For many years there was little scientific evidence that violence prevention strategies were effective. Indeed, researchers found that many ill-conceived approaches to juvenile delinquency were ineffective, leading to the cynical conclusion that "nothing works." Such a pessimistic view is no longer tenable. Scientific reviews of the research literature have found that juvenile violence can be prevented and juvenile offenders can be rehabilitated ( Lipsey and Wilson, 1998; Sherman et al., 1997 ; U.S. Surgeon General, 2001 ).

Many different kinds of programs are effective. Here are a few quick examples:

** Mentoring involves adult volunteers spend ing time each week in recreational or educational activities with children . A controlled experiment with 959 youth in 8 cities found that the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program resulted in a 46% reduction in drug use, a 32% reduction in hitting people, and a 52% reduction in truancy ( Grossman and Garry, 1997 ).

** After-school recreational programs substantially reduce juvenile crime, drug use, and vandalism. For example, several rigorous studies of Boys and Girls Club programs found lowe r drug activity and increased parent involvement (Schinke, Cole, and Orlandi, 1991; St. Pierre, Mark, Kaltreider, Aikin, 1997). A Canadian study (Jones and Offord, 1989) of another intensive after-school program (using sports, music, dancing, and scouting) demonstrated a 75% reduction in juvenile arrests, while arrests at a comparison site rose 67%.

** Family therapy can be effective with delinquent youth. For example, Multisystemic therapy ( Family Services Research Center, 1995 ) has been repeatedly demonstrated to be a cost-effective , effective treatment for high-risk or delinquent children and their families. In controlled outcome studies, multisystemic therapy has proven to be superior to standard treatments for chronic juvenile offenders, inner-city at-risk youth, child-abusive families, and other traditionally difficult populations (Henggeler, Melton, Brondino, Scherer, and Hanley, 1997).

** Parent education programs can substantially increase parenting skills and improve children's behavior (Brestan & Eyberg, 1998; Kazdin, 1997). Examples of research-validated programs include the Parenting Program for Young Children (Webster-Stratton, 1998) and the FAST program ( Family and Schools Together; McDonald, Billingham, Conrad, Morgan, et. al., 1997).

Keep in mind that no strategy is effective for all youth or all settings. Every prevention program will have youth who fail, and failure inevitably receives more attention than success, generating the false impression that the program is not working. Yet programs that can reduce violent crime by even 10-20% are likely to be cost-effective, in light of the high cost of juvenile crime for victims, communities, and the criminal justice system.

School-based programs

School violence prevention works, too. A meta-analysis of 221 studies involving nearly 56,000 students found unequivocal evidence that school-based interventions can reduce aggressive behavior at school (Wilson, Lipsey, and Derzon, 2003).

Each study included pre-post assessment of at least one form of aggressive behavior such as fighting, bullying, or assault. The re was an average effect size of .25 for well-implemented demonstration programs. An effect size of this magnitude would eliminate approximately half the incidents of fighting in a typical school year. Another meta-analysis (Wilson, Gottfredson, and Najaka, 2001) found that school-based prevention programs were effective in reducing a variety of problem behaviors such as substance use, conduct problems, and truancy.

What kinds of school-based programs are effective? There are many different kinds of effective programs, but social competence programs are the most common type of program showing positive effects. A typical social competence program includes lesson plans for instructors to teach students how to resolve peer conflicts. Students learn communication skills such as how to deflect criticism and assert their opinions in a non-provocative manner, and how to listen and respond respectfully to others. They practice applying these skills in role-playing or demonstration exercises. Some programs include a cognitive-behavioral component in which students learn relaxation techniques, practice self-monitoring, or rehearse step-by-step procedures for thinking through problems.

Peer mediation programs are very popular in schools, but less frequently studied by researchers. Peer mediation programs involve teaching students how to resolve conflicts between peers. Typically, a small group of students are trained to serve as mediators for the student body. When two students have an argument or dispute, they bring their grievances to a pair of mediators who guide them through a standard procedure designed to facilitate a discussion to resolve the conflict.

What are the characteristics of the most effective school-based programs? Researchers find that quality of program implementation is critical. Schools that experience problems in fully implementing a program experience less success, and programs that are implemented as part of a demonstration project--where presumably great attention is given to program fidelity--are more successful than programs operating under routine conditions (Wilson, Lipsey, & Derzon, 2003). In their survey of 3,691 school-based prevention programs, Gottfredson and Gottfredson (2001) found that typical prevention efforts are not well integrated into normal school operations and that the school staff who implement these programs are in need of better training, support, and supervision.

Wilson, Lipsey, and Derzon (2003) found that violence prevention programs were effective at all age levels, but larger effect sizes were achieved for preschool and high school interventions than for elementary and middle school interventions. There were no differences in program effectiveness associated with gender and ethnic composition of the samples. Both high-risk and low-risk students benefited from interventions, although as might be expected, the degree of improvement was greater in high-risk populations, where there would be greater room for change.

Programs delivered by teachers were most effective, followed by programs delivered by researchers, and then those delivered by laypersons. Programs that delivered more intensive services and provided more one-on-one attention demonstrated stronger effects. Wilson, Lipsey, and Derzon (2003) next attempted to compare different types of programs, after controlling for differences due to study methodology, sample characteristics, and general program attributes such as implementation quality and program intensity. An unexpected finding was that the relatively few demonstration programs that delivered academic services (such as tutoring and reading development) obtained the largest effect sizes. One intriguing hypothesis is that many students engage in aggressive behavior because of frustration over poor academic performance, and that attention to their academic needs will pay dividends in good behavior. However, the two studies of routine academic programs yielded mixed evidence of effectiveness.

There were few consistent differences in the measured effectiveness of other types of programs; most programs were effective. Notably, social competence interventions have been the most frequently studied programs and stood out as demonstrating substantial effectiveness in most studies. Social competence training is designed to help students understand and resolve interpersonal conflicts and often involves the teaching of communication and negotiation skills. Peer mediation appeared to be effective, but there were few rigorous studies of this popular and widely-used approach.

References

Brestan, E. V. & Eyberg, S. M. (1998). Effective psychosocial treatments of conduct-disordered children and adolescents: 29 Years, 82 Studies, and 5272 Kids. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 180-189.

Family Services Research Center. (1995). Multisystemic therapy using home-based services: A clinically effective and cost effective strategy for treating serious clinical problems in youth. Charleston, S.C.: Author.

Gottfredson , G. D & Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). What schools do to prevent problem behavior and promote safe environments. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 12, 313-344.

Grossman, J. B., & Garry, E. M. (1997). Mentoring -- A proven delinquency prevention strategy. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Henggeler, S. W., Melton, G. B., Brondino, M. J., Scherer, D. G., & Hanley, J. H. (1997). Multisystemic therapy with violent and chronic juvenile offenders and their families: The role of treatment fidelity in successful dissemination. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 821-833.

Jones, M. B. & Offord, D.R. (1989). Reduction of anti-social behavior in poor children by nonschool skill development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 30, 737-750.

Kazdin, A. (1997). Parent management training: Evidence, outcomes, and issues. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 1349-1358

Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1997). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders: A synthesis of research. Vanderbilt Institute for Public Policy Studies. Nashville, TN.

McDonald, L. Billingham, S. Conrad, T., Morgran, A. et al. (1997). Families and Schools Together (FAST). Families in Society, 78, 140-155.

National Institute of Justice. (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising: A report to the United States Congress. Washington, D.C.: Author.

Schinke, S. P., Orlandi, M. A. & Cole, K. C. (1992). Boys & Girls Clubs in public housing developments: Prevention services for youth at risk. Journal of Community Psychology: OSAP Special Issue, 118-128.

St. Pierre, T.L., Mark, M.M. Kaltreider, D.L., Aikin, K.J. (1997). Involving parents of high-risk youth in drug prevention: A three-year longitudinal study in Boys & Girls Clubs. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 21-50.

U.S. Surgeon General . (2001). Youth Violence: A report of the surgeon general.

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

Wilson, D.B., Gottfredson, D.C., & Najaka, S. S. (2001). School-based prevention of problem behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17, 247-272.

Wilson, S.J., Lipsey , M. W., & Derzon, J.H. (2003). The effects of school-based intervention programs on aggressive behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 71, 136-149.

Reports/Projects on the prevention of youth violence

Prevention of Youth Violence: Dewey Cornell discusses the relevance of understanding prevention methods and the etiology of violence in forensic settings in Principles and Practices in Child and Adolescent Forensic Psychiatry:

What Works in Youth Violence Prevention: Dewey Cornell presents prevention strategies found to reduce juvenile violence and other related behavior in Youth Violence Prevention in Virginia: A Needs Assessment.

"Preventing Crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising": A report presented to the National Institute of Justice evaluates programs that are effective, programs that are not effective, and programs that need further investigation. This report asserts that development of programs targeting areas of concentrated poverty will lead to substantial reductions in youth violence.

Business and Community Projects: "The Artcraft Companies” found that they could reduce crime and vandalism in public housing by sponsoring an on-site Boys and Girls Club.

Organizations that focus on the prevention of youth violence

National Youth Violence Prevention Resource Center (NYVPRC): "A gateway to resources for professionals, parents, youth and individuals working to prevent and end violence committed by and against young people."

National Crime Prevention Council: "NCPC's Mission is to enable people to create safer and more caring communities by addressing the causes of crime and violence and reducing the opportunities for crime to occur."

Partnerships Against Violence Network: "Partnerships Against Violence Network is a 'virtual library' of information about violence and youth-at-risk, representing data from seven different Federal agencies."

Creating Caring Communities: "Based upon our highly-respected, much-imitated Bully-Proofing Your School program, Creating Caring Communities offers an in-depth program of comprehensive school climate-change that provides a systems approach for handling bully/victim problems through the creation of a 'caring community' of students and adults."