Article

Were the mental health benefits of a housing mobility intervention larger for adolescents in higher socioeconomic status families?

Institute on Urban Health Research, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, 310 International Village, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Health & Place (Impact Factor: 2.44). 05/2013; 23C:79-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.05.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Moving to Opportunity (MTO) was a social experiment to test how relocation to lower poverty neighborhoods influences low-income families. Using adolescent data from 4 to 7 year evaluations (aged 12-19, n=2829), we applied gender-stratified intent-to-treat and adherence-adjusted linear regression models, to test effect modification of MTO intervention effects on adolescent mental health. Low parental education, welfare receipt, unemployment and never-married status were not significant effect modifiers. Tailoring mobility interventions by these characteristics may not be necessary to alter impact on adolescent mental health. Because parental enrollment in school and teen parent status adversely modified MTO intervention effects on youth mental health, post-move services that increase guidance and supervision of adolescents may help support post-move adjustment.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
54 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An overview of recent research on adolescent sexual activity, pregnancy, and parenthood is presented, with a focus on the dearth of knowledge concerning psychological precursors and consequences. Although the rate of teenage childbearing has decreased substantially this century, increasing rates of sexual activity, illegitimacy, and welfare receipt raise public concerns. New research is discussed that suggests that many negative outcomes previously ascribed to mothers' age are as much causes or correlates of teenage pregnancy as effects of it, although this claim is less substantiated regarding effects on children of teenage mothers. Literature on fathers and grandmothers is summarized, and suggestions are made for furthering this research. An overview is given of recent successes among intervention programs, and policy implications of the new federal welfare law are considered for teenage mothers and their children.
    American Psychologist 03/1998; 53(2):152-66. · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The developmental model of adolescent antisocial behavior advanced by Patterson and colleagues (e.g., Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992) appears to generalize the development of a diverse set of problem behaviors. Structural equation modeling methods were applied to 18-month longitudinal data from 523 adolescents. The problem behavior construct included substance use, antisocial behavior, academic failure, and risky sexual behavior. Families with high levels of conflict were less likely to have high levels of parent-child involvement. Such family conditions resulted in less adequate parental monitoring of adolescent behavior, making associations with deviant peers more likely. Poor parental monitoring and associations with deviant peers were strong predictors of engagement in problem behavior. These constructs accounted for 46% of the variance in problem behavior. Although association with deviant peers was the most proximal social influence on problem behavior, parental monitoring and family factors (conflict and involvement) were key parenting practices that influenced this developmental process.
    Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 05/1999; 27(2):141-50. · 3.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article provides a comprehensive review of research on the effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent well-being. The first section reviews key methodological issues. The following section considers links between neighborhood characteristics and child outcomes and suggests the importance of high socioeconomic status (SES) for achievement and low SES and residential instability for behavioral/emotional outcomes. The third section identifies 3 pathways (institutional resources, relationships, and norms/collective efficacy) through which neighborhoods might influence development, and which represent an extension of models identified by C. Jencks and S. Mayer (1990) and R. J. Sampson (1992). The models provide a theoretical base for studying neighborhood mechanisms and specify different levels (individual, family, school, peer, community) at which processes may operate. Implications for an emerging developmental framework for research on neighborhoods are discussed.
    Psychological Bulletin 04/2000; 126(2):309-37. · 14.39 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
31 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014