Development of Antisocial Behavior in Childhood and Adolescent Years:

How important is the Role of Family in the Character of Children and

Adolescents?

By Desiree Lei Ebuenga

University of the Philippines- Baguio

Some of the developmental psychologists consider that adolescents’ behavior problems

rooted from the early life experiences. The experiences of the child in his early life determine

his future character when he reaches his adolescent years. In the childhood days, the way the

family particularly the parents shape the child is a critical factor in the growth of a child. Thus, it

is very important that the family relationships and other factor variables in the family like

parental supervisions are in harmony and is just right for the child to grow and decide on his own

but with right values that will guard him from the corrupt environmental influences.

Personally, the primary context for which the child develops is his family. This is where

a child learns his values and character mainly by the supervision and discipline of the elderly in

the family. Primarily, a parent should ask himself if he is doing his responsibility properly to his

child and if he is making a good example to what he is teaching to his child.

As a part of the society, in my view, it is our responsibility to not just be aware of what is

happening around us but be a critical observer. It is our social responsibility to be involved in

the “everyday issues” in the society. Thus, the gang-related violence that involved the youths of

Baguio is continuously alarming me. Whenever I heard news about it, I often ask myself why

the youths are so much involve with these violent crimes. Then it will come to my mind that

maybe the family of these youths is not doing their responsibility as moral bows of their child. It

is not strange to me that there might be other factors to these problems but I strongly believe that

the character of an individual is founded in the family.

There is an article in the Sun Star Network Online that certainly troubled me. It talks

about the parents’ comments about their children being killed in gang wars. There is one mother

that said she did not know that her son became a member of a gang. Another mother commented

that her son is not a member of a gang but just joins the group of gang members. One common

with the sons of these mothers is that they were members of gangs and they have vices. In a

forum held, it has been said that these kinds of violence is an indication of a dysfunctional

society, school and family. But these mothers believe that no one should be blame for these, not

even one sector of the society. They added, “As parents we should not be blamed.” This

particular statement greatly struck me. How could these parents say this? Then I came to a

conclusion that we really have a very big problem with our society because even the parents

refused to take responsibility for shaping the values and behaviors of their children.

Based on the observations above, this article aims to give an understanding of the critical

role of the family in the development of an individual specifically to the development of

antisocial behaviors through research studies that were conducted by many psychologists.

The following research studies are summarized in connection with the emphases of this

article.

On the Nature and Nurture of Antisocial Behavior and Violence

By Essi Viding

Social, Genetic, and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry,King’s College London, London SE5 8AF, UK

The role of “nature and nurture” has long been proved as both factors in the human

development. The only question now that many psychologists are finding out is “What is the

dominant contributor in human development between genetic and environment?” What could be

the principal factor from which antisocial and aggressive behaviors develop? Is it something that

is heritable or more of the influence of the environment?

This article tries to present the both sides from which antisocial behaviors develop.

Though, it tackled the two factors, it focused more on the behavioral genetic research and its

contribution in widening our knowledge on how antisocial and aggressive behaviors could

develop.

Early development of aggressive behaviors indicates the serious risks of antisocial

behaviors like violence in later years. Research studies have found that non-shared

environmental factors have the most significant influence in the development of antisocial

behaviors followed by genetic factors. But it should be noted that the difference of these two

factors is insignificant. The third factor that contributes the least is the shared environmental

factors. These findings were the common grounds among 51 studies that had used different

methods in their experiments. The results stated imply that generally, antisocial behavior and

violence are moderately heritable. It also indicates the continuity of aggressive behavior in

humans. There is a genetic predisposition to antisocial behaviors when the heritability for such

behavior is high especially when these behaviors are prevalent across different settings.

Researches also had shown that it is highly possible that children with high levels of

callous-unemotional traits are under tremendously high influences of the genes. Additionally

they also found out that in these researches, there are no influences of shared environment. In

the contrary, children without high levels of callous-unemotional traits are moderately influenced

by genetic factors and extensively influenced by environmental factors both shared and non-

shared. Another implication of it is that environmental influences of the family (not including

the genetic influence the family) plays an important role in the development of antisocial

behavior in this particular group of children. On the other hand, the case of children with high

levels of callous-unemotional traits entails the more importance of environmental influences

together with genotype and environmental influences unique to the child to the development of

antisocial behaviors.

It would be of great help of the behavioral genetic methods to determine the causal theory

behind the antisocial behavior development. The possibility of the environmental factors and the

reaction to these factors can be influence by the effects of genes. Therefore, it is a need for us to

study different environmental factors that are open to genetic influences where we can evaluate

the correlation and interaction between the genes and environment, as well as their effects. In

the genes and environment, there are three possible correlations between the two as identified by

behavioral geneticists. It is either of the three--passive, active or evocative. The passive

correlation indicates the exposure of genetic influence to the environment whereas the active and

evocative correlation indicates experiences that are interconnected with genetic tendencies. The

active gene-environment correlation could be germane in adolescents and children who are not

given enough attention and supervision by their parents. The gene-environment interaction, on

the other hand, was explained as genetic sensitivity or vulnerability to environments.

Caspi and colleagues used longitudinal study regarding the mother’s expressed emotion

in relation to the emergence of anti-social behavior among children. Results showed associations

between the mothers’ negative emotion toward their children and the children’s antisocial

behaviors. This particular situation shows the environmentally mediated risk factors as potential

basis of antisocial behavior.

Another study, the study of Jaffee and colleagues, made use of maltreatment as the

environmental risk factor. They found out that there is a direct positive relationship between

maltreatment and development of antisocial behavior. The degree or extent of maltreatment is

correlated to the level of antisocial behavior. Results also had shown that physical maltreatment

could be followed by the occurrence of a new antisocial behavior. This particular study showed

the passive gene-environment correlation.

Conclusion

The above examples are proofs that behavioral genetic methods are useful in studying

environmental risk factors. The studies cited in this article showed that there are in fact

environmental risk factors that can cause antisocial behavior.

In the “nature” side, there are genes that involve in the possible development of behaviors

that are antisocial only that the risk gene that is accompanied by environmental risk could result

to a significant outcome. One example of these genes is the serotonin. It was found out that

serotonin is responsible for impulsive antisocial, aggressive and violent behaviors.

As a conclusion, for children with genotype vulnerability, it is more likely that their

genotype will react to environmental risk factors. Moreover, the more there are at least one

parent who has the risk gene for antisocial behaviors, the more it is needed for them to contribute

to a less-than-optimal child-rearing environment.

Genetic, Environmental and Early Parenting Characteristics

HENRIK LARSSON ESSI VIDING ROBERT PLOMINInstitute of Psychiatry Institute of Psychiatry Institute of Psychiatry

University College London

In contemporary psychology, many research studies focused on the role of callous-

unemotional traits in the development of antisocial behavior. The results of the studies indicate

that children with such traits exhibits serious and stable pattern of antisocial behavior.

One of the purposes of this study was to be able to give a wider literature and observe

possible differences between the subtypes of callous-unemotional traits and children displaying

antisocial behaviors regarding the characteristics of early parenting. Another purpose was to

conduct analyses on genetic twins to be able to come up with lists of contributions that the

genetic and environmental can carry out to callous-unemotional traits on groups of children with

high levels of such traits only and children with both having high levels of callous-unemotional

traits and antisocial behaviors.

Parenting characteristics, as many theories assume, could greatly contribute to antisocial

behaviors in children. There is a recent study that explained antisocial youth with callous-

unemotional traits have more negative parental discipline than youths without such traits.

The present study used twin genetic analysis since it focused on the study of causes

behind callous unemotional traits in children. It also dealt with differences in early parenting

characteristics between children in controlled condition, children with callous-unemotional traits,

with antisocial behaviors and those with both callous traits and antisocial behavior.

Cohort births listed in the Twins Early Development Study in the year 1994 and 1995

were the ones used in the experimental longitudinal study.

Callous traits and antisocial behavior were determined among children through teacher

ratings of them when they were 7 years old. The parenting characteristics were measured

through letting the parents answer the Parent Feelings Questionnaire at the age 3 and 4 of their

children. At age 3 and 4, the harsh discipline of parents were assessed. There were two different

parental discipline methods that were included in the questionnaires. The first one is either to

smack or to slap, and the other one is telling of or shouting.

Through parents’ reports of their children at age 3, the conduct problems and

hyperactivity of the children were obtained. This process was again assesses at age 4.

Conclusion

The findings of the study included the significant main effects of gender at age 4 and 7

but not at age 3. It indicates higher degree of negative parental characteristics in boys. On the

other hand, at the age of 7, they found out that there is no relevant interaction effect between

group membership as well as the gender and parental characteristics. Hence, gender does not

affect parental characteristics for all the groups studied in the experiment. The results showed

that for the group with both antisocial behavior and callous-unemotional traits compared with the

group with callous-unemotional trait only, there is a greater negative parental feelings and harsh

parental discipline than the latter group. This particular condition was said to remain until 7

years of the children (at least for this particular study). Aside from this, higher degree of

negative parental feelings was found in the parents of children with antisocial behavior than

those in the control children. However, lower degree of negative parental feelings was found in

the parents of callous-unemotional children than children with both antisocial behavior and

callous-unemotional trait at age 4 and 7. The parents of callous-unemotional children compared

to the parents of children exhibiting antisocial behavior had lower degree of negative parental

feelings. Between the antisocial behavior group and the control group, the former had a higher

degree of negative parental discipline. Another finding was the callous-unemotional trait group

had higher degree of negative parental discipline than the control group at ages 4 and 7. One

further analysis that we can deduce from the results obtained is that children with antisocial

behavior and with both antisocial behavior and callous-unemotional traits have higher degree of

behavior problems and hyperactivity than children with callous-unemotional traits only.

Generally, almost all the results can be attributed to genetic influence

and only minimal attribution by shared environmental influences.

Specifically, children with antisocial behavior and callous-unemotional traits,

heredity have a significant influence and no shared environmental influence.

Experiences of negative parenting characteristics in the early age

particularly negative parental feelings can be closely associated with high

intensity of antisocial behaviors. The child’s susceptibility to genetic

influences stimulates responses including punitive discipline which then

contributes to the development of callous-unemotional traits and antisocial

behaviors. This is where we could observe the gene-environment

correlations. Children who exhibit antisocial behavior with callous-

unemotional traits can only be related to parental practices slightly. High

degree of callous unemotional traits is influenced strongly by genes even to

those children with this kind of trait and at the same time exhibits antisocial

behavior. Genes influence the children with antisocial behavior but with

moderate callous-unemotional trait only moderately. With regards to

intensity of the influence of genes to callous-unemotional traits, results

showed that this trait can be strongly heritable. Thus, this means that the

influence of shared environment is little.

High degree of negative parenting characteristics, however, has a

strong influence in the development of antisocial behaviors with callous-

unemotional traits and with only antisocial behavior in children.

Role of Empathy and Parenting Style in the Development of

Antisocial Behaviors

Megan SchafferStephanie Clark

Elizabeth L. JeglicJohn Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York

Development of antisocial behaviors has been related to different

factors like empathy and parental styles. As for decreased empathy,

antisocial behaviors increase. Antisocial behaviors in relation to parental

care have been significant in adolescence. It had been evident that the

development of antisocial behavior in relation to authoritarian and

permissive parenting is positive. This means that the likelihood of the

antisocial behavior to increase is attributable to parenting styles particularly

authoritarian and permissive.

How the interaction of parenting style and empathy develops antisocial

behavior is the objective of this study.

Conclusion

A significant relationship was found between empathy and permissive

parenting. The relationship too is the same with empathy and antisocial

behavior. Since all paths in the model showed significant results, the

possibility of mediating relationship to occur between the predictor and the

third variable is impeded.

As discussed earlier, the results supported the assumption that low

levels of empathy for both cognitive and emotional have significant effect on

the development of antisocial behavior. In addition, the obtained outcome of

the study supported the assumption that permissive style of parenting

contributes to low levels of empathy and thus, influencing the emergence of

behaviors that are antisocial. But it did not show significant relationship

between authoritarian maternal style of parenting and development of

antisocial behaviors. It has been said that lax parenting prevents the

development of empathic tendencies. Thus, there is no increase in the levels

of empathy aside from it contributes to behavioral tendencies.

Generally, it is more likely that the parenting styles that is detached

and is unconcerned have more reliable effects in the development of

antisocial behaviors than parenting styles that are punitive.

Aggressive and Antisocial Behaviors among Secondary School

Students in Botswana

The Influence of Family and School Based Factors

By Leapetswe Malete

University of Botswana

This study of Leapetswe Malete from the University of Alabama is

concerned with the correlation between influences of the family and the

antisocial behaviors of the antisocial behaviors and aggressiveness of the

secondary school students in Botswana.

Like what I’ve said earlier in my observation in Baguio City, there has

been an increase in the violent acts among the youths and children

nowadays. It has also been observed by many researchers. Thus, it means

that this particular observation is not just true here in Baguio City or in the

Philippines but also in the other countries. Then we can further state that

this problem about increased violence and aggression especially among the

youths is a global problem that should be taken seriously.

Social Learning Theory of Albert Bandura is one of the main

background theories of the study. This theory states that children learned

through imitating the behaviors that they observed in their environment.

Therefore prolonged exposure of children and youths to violent acts and

antisocial behavior will more likely cause them to imitate the behaviors.

Another factor that we can add here is the presence of models and who is

the person being modeled.

In the case of the youths and children in Botswana, it was assumed

that one of the factos for their antisocial behaviors is the change in

economic, demographic and socio-cultural situations in their country.

The purpose of this particular study is to investigate and analyze the

influence of the family to the development of antisocial behaviors in the

secondary students in Botswana. The study also tried to answer questions

relating to age group differences in aggressive and antisocial behaviors. One

of its assumptions is that family factors have significant effect on the

development of antisocial behaviors and aggression. They also assumed

that there is a positive significant relationship between antisocial behaviors

and aggression.

Conclusion

The results supported the assumption that family factors have

influence on development of antisocial behaviors and aggression. Probably

the reason for this is that the families in Botswana don’t make much

involvement in disciplining their children. It can be supported by reports of

low parental monitoring in the subjects used. Poor parental monitoring was

more likely to create higher mean scores of aggression and antisocial

behaviors in the youths. This just means that there is a negative relationship

between parental monitoring and aggression and antisocial behaviors among

youths. Low parental monitoring increases the exhibiting of the youths of

antisocial behaviors as well as aggressiveness. Based on the results, it can

also cause the youths to use alcohol, weapons and drugs. But contrary to

what is expected, family structure did not show significant effects in the

development of behaviors that are anti-normative. Notwithstanding, family

structure as a factor to antisocial behavior development still needs further

study since it can be a potential contributor. The peer influence is also likely

to increase the aggression and carrying of weapons of the youths.

On the issue of age differences, senior secondary students are more

engaged in the use of alcohol and drugs while the junior secondary students

are more engaged in carrying weapons and aggression. On the other hand,

on gender differences, girls are less likely to engage in antisocial behaviors

and aggression than boys. This is probably because there is more control

exercised by girls than do boys have.

Mother’s and father’s parental adjustment: Links to externalizing behavior problems in sons

and daughters

Pierrette Verlaan Alex E. SchwartzmanSherbrooke University, Quebec, Canada Concordia University, Montreal, Canada

Links between parental adjustments and behavior problems of children were examined in

this study. The main objective of this research was to scrutinize two alternative pathways that

connect parental adjustment and children’s expressed behavior problems. The first assumption is

that antisocial behavior of parents and marital hostility influence children’s antisocial behavior

through the effect of dysfunctional parenting. The second assumption is the same as the first

except that the effect of dysfunctional parenting is not fully mediated.

Conclusion

Maternal adjustment affects the behavior problems of the children directly and indirectly.

Contrary to past research studies, the link between adolescent antisocial behaviors and marital

discord on adolescent girls is not strong. However, results supported the assumption in the

beginning of the study that marital hostility that was fully mediated by dysfunctional parenting

influences the behavior problems of the children. In addition, there is a significant impact of

maternal antisocial behavior to children’s adjustment difficulties.

What this study can add to already established findings on the past researches is that

maternal patterns of adjustment are the same with both boys and girls.

The early onset of behavior problems and negative marital conflict is mediated by critical

parenting. It supports the theory of Patterson that marital conflict could disrupt the way mothers

raise their children. Contrary to the effect of mother’s dysfunctional parenting, father’s

dysfunctional parenting did not turn up to be a relevant mediator of the effect of paternal

antisocial behavior and marital hostility on the behavior problems of daughters. These findings

implies that the critical role of the development of behavior problems in children are played by

parental modeling and the possibility of transfer of antisocial behavior. One proof is that results

found in the previous studies show that children who have behavior problems were more likely

to have parents that exhibit delinquent activities.

Furthermore, father’s coercive parenting style affects the development of antisocial

behaviors more on boys than girl children. We can observe here that there is a strong gender-

related pattern.

Childhood predictors of adult criminality: are all risk factors reflected in childhood

aggressiveness?

L. ROWELL HUESMANN1, LEONARD D. ERON1 AND ERIC F. DUBOW,Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, USA;

Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, USA

One of the bases of the study is the notion that early aggressive behavior is one of the

predictors of adult criminality.

The proponents of this study aimed to measure the degree to which family, parental

principles and behaviors and child intelligence influence child aggression and potential for adult

criminality.

Conclusion

The analyses that they have made with regards to the predictors of childhood criminality

were based on the assessment of physical and violent aggression, as well as verbal, acquisitive

and indirect aggression of the participants in the experiment. The best predictor, as an analysis

on the results obtained, is the aggressive behavior of the child at the age of eight. It will

determine how the child would be like in the next 22 years. So far, the strongest predictor of

adult criminality is childhood aggression. Specifically, what the parents believe regarding

punishments in aggression contributes to adult criminality. If the parents strongly believe in the

punishment of crimes whether severe or mild punishment, the child would be more likely at

stake to engage in criminal behaviors than whose parents don’t have such belief. This is

probably because those children whose parents believe in punishment were already disaffected to

punishments since they often receive them from their parents. Thus, the relationship between the

child and his parents will be in discord. Another possible reason for this is imitation and

modeling. The child will likely to imitate the punitive behaviors of his parents toward him.

However, for those boys whose parents are religious, they are less likely to engage in

criminal behaviors in their later years. The reason for this is the parents are more attentive with

their children’s problems. Thus, it increases the closeness of the parents to their child.

If the child did not feel guilty for his transgressions in his early age, he will likely to

involve in adult criminality.

A Child Effects Explanation for the Association between Family Risk and Involvement in an

Antisocial Lifestyle

Kevin M. Beaver John Paul WrightFlorida State University University of Cincinnati

The purpose of the study is to assess reciprocal effects between family risk and antisocial

lifestyle of males.

Conclusion

Children develop to what they are now relied to what they experience in their own

homes. This is the findings of other research studies. On the other hand, another research study

found out that the relationship between experiences with the family and being what they are is

spurious if we partialled out the effect of “child effects”. The study I am discussing now aimed

to test the value of these two opposite perspective.

The results obtained in this study supported the second assumption more. Family risk did

not show significant effect on determining whether the boy would be embedded in an antisocial

lifestyle or not. This is true for both longitudinal study and cross-sectional study that displayed

reciprocal effects.

Their findings also showed that there is stability in antisocial lifestyle starting in

childhood years to adolescent years. It then implies that antisocial behaviors are rooted to the

early life experiences.

Family Relationship Quality and Contact with Deviant Peers as Predictors of Adolescent

Problem Behaviors: The Moderating Role of Gender

Nicole E. Werner Rainer K. SilbereisenWashington State University University of Jena

Many researches had focused on studying the relationship between

family factor variables and the development of antisocial behaviors. In this

study, the primary aim was to examine gender differences between German

adolescents’ quality of family relationship and substance use and

delinquency. In childhood psychopathology, it has been concluded that

males are more vulnerable to influences of family conflicts and disorders

than females are. Contrary to this, adolescent studies showed that females

are the more vulnerable ones in the effects of family conflicts and disputes.

Conclusion

Findings imply that experiences involving family and relationship with

peers are associated in the occurrence of delinquent behaviors and

substance use. Additionally, adolescents are less likely to be involved with

peers that used substance and engaged in antisocial behaviors if they have

good relationship with their family particularly with their parents. The

gender intensification theory, in connection with this study, states that it is

stressful for adolescent girls if they have discordance with their relationship

with their family. This just further means that if there is conflict in the

family, they would more likely join peers that engaged in deviant and

delinquent activities. With this situation, it is undoubtedly that they will

exhibit behavior problems. Another finding of the study regarding the

influence of the parents to adolescents can be connected to gender. Fathers

are more likely to have influence with their daughters than their son. If the

daughter has conflict with his father, she will more likely join deviant peers.

Mothers, on the other hand have influence in both daughters and sons.

Social Disadvantage and Neglectful Parenting as Precursors to the Development of Antisocial

and Aggressive Child Behavior: Testing a Theoretical Model

John F. Knutson David S. DeGarmo John B. Reid

University of Iowa, Iowa City, IowaOregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, Oregon

One of the observations of the researchers is that neglectful parenting implicitly causes

the children to engage in antisocial behaviors. Thus, the purpose of Knutson and colleagues in

this study is to examine the indirect effects of neglectful parenting as well as social disadvantage

and punitive parenting in the development of antisocial and aggressive behaviors among

children.

Conclusion

Neglectful parenting as well as punitive parenting indeed has reliable and specific effects

on the development of the antisocial and aggressive behaviors of children. Generally, discipline

and negligence in parenting that takes place at the locus of development are one of the possible

grounds from which growth development, delineation and what an individual will become in the

future. The suggested probable reason for this is neglectful parenting impedes the child’s

development of social competence and constructive relationship with peers.

The links between antisocial behavior as well as positive change in antisocial behavior

for the next five years and punitive discipline are true for younger children. In terms of

concomitant antisocial behavior in connection to punitive discipline for older children, the links

are accurate but not with positive change in antisocial behavior. To sum up, punitive discipline

is indeed is a factor to which young children develop aggression.

The Antisocial Behavior of the Adolescent Children of Incarcerated Parents: A

Developmental Perspective

J. Mark Eddy and John B. Reid,Oregon Social Learning Center

Eddy and Reid, the researchers for this particular study believe that the adolescent

children of incarcerated parents are the ones who can negatively contribute to the society through

antisocial behaviors on account of their developmental stage. It is the one of the strongest

prognosticator of violence and crime among adolescents. An adolescent with parents who

exhibit anti-normative behaviors most likely exhibit the same behaviors as his parents since he

will imitate and modeled his parents. But with proper parenting, the adolescent children of

incarcerated parents will less likely to engage in violent acts and delinquent activities.

The theory of coercion can be related with this particular issue. It suggests that

socialization as well as parenting is considered as a very interactive and shared process between

the child and his family, peers and others that are important to him who give him various chances

for attaining success if not failure. Yet, in the United States, only few of the incarcerated parents

have a regular interaction with their children. Others interact with their children only through

mail and phone. Still, it is very important that the incarcerated parents interact with their

children, shaping them, doing their responsibilities as parents are not within the prison walls or

any media-related communication but outside prison walls where they can offer a personal

guidance and supervision for their children. In addition, it is also important to note the behaviors

and certain parenting manners of the parents throughout the four stages of development namely

before birth, during preschool years, during elementary school years and during adolescence.

Integration and Application

Family is indeed a critical factor from which an individual develops, learn his values and

shape his character. From my own point of view, based on the research studies cite in this

article, there are several reasons why family is of much importance in the development of an

individual. First, the family is where the child primarily achieves his first years of interaction

and learning. These first years of a child’s life is crucial since in these years starts the molding

of his character as an individual and as a part of the society. The bottom of all of this is that the

family should have the highest standards when it comes to disciplining and shaping their child

because as the child grows up, he will not just interact with his family but his world will

widened. He will soon interact with other people in the society. In his elementary school years,

he will then interact with his classmates and teachers. Then later with his secondary school

years, his interaction does not only revolve around his classmates and teachers but also with

other friends within an organization. His world will further widen when he reaches his tertiary

school years when he will interact with more peers within classes and organizations. Until he

will become an adult that he will as well interact with his colleagues and the rest of the world as

soon as he will find a job. Therefore, his impact is not just centered in the family or in his peers

but also with the whole society. Thus, if his character and values are founded strongly which

starts in the family, he will create a beneficial influence and contribution in his country and

probably in the whole world.

Another reason, this individual will create an influence with his peers and other people

whatever values he may have. If he has an upright character, the influence he will create to

others and pass unto them is also upright. But if he always into fights, gang wars and other

antisocial and violent behaviors, in broader terms, his values are not moral virtuous, then he will

just be a bad influence to others. If it happens, then it will create a whole batch of bad influences

in the community and later on in the society. Then what happens next is a country that has a

majority of a corrupt society since it is compose of a whole lot of corrupt individuals.

The third reason is that if it happens that this individual doesn’t have a strong foundation

on moral and upright values, he will pass on his corrupt ways to his children. Later on, his

children might pass his bad values to his children and so on.

To sum it all, the society that we are into is just undergoing into an interactive process in

which each one and another affects each other both directly and indirectly. It is a society that

continues on and on over the generations that will still come.

Dodge’s Social Information-Processing Model includes the notion that youths that are

aggressive act imprudently. They act without thinking much and respond automatically past

experiences as their bases. These youths often experienced rejection, cruelty, oppression and

other invective abuse that causes them to think that the world is an unfriendly and a harsh world

(Sigelman et al., 2009). This model of Dodge can be connected to the research study made by

Knutson and colleagues about social disadvantage and neglectful parenting as factors to the

development of antisocial behaviors as well as the study of Eddy and colleagues regarding the

antisocial behavior of the adolescent children of incarcerated parents. They all had the same

conclusion that neglectful parenting is indeed a contributor on the antisocial behavior

development in an individual.

With the view point of Patterson and colleagues, in their study of coercive family

environments, in this kind of family structure, members of the family are struggling for power

and each are trying to rule one another through forcible tactics. As the parents lose their control

over their children, the punishments only have just little effect on the children. These children in

turn are easy for them to use force against other persons. In Patterson’s over all conclusions,

ineffective parenting definitely influences to problems in behavior as well as rejection of peers,

association with antisocial peers and adolescents’ antisocial behavior (Sigelman et al., 2009).

These are just few of the theories and models that support the notion that family is a very

critical factor in the growth and development of an individual and therefore should be given so

much attention.

Our society doesn’t pay much attention to these problems. Even though, in simplest

terms, it seems that there is no problem with the families in our society, yet it is one big problem

that we must face. That’s why here in Baguio there are so much crimes and gang wars that

involve youths. Parents don’t take enough and proper responsibility for their children who then

seek attention in joining gangs. One reason I analyzed why the gang-related crimes in Baguio

City is simultaneous and unending is because the incidents in the environment that they imitate

and model unconsciously are antisocial and violent since there are many past incidents of gang

wars and gang-related violence. Another reason is that the police and government authorities

don’t seem to pay much attention to these crimes. Because it seems that there are no

punishments to these crimes, the gang members are not afraid to commit violence and other

crimes.

It is the time to be more critical at these kinds of issues. Every parent should be educated

with the proper parenting techniques in order for us to have a society that is respectable. Now is

the time to create and shape individuals that our country would be proud of.

References:

Beaver, K.M., & Wright, J.P. (2007). A Child Effects Explanation for the Association between Family Risk and Involvement in Antisocial Lifestyle. Journal of Adolescent Research, vol. 22. No.6.

Eddy, J.M., & Reid, J.B. (2002). The Antisocial Behavior of the Adolescent Children of Incarcerated Parents: A Developmental Perspective, 1-23.

Huesmann, R.L., et al (2002). Childhood Predictors of Adult Criminality: Are All Risk Factors Reflected in Childhood Aggressiveness? Journal on Criminal Behavior and Mental Health. Vol.12, 185-208.

Knutson, J.F. et al, (2004). Social Disadvantage and Neglectful Parenting as Precursors to the Development of Antisocial and Aggressive Child Behavior: Testing a Theoretical Model. Journal on Aggressive Behavior. Vol. 30, 187-205.

Malete, L., (2007). Aggressive and Antisocial Behaviors Among Secondary School Students in Botswana: The Influence of Family and School-based Factors. Journal on School Psychology International. Vol. 28, 90-109.

Larsson, H., et al, (2008). Callous-unemotional Traits and Antisocial Behavior: Genetic, Environmental and Early Parenting Characteristics. Journal on Criminal Justice and Behavior. Vol. 35, no. 2.

Opina, R. (2009). Mothers Speak Their Hearts on Gang Wars. Sun Star Network Online. (www.sunstar.com.ph/baguio/mothers-speak-their-hearts-gang-wars)

Schaffer, M., et al, (2009). The Role of Empathy and Parenting Style in the Development of Antisocial Behaviors. Journal on Crime and Delinquency. 586-599.

Sigelman, C.K., & Rider, E.A. (2009). Lifespan Human Development. California:Wadsworth.

Werner, N.E., & Silbereisen, R.K., (2003). Family Relationship Quality and Contact with Deviant Peers as Predictors of Adolescent Problem Behaviors: The Moderating Role of Gender. Journal of Adolescent Research. Vol. 18, no. 5.

Verlaan P., & Schwartzman, A.E. (2002). Mother’s and Father’s Parental Adjsutment: Links to Externalizing Behavior Problems in Sons and Daughters. International Journal of Behavioral Development. Vol. 26, 214-224.

Viding, E. (2004). On the Nature and Nurture of Antisocial Behavior and Violence. 267-277.

Development of Antisocial Behavior in Childhood and

Adolescent Years:

How important is the Role of Family in the Character of

Children and Adolescents?

Desiree Lei P. Ebuenga

College of Social Sciences

University of the Philippines- Baguio

October 21, 2009

EDFD 110

Prof. Nancy Florendo