The Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology ... · Myths – or Not A remarkably understudied assumption, with few randomized tests of whether boosters promote long-term

The Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (SCCAP):

Initiative for Dissemination of Evidence-based Treatments for Childhood and Adolescent Mental

Health Problems

With additional support from Florida International University and The Children’s Trust.

Keynote Evidence-based School-based Violence and Prevention Programs

John E. Lochman, Ph.D., ABPP Professor and Doddridge Saxon Chair of Clinical Psychology

The University of Alabama

Topics

Prevention and treatment

Evidence-based programs

Typical elements of cognitive behavioral preventive

interventions

Myths or not

What do school-based interventions

address? – The IOM Continuum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK32789/figure/ch3.f1/?report=objectonly

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK32789/figure/ch3.f1/?report=objectonly

Evidence-based prevention and

treatment interventions

Three Developmental Periods

Preschool and Early Childhood

Later Childhood

Early Adolescence

Evidence-based prevention and treatment

interventions in preschool and early childhood

Universal prevention programs

Good Behavior Game (Embry, 2002)

Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (Greenberg & Kusche, 1996)

LIFT program (Reid & Eddy, 2002; Eddy et al, 2003)

Second Step Program (Grossman et al, 1997; Taub, 2001)



Treatment and targeted prevention programs

Incredible Years multicomponent program, with child and teacher

training (Dinosaur School) and 12-20 parent training sessions (Webster-Stratton & Hammond, 1997; Webster-Stratton, 1998; Reid et al, 2007)

Triple P (Positive Parenting Program) is a 5-tier intervention that

includes (1) media-based parent information, (2) 1-2 session parent training, (3) 4 session behavioral training for moderate problems, (4) 12 session behavioral training for more severe problems, and (5) 11 tailored sessions that includes a focus on parental dysfunction

Montreal Delinquency Prevention Program (Tremblay et

al, 1996) was a multicomponent program for 2nd and 3rd graders, including parent training and social skills and self control training for children



Treatment and targeted prevention programs (continued)

Fast Track (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999, 2002, 2004,

2010) is a comprehensive preventive intervention that

included classroom-level PATHS lessons, parent training,

friendship groups and tutoring for at-risk kindergarten-age

children - from 1st through 10th grades

Family Check-UP (Shaw et al, 2006) is a 3 session

intervention based on motivational interviewing techniques

Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) (Brinkmeyer & Eyberg, 2003; Nixon et al, 2003) is a highly individualized

12-16 session intervention,


interventions in later childhood


Seattle Social Development Project (Hawkins et al, 1999;

Lonczak et al, 2001) - behavior management training for teachers, parent training, child social skill training

Bullying Prevention Program (Olweus, 1993; Berryhill &

Prinz, 2003) - reduce acceptance by school staff of bullying

Positive Behavior Supports (Sugai & Horner, 2002; Todd et al,

2002) - Workshops for teachers and students, outlining positive behavioral expectations


interventions in later childhood


Problem Solving Skills Training & Parent

Management Training (Kazdin et al, 1987; 1989; 1992)

Anger Coping, and Coping Power, Programs (Lochman, 1992; Lochman & Wells, 2002, 2003, 2004; Lochman et al, 2009)


interventions in early adolescence


Life Skills Training (Botvin & Griffin, 2004)

Responding in Peaceful and Positive Ways (Farrell

et al, 2001)

School Transitional Environment Project (Felner et

al, 2001)

Positive Youth Development (Caplan et al, 1992) -

Sessions in 6th and 7th grades address stress management,

problem solving and assertiveness, social networks, and

substance and health information


interventions in early adolescence


The Art of Self-Control (Feindler & Ecton, 1986)

Other intensive, effective, multicomponent

programs are Multisystemic Therapy (Henggler &

Lee, 2003) and Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (Chamberlain & Smith, 2003) - are not based in schools, but typically can include therapists’ direct contact with schools

Typical elements of school-based

prevention programs for children with

conduct problems



conduct problems School-based interventions address reciprocal relations between

children’s cognitions, emotions and behavior

To address these reciprocal processes, intervention’s have both

behavioral elements (using basic behavioral principles, focusing on the

influence of external contingencies) and cognitive elements (internal

information-processing)

Certain common elements exist in many school-based programs

for children with aggressive and conduct problem behavior



conduct problems (cont.)

Goal Setting

Children identify long-term and short-term goals for

themselves in their home and school settings

short-term goals are typically “prosocial opposites” of problem

behaviors, and lead to monitoring and reinforcement

Research has indicated that a goal-setting component in a CBI

program can help to generalize behavioral change into school

and home settings

Likely leads children to focus more on the consequences of

their daily behaviors




Organizational and study skills, which are important for the

concomitant academic problems that aggressive children have

Children identify useful and not-useful study skills, and then

plan to use the useful ones when completing homework and

long-term projects at school

Children and parents jointly create a homework contract which

specifies when and where homework will be done, and how

parents will monitor homework completion and provide

contingent rewards for home work completion




Awareness of emotions, especially anger, and of associated

physiological arousal

Children increase their accuracy in identifying emotions in others

There is an initial focus on a wide range of emotions children experience,

including emotions that they perceive as making them vulnerable

(sadness, anxiety), and which they may not recognize in themselves

There is focused attention on the cognitive (ruminative “angry thoughts”)

and physiological correlates of anger

Using aids such as anger thermometers, children learn to identify different

levels of anger that they experience, and they identify “triggers” that lead

to each level of anger




Anger management and self-regulation Attention to anger awareness leads into a focus on how children can better manage their

arousal

Children are taught a set of coping methods that they can use when anger-aroused, and

which can aid then in recovering more quickly from an aroused state

The self-regulation methods typically include use of distraction techniques, relaxation

training (e.g. abdominal breathing, or progressive relaxation), and use of coping

internalized self-statements

The coping self statements are meant to lead into more deliberative processing of

possible solutions to the social problem that is experienced

Typically a series of graded exposure activities are used to assist children in practicing

their self-regulation skills first in indirect ways (e.g. through puppet role-plays) and then

in direct person-to-person role-plays




Perspective-taking and attribution retraining Before children can accurately perceive the problem situations they face, they must

develop an ability to accurately perceive others’ perspectives and intentions

After a set of fun game-like tasks that illustrate how a single stimulus can be perceived in

quite different ways, children can engage in role-play tasks where different people’s

different perceptions of events and of others’ intentions are explored

Although the focus is primarily often on children’s perceptions of their peer interactions,

clinicians can also focus on adult-child interactions if warranted

The primary focus is on retraining the hostile attribution bias evident in reactive

aggressive children, encouraging them to experience that it is sometimes hard to tell

what others intend in problematic situations (rather than erroneously assuming hostile

intentions in ambiguous situations)




Social problem-solving skills Along with anger management, problem solving skill training is the most common CBI

technique used with aggressive children

Children learn a step-wise approach to thinking about problem resolution, typically

including steps for problem identification, generation of choices or solutions to resolve

the problem, consideration of consequences for each solution, and a method for making

a decision about which choice to enact

Problem solving can be more successful when a positive goal to be achieved is identified,

and when the child initially tries to resolve problems which trigger low to moderate

levels of anger

Brainstorming about consequences (perceived as positive and negative; short and long

term) is likely one of the most important aspects of the problem-solving process

A series of activities is again used, ranging from discussion, to game-like tasks, to role-

playing, to video or audio recording an enactment of the problem solving process




Social skills, dealing with peer pressure, and involvement in

less-deviant peer groups

Because of the associated social skills deficits of many (but not all)

aggressive children, training in social skills with peers is often an element

of CBI

As children get closer to adolescence, there is often a focus on handling

developmentally-appropriate risks, such as peer pressure to engage in

antisocial behavior

CBI can explicitly focus on children’s current involvement in potentially

deviant peer groups, and can address how to move to other peer groups

that are somewhat less risky

Myths – or Not

Myths – or Not Multicomponent interventions are more useful than

simpler single component intervention

Booster sessions are necessary

Interventions have differing effectiveness in neighborhoods that vary socioeconomically

Group interventions with aggressive children are iatrogenic

Parent engagement in preventive intervention is only a function of parent characteristics

A good workshop is sufficient training for school staff to implement prevention programs

The characteristics of schools and school staff affect the implementation of programs

Myths – or Not

Multicomponent interventions are more useful

than simpler single component interventions

Multicomponent interventions

Overall, multicomponent intervention programs that

involve child and parent components have stronger

outcomes than do single components for children and for

parents

There are few universal prevention multicomponent

programs that have been to be effective, although the

LIFT program is an exception

Effect Sizes of Contrasts of Coping Power with

Control Cell: Outcomes at 1 Year Follow-up

Lochman & Wells (2004), Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 571-578

CP Child Component

Only

versus Control

CP Child + Parent

Components

versus Control

Delinquency - .37*

Substance Use (Parent-

rated) - .66*

School Behavioral

Improvement .42* .34*

So, myth or not?

Not a myth for important outcomes in the

community

BUT IS a myth for school-based behavioral

problems; child-only preventive interventions

can be as effective as multicomponent

intervention

Myths – or Not

Booster sessions are necessary

Myths – or Not

A remarkably understudied assumption, with few randomized tests of whether boosters promote long-term maintenance or produce long-term preventive effects, as assumed

Have been positive effects of a brief booster to the Anger Coping program in maintaining observed classroom disruptive off-task behaviors at a 3 year follow-up (Lochman,

1992), and of a booster for a family-focused prevention program on child aggression at a 1 year follow-up (Tolan et al, 2009)

However, boosters have not produced additional effects in a treatment for adults with impulse-control problems (Hodgins

et al, 2009) nor for a classroom social problem solving program to reduce aggression (Daunic et al, 2006)

Brief Coping Power – Growth Curve Analyses

Time 1-5 – on Teachers’ BASC Ratings of

Externalizing Behavior Problems

Coping Power delivered during 5th grade (24 child sessions, 10 parent sessions)

CP Booster – monthly individual sessions in grade 6

CP-Only:60: CP-Booster:60; Control:120

COEFFICIENT p VALUE

CP-Only vs

Control

-2.79 .016

CP-Booster vs

Control

-1.28 ns

Teacher BASC Externalizing

Ratings by Condition

27.61

31.44

35.26

39.09

42.92

Teacher Rating Externalizing Composite

0 0.97 1.93 2.90 3.87

Year

Control

CP only

CP-Booster

So, myth or not?

Not a myth for preventive family interventions

BUT may be a myth for school-based

interventions

Myths – or Not

Interventions are most effective in higher

socoieconomic neighborhoods

Neighborhood Effects Exposure to neighborhood problems increases children’s

aggressive behaviors (Colder, Mott, Levy & Flay, 2000; Guerra, Huesmann &

Spindler, 2003), with heightened effects during middle childhood (Ingoldsby & Shaw, 2002).

Neighborhood problems contribute to poor parenting

(Pinderhughes, Nix, Foster, Jones & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2001),

although the neighborhood effects continue to add to the

effects of poor parenting on children’s aggressive behaviors (Greenberg, Lengua, Coie, Pinderhughes & CPPRG, 1999; Schwab-Stone et al, 1995)

In addition to these direct and mediated effects, community

contextual factors may influence the ability of preventive

interventions to affect later parenting processes and

children’s behavior

TOCA Aggression: Coping Power and

Neighborhood Disadvantage (Lochman et al, 2007, SRCD)

Level 2 Time Slope

TRT,G110

TRT,G210

Level 3

Neighborhood Intercept, G001

Neigh X Time Slope, G101

Neigh X TRT X Time, G111

Neigh X SQTime, G201

Neigh X TRT X SQTime, G211

ns (sig w/out neigh

predictors)

ns

.207418 (.001***)

ns

ns

-.015370 (.05*)

.035886 (.03*)

TOCA Aggression: Coping Power X

Neighborhood Disadvantage

-2.81 -1.64 -0.47 0.71 1.88 3.05

TOCABEH*YEAR*CP*CONDIS

CT

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

A

G

G

C

O

N

_

C

CPOWER = 0.000000

CONDIS2 = -0.530310

CPOWER = 0.000000

CONDIS2 = 0.755966

CPOWER = 1.000000

CONDIS2 = -0.530310

CPOWER = 1.000000

CONDIS2 = 0.755966

Conclusion

Neighborhood disadvantage, as measured by census data, have an effect on the Rx X Time Slope:

on children’s aggressive behavior, with intervention children and parents in the better neighborhoods showing most improvement

So, myth or not?

NOT a myth - Is support for the assumption

that school-based interventions fare better

with children from higher SES neighborhoods

through a 3 year follow-up

Myths – or Not

Group interventions with aggressive children

are iatrogenic

Group Formats Although overall Coping Power program effects have

significantly reduced children’s problem behavior, it is

plausible that the degree of positive effects may be reduced

or truncated to some degree by deviant peer effects and

other behavioral management problems with groups of

children.

– The steepest growth of substance use occurs among adolescents

with drug-using peers (Chassin et al., 1996; Curran et al., 1997).

– Similarly, aggressive children within classrooms with high rates of

other aggressive children are more likely to increase their aggression

during that academic year (Barth et al., 2004).

Intervention Research on

Deviant Group Effects

By a 1-year follow-up, Dishion and Andrews (1995) found that

youth who had received youth ATP sessions had higher rates

of tobacco use and of teacher-rated delinquent behaviors

than did the control children, and these iatrogenic effects

were evident even if the parents had also received

intervention in the combined condition.

– At a 3-year follow-up, the teen intervention conditions continued to

have more tobacco use and delinquency (Poulin et al., 2001).

– Analyses of the iatrogenic group conditions revealed that subtle

dynamics of deviancy training during unstructured transitions in the

groups predicted growth in self reported smoking and teacher ratings

of delinquency (Dishion et al., 2001).

Pilot Study of Individual vs Group

format for Coping Power

11 schools randomly assigned to either the ICP (individually

delivered Coping Power) or GCP (group delivered Coping

Power) condition (ICP: 30; GCP: 30)

abbreviated CP intervention: 24 child sessions and 10

parent sessions during the 4th grade year

Assessments: T1, T2 (after 5 sessions), T3 (post; 98%

retention)

Baseline-Post (T1-T3) Dominance/Revenge Social Goals – ICP vs GCP contrast

Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p= 01**

OJ J DP Sa ml p e I CP v s GCP

Co n d i t i o n Gr o u p - CP I n d i v i d u a l - CP

L Sme a n _ SGCc o mp

- 1 . 2 0 0 0

- 1 . 1 0 0 0

- 1 . 0 0 0 0

- 0 . 9 0 0 0

- 0 . 8 0 0 0

- 0 . 7 0 0 0

- 0 . 6 0 0 0

- 0 . 5 0 0 0

- 0 . 4 0 0 0

- 0 . 3 0 0 0

- 0 . 2 0 0 0

- 0 . 1 0 0 0

0

0 . 1 0 0 0

0 . 2 0 0 0

Ti me Po i n t

1 2 3

Baseline-Post (T1-T3) Self-Dysregulation – ICP vs GCP contrast

Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p=.03*



L Sme a n _ To t ADI

1 . 1 7 0 0

1 . 1 8 0 0

1 . 1 9 0 0

1 . 2 0 0 0

1 . 2 1 0 0

1 . 2 2 0 0

1 . 2 3 0 0

1 . 2 4 0 0

1 . 2 5 0 0

1 . 2 6 0 0

1 . 2 7 0 0

1 . 2 8 0 0

1 . 2 9 0 0

1 . 3 0 0 0

1 . 3 1 0 0

1 . 3 2 0 0

1 . 3 3 0 0

1 . 3 4 0 0

1 . 3 5 0 0

1 . 3 6 0 0

1 . 3 7 0 0

1 . 3 8 0 0

1 . 3 9 0 0

Ti me Po i n t

1 2 3

Baseline-Post (T1-T3) parent-rated BASC Conduct Problems – ICP vs GCP contrast

Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p=.008*



L Sme a n _ CPp a r e n t

4 . 0 0 0 0

5 . 0 0 0 0

6 . 0 0 0 0

7 . 0 0 0 0

Ti me Po i n t

1 2 3

Conclusion

Individual format (ICP) is more effective than Group

Format (GCP) in reducing parent-rated children’s

conduct problems

GCP was more effective than ICP in reducing

children’s dominance/revenge-oriented social goals

and in improving their self-regulation

Thus, group and individual delivery of programs

may affect different types of outcomes

So, myth or not?

NOT a myth for child behavior outcome – an

individually delivered intervention did better

than a group intervention

HOWEVER, other outcomes are better with a

group format than with an individual format,

so mixed…..

Myths – or Not

Parent engagement in preventive intervention

is only a function of parent characteristics

Parenting Practices Mediate Effect of Family Context

on Parent Attendance at CP Parent Sessions Ryan, Boxmeyer & Lochman, Behavioral Disorders, 2009

Maternal

Depression

Contextual

Factors

Community

Support

Community

Problems

SES/Parent

Education

Parenting

Child Social

Goals

Attendance

Dominant

Social Goals

Revenge

Social

Goals

Parent

Attendance

Parental

Monitoring

Positive

Parenting

Parent

Involvement

Enhancing parent engagement:

through parents

Dishion and Kavanagh (2003) have used a 3-

session family check-up to enhance parent

motivation and parent engagement in

intervention

Feedback

Form: Tool

to

communicate

and connect

family

strength and

areas of

concerns.

Action

Planning

Form

combines

goal setting

and MI

strategies.

Enhancing parent engagement:

through children

Lag effects of child engagement and parent

engagement during Coping Power sessions

Parent and Child Engagement Across early, Middle

and Late Intervention Ellis, Lindsey, Barker, Boxmeyer & Lochman, under review

Parent T1 Parent T2 Parent T3

Child T1 Child T2 Child T3

0.59 0.81

0.62 0.47

0.19

0.340.11

Parent

engagement:

attendance

Child

engagement:

attendance,

goal points

earned, group

points earned

So, myth or not?

Parent engagement is affected by parent

characteristics, such as their parenting patterns

However, it is a myth that parenting characteristics

such as motivation can not be changed (e.g. with

the Family Check-up), and that child characteristics,

such as children’s initial engagement in their own

sessions, can not directly affect parent engagement

Myths – or Not

A good basic workshop is sufficient training

for school staff to implement prevention

programs

Coping Power Field Trial in 57 Schools

Lochman, Boxmeyer, Powell, Qu, Wells, & Windle (2009). Journal of

Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Training process for school counselors (randomly assigned to receive Basic Training or Intensive Training):

(1) 3 days of workshop training

(2) Monthly meetings (2 hours) while intervention underway

For CP-IT counselors only:

(3) Individualized feedback on audiotaped sessions

(4) Technical assistance from trainers via telephone and email contacts

CP-Intensive

vs Control

Estimate (SE)

Behavior Problems

BASC Externalizing

(teacher-report) -.41* (.11)

BASC Externalizing

(parent-report) -.23*(.12)

NYS Minor Assault

(child-report) -.25** (.12)

Targeted Processes

BASC Social/Academic

(teacher) .35* (.13)

BASC Social (parent)

Outcome Expectations

(child) -.24* (.08)

APQ Inconsistent Discipline

(parent)

**p<.01, *p<.05,

CP-Intensive vs

Control

Estimate (SE)

CP-Basic

vs Control:

Estimate (SE)

Behavior Problems

BASC Externalizing

(teacher-report) -.41* (.11)

BASC Externalizing

(parent-report) -.23*(.12)

NYS Minor Assault (child-

report) -.25** (.12)

Targeted Processes

BASC Social/Academic

(teacher) .35* (.13) .24+ (.13)

BASC Social (parent)

Outcome Expectations

(child) -.24* (.08)

APQ Inconsistent

Discipline (parent)

**p<.01, *p<.05, +p=.06

Conclusions/Implications for Training

Evidence-based prevention programs such as Coping

Power can be disseminated effectively to counselors in

real-world settings, although:

The intensity of training makes a difference in whether

improvements in children’s outcomes and mediating processes

occur

Ongoing supervisory feedback about program implementation

(particularly to foster client engagement) may be critical to

promoting positive outcomes

So, myth or not?

It is a myth that training intensity will not

influence the implementation of new

prevention programs

Myths – or Not

The characteristics of schools and school staff

affect the implementation of programs

Counselor and School Characteristics

Predicting Program Delivery *p<.05, +p<.10

Lochman, Powell, Boxmeyer, Qu, Wells, & Windle. (2009).

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

Objectives

Completed

Sessions

Scheduled

Agreeableness .086* (.042) .185+ (.103)

Managerial Control -.286+ (.149)

Counselor and School Characteristics

Predicting Counselor Engagement **p<.01, *p<.05

With

Children

With

Parents

Conscientiousness .068* (.032)

Agreeableness .112** (.039)

Managerial Control X Cynicism -.734** (.200)

Autonomy X Cynicism .674** (.173)

Autonomy X Cynicism

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Low Autonomy High Autonomy

En

gagem

ent

wit

h C

hild

ren

Cynicism No

Cynicism Yes

Conclusions About Counselor and

School Characteristics

The GOOD NEWS: It is ok to be neurotic, not particularly

open-minded, not particularly extraverted, and cynical if you

are in the right work environment

Degree and quality of implementation can be influenced by

agreeableness and conscientiousness of counselors and

by characteristics of the school setting which interact with

counselor characteristics (counselor cynicism in interaction

with school autonomy and rigid managerial control)

So, myth or not?

It is not a myth that counselor and school

characteristics can influence the

implementation of new programs

For more information, please go to the main website and browse for workshops on this topic or check out our additional resources.

Additional Resources Online resources: 1. Coping Power website: http://www.rfts.ca/cope/index.html 2. Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology website: http://effective childtherapy.com 3. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: http://www.clemson.edu/olweus/history.htm

Books: 1. Larson J., & Lochman J.E. (2002). Helping Schoolchildren Cope With Anger: A Cognitive Behavioral Intervention. New York: Guilford Press. 2. Murrihy, R.C., Kidman, A.D., & Ollendick, T.H. (2010). The Fast Track Project: Preventing Severe Conduct Problems in School-Age Youth. New York: Springer.

Selected Peer-reviewed Journal Articles: 1. Embry, D. (2002). The good behavior game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 5(4), 273-297. 2. Farrell, A.D., Meyer, A.L., Kung, E.M., & Sullivan, T.N. (2001). Development and evaluation of school-based violence prevention programs. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30 (1), 207-220. 3. Ingoldsby, E.M. & Shaw, D.S. (2002). Neighborhood contextual factors and early-starting antisocial pathways. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5 (1), 21-55. 4. Lochman J.E., Boxmeyer C., Powell N., Qu L., Wells K., & Windle M. (2009) Dissemination of the Coping Power program: Importance of intensity of counselor training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 397–409. 5. Sugai, G., & Horner, R.R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35 (2), 245-259.

Full Reference List Keynote: Evidence-based School-based Violence and Prevention Programs Websites: 1. Coping Power website: http://www.rfts.ca/cope/index.html 2. Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology website: http://effective childtherapy.com 3. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: http://www.clemson.edu/olweus/history.htm Books: Brinkmeyer, M., & Eyberg, S. M. (2003). Parent-child interaction therapy for oppositional

children. In A. E. Kazdin&J. R.Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 204–223). New York: Guilford.

Chamberlain, P., & Smith, D. K. (2003). Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: The Oregon Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care model. In A. E. Kazdin & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 282–300). New York: Guilford Press.

Dishion, T. J., & Kavanagh, K. (2003). Intervening in adolescent problem behavior: A family-centered approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Greenberg, M. T., & Kusché, C. A. (1993). Promoting social and emotional development in deaf children: The PATHS Project. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Henggeler, S. W., & Lee, T. (2003). Multisystemic treatment of serious clinical problems. In A. E. Kazdin & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 301–322). New York: Guilford Press.

Larson J., & Lochman J.E. (2002). Helping Schoolchildren Cope With Anger: A Cognitive Behavioral Intervention. New York: Guilford Press.

Murrihy, R.C., Kidman, A.D., & Ollendick, T.H. (2010). The Fast Track Project: Preventing Severe Conduct Problems in School-Age Youth. New York: Springer.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.

Reid, J. B., & Eddy, J. M. (2002). Preventive efforts during the elementary school years: The linking the interests of families and teachers project. In J. B.Reid, G. R.Patterson, & J.Snyder (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention (pp. 219–233). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Todd, A. W., Lewis-Palmer, T., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Phillips, D. (2002). A guide to understanding and using the SET. Eugene: University of Oregon.

Tremblay, R. E., Mâsse, L. C., Pagani-Kurtz, L., et al (1996). From childhood physical aggression to adolescent maladjustment: the Montreal prevention experiment. In Preventing Childhood Disorders, Substance Abuse, and Delinquency (Eds R. d. V. Peters & R. J. McMahon), pp. 268– 298.Thousand Oaks:Sage.

Peer-reviewed Journal Articles: Barth, J. M., Dunlap, S. T., Dane, H., Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). Classroom environment

influences on aggression, peer relations, and academic focus. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 115–133.

Berryhill, J.C. & Prinz, R.J. (2003). Environmental interventions to enhance student adjustment: Implications for prevention. Prevention Science, 4 (2), 65-87.

Botvin GJ, Griffin KW. (2004). Life skills training: empirical predictions and future directions. Journal of Primary Prevention, 25, 211–32.

Full Reference List Caplan, M., Weissberg, R. P., Grober, J., Sivo, P. J., Grady, K., & Jacoby, C. (1992). Social

competence promotion with inner-city and suburban young adolescents: Effects on social adjustment and alcohol use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 56–63.

Chassin L, Curran PJ, Hussong AM, Colder CR. (1996). The relation of parental alcoholism to adolescent alcohol use: A longitudinal follow-up study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 70–80.

Colder, C.R., Mott, J., Levy, S., & Flay, B. (2000). The relation of perceived neighborhood danger to childhood aggression: A test of mediating mechanisms. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 83–103.

Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Initial impact of the fast track prevention trial for conduct problems II. Classroom effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 648–657.

Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2002). Evaluation of the first three years of the Fast Track Prevention Trial with children at high risk for adolescent conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 19–35.

Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2004). The effects of the Fast Track Program on serious problem outcomes at the end of elementary school. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 650–661.

Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2010). The difficulty of maintaining positive intervention effects: A look at disruptive behavior, deviant peer relations, and social skills during the middle school years. Journal of Early Adolescence, 6, 131–157.

Curran, P., Stice, E, & Chassin, L. (1997). The relation between adolescent alcohol use and peer alcohol use: a longitudinal random coefficients model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 130–40.

Daunic, A. P., Smith, S.W., Brank, E. M., & Penfield, R. D. (2006). Classroom based cognitive–behavioral intervention to prevent aggression: Efficacy and social validity. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 123–139.

Dishion, T. J., & Andrews, D. W. (1995). Preventing escalation in problem behaviors with high-risk young adolescents: Immediate and 1-year outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 538–548.

Dishion, T. J., Poulin, F. & Burraston, B. (2001). Peer group dynamics associated with iatrogenic effect in group interventions with high-risk young adolescents. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 79–92.

Eddy, J.M., Reid, J.B., Stoolmiller, M., & Fetrow, R.A. (2003). Outcomes during middle school for an elementary school-based preventive intervention for conduct problems: Follow-up results from a randomized trial. Behavior Therapy, 34, 535–552.

Embry, D. (2002). The good behavior game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 5(4), 273-297.

Farrell, A.D., Meyer, A.L., Kung, E.M., & Sullivan, T.N. (2001). Development and evaluation of school-based violence prevention programs. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30 (1), 207-220.

Farrell, A. D., Meyer, A. L., & White, K. S. (2001). Evaluation of Responding in Peaceful and Positive ways (RIPP): A school-based prevention program for reducing violence among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 451–463.

Feindler, E. L., Ecton, R. B., Kingsley, D., & Dubey, D.R. (1986). Group anger-control training for institutionalized psychiatric male adolescents. Behavior Therapy, 17, 109–123.

Full Reference List Felner, R. D., Favazza, A., Shim, M., Stephen, B., Gu, K., & Noonan, N. (2001). Whole school

improvement and restructuring as prevention and promotion: Lessons from STEP and the Project on High Performance Learning Communities. Journal of School Psychology, Special Issue: Schooling and Mental Health Issues, 39, 177−202.

Greenberg, M. T., Lengua, L. J., Coie, J., Pinderhughes, E., & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Predicting developmental outcomes at school entry using a multiple-risk model: Four American communities. Developmental Psychology,35, 403–417.

Grossman, D. C., Neckerman, H. J., Koepsell, T. D., Liu, P. Y., & Asher, K. N. (1997). Effectiveness of a violence prevention curriculum among children in elementary school: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1605–1611.

Guerra, N.G., Huesmann, L.R., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development, 74(5), 1561–1576.

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, 226–234.

Hodgins , D. C. Currie , S. R. Currie , G. Fick , G. H. (2009). Randomized trial of brief motivational treatments for pathological gamblers: More is not necessarily better. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 950-960.

Ingoldsby, E.M. & Shaw, D.S. (2002). Neighborhood contextual factors and early-starting antisocial pathways. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5 (1), 21-55.

Kazdin, A. E. (1987). Treatment of antisocial behavior in children: Current status and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 187-203.

Kazdin, A. E., Bass, D., Siegcl, T, & Thomas, C. (1989). Cognitive-behavioral therapy and relationship therapy in the treatment of children referred for antisocial behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 522-535.

Kazdin, A. E., Siegel, T. C., & Bass, D. (1992). Cognitive problem-solving skills training and parent management training in the treatment of antisocial behavior in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 733–747.

Lochman, J. E. (1992). Cognitive-behavioral intervention with aggressive boys: Three-year follow-up and preventive effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 426–432.

Lochman J.E., Boxmeyer C., Powell N., Qu L., Wells K., & Windle M. (2009). Dissemination of the Coping Power program: Importance of intensity of counselor training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 397–409.

Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2002). The Coping Power Program at the middle school transition:

Universal and indicated prevention effects. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, S40–S54.

Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2003). Effectiveness study of Coping Power and classroom intervention with aggressive children: Outcomes at a one-year follow-up. Behavior Therapy, 34, 493–515.

Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). The Coping Power program for preadolescent aggressive boys and their parents: Outcome effects at the one-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 571–578.

Full Reference List Lochman, J. E., Powell, N. P., Boxmeyer, C. L., Qu, L., Wells, K. C., & Windle, M. (2009).

Implementation of a school-based prevention program: Effects of counselor and school characteristics. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 476–482.

Lonczak, H.S., Huang, B., Catalano, R.F., Hawkins, J.D., Hill, K.G., Abbott, R.D., Ryan, J.A.M., & Kosterman, R. (2001) The social predictors of adolescent alcohol misuse: A test of the Social Development Model. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62, 179–189.

Nixon, R. D. V., Sweeney, L., Erickson, D. B., & Touyz, S.W. (2003). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy: A comparison of standard and abbreviated treatments for oppositional defiant preschoolers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 251–260.

Pinderhughes, E. E., Nix, R., Foster, E. M., Jones, D. & The Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2001). Parenting in Context: Impact of Neighborhood Poverty, Residential Stability, Public Services, Social Networks, and Danger on Parental Behaviors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 941–953.

Poulin, F., Dishion, T. J., & Burraston, B. (2001). 3-year iatrogenic effects associated with aggregating highrisk adolescents in cognitive-behavioral preventive interventions. Applied Developmental Science, 5, 214–224.

Reid, M. J., Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (2007). Enhancing a classroom social competence and problem-solving curriculum by offering parent training to families of moderate- to high-risk elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 36, 605–620.

Ryan, S.M., Boxmeyer, C.L., & Lochman, J.E. (2009). Influence of Risk Factors for Child Disruptive Behavior on Parent Attendance at a Preventive Intervention. Behavioral Disorders, 35 (1), 41–52.

Schwab-Stone, M.E., Ayers, T.S., Kasprow, W., Voyce, C., Barone, T. C., Shriver et al. (1995). No safe haven: a study of violence exposure in an urban community. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 1343–1352.

Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Supplee, L., Gardner, F., & Arnds, K. (2006). Randomized trial of a family centered approach to the prevention of early conduct problems: 2-Year effects of the family check-up in early childhood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74, 1–9.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R.H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 23–50.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R.R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35 (2), 245-259.

Taub, J. (2001). Evaluation of the Second Step violence prevention program at a rural elementary school. School Psychology Review, 31, 186–200.

Tolan, P.H., Gorman-Smith, G., Henry, D., & Schoeny, M. (2009). The benefits of booster interventions: Evidence from a family-focused prevention program. Prevention Science, 10 (4), 287-297.

Webster-Stratton, C. (1998). Preventing conduct problems in Head Start children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 715–730.

Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (1997). Treating children with early-onset conduct problems: A comparison of child and parent training interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65 (1), 93-109.

Retrieved from http://www.EffectiveChildTherapy.fiu.edu

Documents

The Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology ... · Myths – or Not A remarkably understudied assumption, with few randomized tests of whether boosters promote long-term