. (pp. 129-165). Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.
Scott, E. S., Reppucci, N. D., & Woolard, J. L. (1995). Evaluating adolescent decision making in
legal contexts. Law and Human Behavior, 19(3), 221-244.
Shaw, C., & McKay, H. (1969). Juvenile delinquency and urban area. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Smith, G. M., & Fogg, C. P. (1978). Psychological predictors of early use, late use, and nonuse
of marihuana among teenage students. In D. B. Kandel (Ed.), Longitudinal research on
drug use: Empirical findings and methodological issues (pp. 101-113). Washington; New
York: Hemisphere Pub. Corp.; Halsted Press.
Spingarn, R., & DuRant, R. (1996). Male adolescents involved in pregnancy: Associated health
risk and problem behaviors. Pediatrics, 11(4), 351-374.
Steinberg, L., Albert, D., Cauffman, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2008). Age
differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior and self-report:
Evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology, 44(6), 1764-1778.
Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (1996). Maturity of judgment in adolescence: Psychosocial factors
in adolescent decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 20(3), 249-272.
Steinberg, L., & Monahan, K. C. (2007). Age differences in resistance to peer influence.
Sundet, J. M., Magnus, P., Kvalem, I. L., Broonesby, J. K., & Bakkenteig, L. S. (1989). Number
of sexual partners and use of condoms in the heterosexual population of Norway -
relevance to HIV-infection. Health Policy, 13(2), 159-167.
Tremblay, R. E., Masse, L. C., Pagani, L., Vitaro, F., Peters, R. D., & McMahon, R. J. (1996).
From childhood physical aggression to adolescent maladjustment: The Montreal
prevention experiment. In Preventing childhood disorders, substance abuse, and
delinquency (pp. 268-298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to
adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
White, H. R. (1990). The drug use-delinquency connection in adolescence. In R. A. Weisheit
(Ed.), Drugs, crime and the criminal justice system. Academy of Criminal Justice
Sciences monograph series (pp. 215-256). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
White, H. R., Pandina, R. J., & LaGrange, R. L. (1987). Longitudinal predictors of serious
substance use and delinquency. Criminology, 25(3), 715-739.
Willoughby, T., Chalmers, H., & Busseri, M. A. (2004). Where Is the Syndrome? Examining
Co-Occurrence Among Multiple Problem Behaviors in Adolescence. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(6), 1022-1037.
Wilson, J. Q., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1985). Crime and human nature. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Windle, M. (1990). A longitudinal study of antisocial behaviors in early adolescence as
predictors of late adolescent substance use: Gender and ethnic group differences. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 99(1), 86-91.
Windle, M., & Wiesner, M. (2004). Trajectories of marijuana use from adolescence to young
adulthood: Predictors and outcomes. Development and Psychopathology, 16(4), 1007-
1027.
Winsler, A., Diaz, R. M., Atencio, D. J., McCarthy, E. M., & Adams Chabay, L. (2000). Verbal
self-regulation over time in preschool children at risk for attention and behavior
problems. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(7), 875-886.
Wu, L. L., & Thomson, E. (2001). Race differences in family experience and early sexual
initiation: Dynamic models of family structure and family change. Journal of Marriage
& the Family, 63(3), 682-696.
Yamaguchi, K., & Kandel, D. (1987). Drug use and other determinants of premarital pregnancy
and its outcome: A dynamic analysis of competing life events. Journal of Marriage & the
Family, 49(2), 257-270.
Zabin, L. S., Hardy, J. B., Smith, E. A., & Hirsch, M. B. (1986). Substance use and its relation to
sexual activity among inner-city adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 7(5),
320-331.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Schmeelk-Cone, K. H. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of adolescent
substance use and school motivation among African American youth. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 13(2), 185-210.
Zucker, R. A. (1994). Pathways to alcohol problems and alcoholism: A developmental account
of the evidence for multiple alcoholism and for contextual contributions to risk. In R.
Zucker, G. Boyd & J. Howard (Eds.), The development of alcohol problems: Exploring
the biopsychosocial matrix of risk. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
Research Monograph No. 26 (pp. 255-289). Rockville, MD: National Institute on
Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Zucker, R. A., & Harford, T. C. (1983). National study of the demography of adolescent drinking
practices in 1980. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 44(6), 974-985.
Suggested citation: Hawkins, D. and Monahan, K. 2009. Covariance of problem behaviors in

adolescence. Paper presented at IOM Committee on the Science of Adolescence Workshop,
Washington, DC.

Escuela y Delincuencia5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Escuela y Delincuencia5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Escuela y Delincuencia5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem Behavior in Adolescence 1

Covariance of Problem Behaviors in Adolescence

Social Development Research Group

School of Social Work

The National Academies of Science

Substance Abuse Prevention.

Covariance of Problem Behaviors in Adolescence

Adolescents engage in a number of problem behaviors, including reckless driving,

pregnancies are unplanned (Henshaw, 1998).

The widespread prevalence of problem behaviors during adolescence is troubling because

including failure to complete high school, underemployment, incarceration, long-term substance

navigate adolescence without negative consequences of problem behaviors, problem behaviors

behaviors represent a syndrome of “problem behaviors” (Jessor & Jessor, 1977).

This paper provides an illustrative review of research on covariation in problem

of adolescent problem behaviors.

Covariance of Problem Behaviors

indicators of a syndrome of adolescent problem behavior indicative of a more general lifestyle

Kosterman, Catalano, & Hawkins, 2001).

strong correlation between various types of problem behavior in adolescence.

In Jessor’s original conception of problem behavior syndrome theory, all problem

behaviors were proposed to be manifestations of a single underlying first-order trait or factor. To

problem behavior syndrome.

behavior) to other health-related behaviors. Problem behaviors including delinquency and

Measelle, Stice, & Hogansen, 2006).

Although a preponderance of evidence suggests that problem behaviors such as

number of sexual partners) are components a general syndrome of problem behavior in

perfectly related to other types of problem behaviors.

Covariance of Problem Behavior Across Development

Involvement in different types of problem behavior increases throughout adolescence, but

involvement in delinquent behavior, on average, increases in early adolescence, peaks around

over the course of adolescence.

adolescence, and as youth enter adulthood, begins to weaken. In a series of studies on a

(Donovan, Jessor, & Costa, 1988).

or later developmental periods.

academic problems can be both a consequence of and a contributor to externalizing problems.

not attributable to effects of IQ, parenting quality, or socioeconomic characteristics (Masten et

Another example of a model of the progression of problem behaviors during adolescence

adolescents engage in problem behaviors in a developmental sequence, with young people

found in the relation between delinquency and substance use initiation.

throughout adolescence for males (Mason, Hitchings, & Spoth, 2007).

active adolescents, problem behaviors such as delinquency predicted nonuse of condoms

violence (Hawkins et al., 1998).

of developmentally appropriate indexes of problem behavior is that it becomes difficult to

stronger covariation of problem behaviors during adolescence than at other developmental

periods reflects the limitations of measuring problem behaviors across development.

sexual behavior declines in young adulthood as youths establish monogamous relationships

are most prevalent.

According to Jessor’s theory of problem behavior, the underlying cause of externalizing

problems during adolescence is unconventionality – both in a youth’s personality or

unconventional individuals in unconventional environments are more likely to engage in a wide

& Anderssen, 1997; Jessor, 1987b; Spingarn & DuRant, 1996).

Institute of Medicine, 2009). Protective factors predict a decreased likelihood of problem

mechanisms can be identified. The identification of causal or etiological mechanisms requires

and Institute of Medicine, 2009).

differences in self-reported familial parenting practices such as monitoring of children during

prevent multiple types of problem behaviors.

Common vs. Specific Risk Factors

each is related to problem behavior.

disorders along the externalizing spectrum is a genetically mediated, trait-like vulnerability to

Impulsivity is a generalized risk factor for educational underachievement, delinquent behavior,