Cognitive problem solving and aggressive behavior among children

Fraser, Mark W

VIOLENCE AND OTHER ANTISOCIAL, aggressive behaviors are growing problems (Gest Friedman, 1994; Clest, Witkin, Hetter, Wright, 1994). In child-welfare, juvenile-justice, and mental health agencies across the country, practitioners are increasingly confronted with hostile, oppositional children who are failing or truant at school, unsupervised on the streets, and in trouble with the courts. o serve these children and their families, many agencies offer family-preservation programs, a combination of brief, in-home supportive services designed to strengthen families and prevent the placement of children in foster families, group homes, residential treatment, and other forms of substitute care.

The development of effective intervention strategies for aggressive children and their families is important because the prognosis for change is often poor even with treatment. Failure rates are quite high for various kinds of treatment for antisocial children and their families (Henggeler, 1989; Kazdin, 1987). In family-preservation services (FPS), which are the first contact many aggressive children have with service systems, failure rates also are high (Feldman, 1991; Fraser, Pecora, & Haapala, 1991; Nelson, 1990; Nelson Landsman, 1992; University Associates, 1993; Yuan, McDonald, Wheeler, Struckman-lohnson, & Rivest, 1990). Research indicates that many FPS programs are relatively more successful with child-abuse referrals than with referrals involving aggressive, oppositional children and their families (Bath Haapala, 1993; Dore, 1993; Fraser et al., 1991; Nelson, 1990; Nelson & Landsman, 1992; Spaid & Fraser, 1991). If FPS and other forms of treatment are to become more effective, service strategies may need to be more closely tied to the developmental processes chat "potentiate" aggressive behavior (Rutter, 1979).

This article explores the way antisocial, aggressive children think about social problems and engage others in achieving social goals. For many youth, developmental deficits in cognitive processes are associated with early aggressive behavior, school failure, sexual precocity, drug abuse, and delinquency (Coie, Lochman, Terry, & Hyman, 1992; Lochman Dodge, 1994; Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, Van Kammen, & Farrinpton, 1991). Based on the cognitive problem-solving characteristics of aggressive children, treatment strategies for augmenting family-preservation and related programs are suggested.

Cognitive Processing of Social Information and Aggressive Behavior

Recent longitudinal studies suggest that antisocial behavior in both boys and girls is produced via at least three developmental pathways: (1) a "cover" Pathway that leads from early childhood lying and cheating to more serious offenses such as shoplifting and stealing, (2) an "overt" pathway that leads from early childhood taunting and bullying of other children to frequent fighting and then to more serious offenses such as assault and street violence, and (3) a pathway that begins in late toddlerhood and is characterized by a wide range of authority-conflict problems (Loeber, 1988; Loeber et al., 1993). The pathways are not necessarily mutually exclusive; children who begin on one pathway may shift to another. For example, approximately 75% of children who are consistently stubborn, hostile, and uncontrollable as toddlers later enter a covert or overt pathway (Loeber et al., 1993). Although many children who begin these c pathways desist over time, many others are referred to child-welfare, mental health, and juvenile-justice agencies where they receive family-preservation and related services. In this a sense, family-preservation programs represent s the nation's front line in attempting to prevent a violence and other antisocial behavior.

From a developmental perspective, learning to solve problems without using force is a critical element of successful social participation. In part, normative social development requires mastery of cognitive and behavioral skills for assessing social circumstances, communicating with others, and resolving conflicts without force or violence. Whether learned in the home, school, church, community center, or clinic, the ability to achieve social goals without resorting to covert acts or overt force is crucial for making and keeping friends, getting along with teachers, and participating successfully in community activities.

Although other theories on antisocial, aggressive behavior (e.g., social control, psychodynamic, and labeling theories) exist, cognitive perspectives on social development have gained increasing research support. Cognitive theory focuses on a child's thinking skills and is based on several important assumptions. These assumptions define the context in which the cognitive processing of social information should be understood and interpreted for FPS practice.

First, children's responses to social circumstances are thought to follow a sequence of information-processing steps that are outside normal conscious awareness but nevertheless underpin all social exchange. In this article, these steps are called cognitive problem solving because they involve both cognitive processes and behavioral-enactment skills.

Second, the use of processing skills is affected by a child's basal arousal rate, by predisposing conditions in the environment (e.g., poverty, racism, low social status, social isolation), and by characteristics of precipitating events (e.g., drug use by participants). From a treatment perspective, therefore, training in cognitive problem solving is likely to be more effective when used in concert with other interventions that concomitantly address a child's physiological arousal and the predisposing and precipitating conditions that characterize and energize social situations.

Third, although the steps or skills associated with this latent process are usually described in a linear, stepwise fashion, they interact with one another in feedback loops, drawing on cognitive resources based on past experience, learned rules, acquired beliefs, and contextual influences (Crick & Dodge, 1994). In this way, environmental factors are thought to mediate a child's repertoire of information processing skills. In the sense that social and historical information is constantly used and reused in solving social problems, the process is context dependent, cumulative over time, cyclical, and nonlinear.

Finally, a child's mastery of these processing skills is thought to define his or her ability to navigate new social situations. These skills determine whether a child will encounter new situations with a sense of hope or a sense of suspicion and hostility. Moreover, they dispose children to interactional styles that affect opportunities for future social participation and success. Mastery of these skills is thought to relate to a child's overall social adjustment and life course.

Steps in Cognitive Problem Solving And Aggressive Children

Cognitive problem solving is distinguished from other skills by its emphasis on the way children think about social situations. It focuses on a series of interrelated steps that appear to be nearly ubiquitous in processing social information. In the following sections, each step is described, and specific information about the social development of aggressive, antisocial children is reviewed. Implications for refining family preservation and factors that may condition the processing of social information are explored.

Encoding

Encoding is the first step that children must take in cognitive problem solving. As a skill, encoding involves attending to social cues and selecting from the universe of cues that appear in social situations. Aggressive children appear to attend to fewer cues in general, and when they do identify cues, they miss important ones. They tend to make use only of more recent and stimulating cues, ignoring nuances and series of cues that may build from the subtle to the overt (Dodge & Newman, 1981; Dodge & Tomlin, 1987; Gouze, 1987).

Compared with nonaggressive children, aggressive children tend to rely more on "schemata" or generalized memories that allow them to structure new information. This approach is efficient in that the child's encounters with others do not have to be individually assessed. But it also means that aggressive children make sense of the world by skipping over situation-specific cues to which nonaggressive children attend (Dodge Tomlin, 1987). Often unsuccessful in controlling arousal, aggressive youths encode fewer cues before they conclude that they understand a social situation (Garrison Stolberg, 1983).

Interpretation and Hostile Attribution

Interpretation involves assigning meaning to social cues. This usually involves drawing conclusions about a current social situation on the basis of past relationships, past interpretations, one's sense of personal efficacy or competence ("I don't do well with this kind of person"), and an assessment of the intent or causal factors associated with similar cues in similar circumstances ("she wants to be my friend"). The attribution of intent is important in establishing subsequent social goals because it is a building block in determining a social Strategy.

Aggressive children often make thinking errors by erroneously assigning hostile intent to neutral social cues (Dodge, 1991; Nasby, Hayden, & DePaulo, 1979). They are not good at figuring out others' feelings or thoughts and underestimate the complexity of social circumstances. Aggressive children commonly interpret neutral interactions as threatening and then respond defensively with aggression. Their poor interpretation skills lead them to react aggressively even in the absence of aggressive intentions on the part of peers, parents, teachers, and others. They perceive hostility when it isn't there. This is called "hostile attribution."

A relationship between aggressive behavior and attribution of hostile intent has been found in many studies of both boys and girls in kindergarten through eighth grade (Dodge, Pettit, McClaskey, & Brown, 1986; Feldman & Dodge, 1987; Quiggle, Garber, Panak, Dodge, 1992; Steinberg Dodge, 1983). Compared with nonaggressive children, aggressive children are more likely to perceive hostility in others. Hostile attributional biases have also been found in clinical samples of older boys in residential treatment (Nasby et al., 1979), specialized educational programs for violent offenders (Lochman & Dodge, 1994), and secure correctional settings (Dodge, Price, Bachorowski, & Newman, 1990; Slaby & Guerra, 1988).

The source of hostile attribution is not clear. Some evidence suggests that it is provoked by parental aggression and extreme socioeconomic conditions. Strassberg and Dodge (1992) found that kindergarten children who were rejected by their peers experienced significantly more aggression in their homes. In particular, the aggressive behavior of fathers toward children and their mothers was correlated with children's aggression toward and rejection by peers. In addition to family factors, community or contextual factors such as poverty, racism, low social status, and drugs appear to provoke hostility and an angry world view (Bernard, 1990; Coie & Jacobs, 1993; Wilson, 1987). Pettit, Dodge, and Brown (1988) found hostile bias in both aggressive and nonaggressive children in families receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), many children of which were affected by poverty, poor housing, and high rates of neighborhood disorganization. This finding suggests that environmental factors may condition children to expect abusive and coercive interactions with others (Graham & Hudley, 1994; Weiss, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1992). Whether teen or toddler, children who are routinely exposed to violence and abuse appear to adopt a defensive, negative interpersonal style that affects later social opportunities.

Goal Formulation

The third step in cognitive problem solving is goal formulation and refinement. Goals are defined as focused orientations toward a particular outcome or set of outcomes. They may include feeling states ("When this is finished, I want to feel as if I did it myself") or more concrete outcomes ("I want to have the black basketball"). Children process multiple goals concurrently and in setting goals weigh the odds of success against past experience. They bring to social circumstances a goal orientation that consists of feelings, temperament (toward cooperative or hostile involvement with others), prior socialization toward goals (training and role modeling from parents, teachers, and others), and perceived norms or situational standards for behavior in similar circumstances (that may be defined by culture, ethnicity, race, class, the media, and other broad influences).

Aggressive children tend to define goals that are inappropriate or damaging to their social relationships. They are likely to ignore the long-term consequences of brute-force solutions to social problems. They regard winning, securing control over an object, and social dominance as ends without attenuating consequences (Crick & Dodge, 1989, 1994; Renshaw Asher, 1983; Slaby & Guerra, 1988). In contrast, nonaggressive children are more likely to develop goals that enhance peer relationships by sharing toys, other desired objects, and opportunities; by acknowledging others' desires; and by developing cooperative solutions.

Response Search and Formulation

The fourth step in processing social information involves the formulation of specific responses. From memory, children develop ideas about how to respond to each social circumstance they encounter. Response searches involve identifying a range of alternative responses to social opportunities. In reacting to an invitation to play, for example, children have many alternative responses. They can play immediately, later, or not at all. They can bargain for a particular kind of play. They can offer conditions and limits. They can acknowledge the request or pretend to be mute. Compared with other children, aggressive children identify fewer alternatives (Pettit et al., 1988; Slaby & Guerra, 1988; Spivak, Platt, & Shure, 1976). They seem unaware of the various options that may be open to them when invited to participate in play or when confronted by a social problem.

In addition to having a small repertoire of responses, aggressive children appear to generate proportionally more coercive responses. Compared with their socially accepted, more prosocial peers, aggressive children are relatively more confrontational and socially ineffective (Asher, Renshaw, Geraci, 1980; Quiggle et al., 1992). It is not clear whether aggressive children are simply victims of family and community circumstances in which many responses to social opportunities are impoverished or whether individual cognitive deficits prevent aggressive children from recalling or constructing more diverse and prosocial response repertoires (Crick & Dodge, 1994).

Response Decision

The fifth skill or step, response decision, involves assessing the likely outcomes of rival responses and selecting a response that can be enacted given the constraints of the situation. Compared with nonaggressive children, aggressive children tend to assign higher value to physically and verbally coercive responses (Crick & Ladd, 1990; Dodge et al., 1986; Graham & Hudley, 1994; Quiggle et al., 1992). From elementary through high school, aggressive children focus on short-run material gains and fail to estimate the long-run costs of aggressive behavior. When asked what might happen as a result of alternative responses, aggressive children report less favorable expectations for the outcomes based on bargaining, ignoring provocation, or giving compliments (Crick Dodge, 1989; Quiggle et al., 1992). Thus, compared with their more nonaggressive counterparts, they not only evaluate aggressive responses more favorably but they evaluate prosocial responses as favorably.

Reflecting the interactive nature of the processing steps, response decisions are usually affected by the degree to which children feel they can successfully enact or implement a specific response in a specific social situation. Aggressive children feel mare confident about carrying out verbally or physically aggressive responses (Crick Dodge, 1989). Perhaps because they have learned a coercive style of interaction in their homes or on their streets, aggressive children appear predisposed to the use of less prosocial responses.

Enactment

Enactment involves executing a response. Aggressive children are often less adept at joining groups, offering/receiving positive statements, negotiating "deals" ("I'll let you play with my doll, if I can play with your truck"), and bargaining for the exchange of social opportunities ("let's flip a coin to see who bats first") (Jenson Howard, 1990; Lochman Dodge, 1994). hey have trouble conceptualizing a stepwise approach to achieving a social goal. Because they are less skillful in sequencing behaviors to achieve a goal, they tend to rely on force to solve social problems. Over time, the use of force as a social strategy places a child outside the skilled peer group in a sort of "social limbo" (Patterson, Capaldi, & Bank, 1991, p. 149). In a world where the future Looks bleak and merely growing up without getting injured is difficult for many children, short-run, coercive solutions offer immediate pleasures while exacting a high price in social relationships with peers, teachers, and others.

Implications for Family Preservation Services

In some FPS programs, training to strengthen a child's problem-solving skills is considered an important element of service (Cole & Duva, 1990; Henggeler, Melton, & Smith, 1992; Kinney, Haapala, & Booth, 1991), but in many other FPS programs, individual treatment is considered antithetical to a systems treatment strategy. In still other programs, training is based on early problem-solving schemas that were not developed by studying the social interactions of aggressive children (see D'Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Spivak et al., 1976). Whether provided by the FPS worker, a school social worker or psychologist, or a contracted worker who is a specialist in cognitive interventions, the model described here has roots in the social development of aggressive and sometimes violent behavior in children.

Emerging developmental theory suggests that lacking an intervention to strengthen the information-processing skills that aggressive children bring to bear upon social problems, family-based services are not likely to alter a child's peer relationships. And peer relationships -- especially low peer social status and rejection by skilled peer groups -- occupy central causal roles in the etiology of ungovernability, school failure, gang violence, and delinquency (Coie et al., 1992; Farrington et al., 1993; Farrington, Loeber, Van Kammen, 1990; Roff, 1992).

In both assessment and treatment, theory . can strengthen FPS practice. Based upon comprehensive assessment focusing upon a child's needs, strengths, and deficits, and in the context of a comprehensive treatment strategy that addresses other family, school, peer, and neighborhood factors affecting antisocial behavior, each step in information processing may be transposed into service goals and activities.

Practice Implications

Encoding. As Table 1 illustrates, treatment sessions that focus on encoding should seek to increase a child's sensitivity to verbal and nonverbal social cues.(All tables omitted) Through games and role play, workers should teach children to identify social cues in body language and pitch of voice. They should focus on sequences of cues as they occur in hypothetical and real social situations. One strategy involves helping children identify their own feeling states and the indicators of these feeling states through self-report and observation. Children can be asked to make videos of their own cues and then encouraged to explain their feelings on the basis of cues demonstrated in the tape. By the end of training, children should be able to identify correctly simple feeling states on the basis of facial expressions, voice intonation, hand pressures, and other indicators of social intent.

Interpretation. Treatment goals that focus on interpretation should address misattribution of intent. Children should learn to identify and classify social cues by friendly neutral, and hostile categories of intent. Whereas younger children might need to practice this through doll or puppet play (focusing on activities in the third column of Table 1), older children might practice by assuming the roles of other children in disputes. With the help of videotapes of playground activities, children should be taught to identify the sources of the problems and the feelings of participants. Emphasis should be placed on correctly identifying friendly and neutral, as well as hostile, intent on the part of others.

Goal formulation. The objective of training sessions on goal formulation should be to increase the number of goals that children associate with specific social situations. Children should be given opportunities to practice identifying and fitting prosocial goals to various situations and circumstances. Different kinds of goals -- affective and instrumental, short- and long-term -- should be encouraged. Workers might play a game in which children are rewarded for having ideas about goals for various situations. Goals might be rated as to whether they are likely to enhance or damage interpersonal relationships with others.

Response search and formulation. The goal of training sessions focusing on response access and formulation is to increase a child's skill in identifying alternatives to the use of force to solve social problems. Workers should focus on skills to control children's arousal and to generate behavioral sequences in which anger and use of force are only two of various response possibilities. This may involve anger management training (see Eggert, 1994). For children from abusive homes or neighborhoods where violence is commonplace (and coercion is a typical approach to problem solving), it may be necessary to demonstrate, enact, and practice prosocial responses with puppets or role play. Because parental and neighborhood violence increase arousal (including hostile intent and reactive aggression) and limit the responses of children who see or are victims of family and street violence (Bernard, 1990; Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1990), children who are exposed to routine violence should be afforded more time and training to identify and describe problem-solving strategies that do not employ coercion. A four- to eight-week FPS model may not provide enough training time for such children.

Response decision. The response decision requires evaluation of each alternative. Children should be given opportunities to discuss the likely finds and losses associated with each identified alternative in specific social situations Like goals, gains may be described as material and social, short- and long-term, or affective and concrete. In addition to focusing on the benefits of selected alternatives, treatment should also focus on the costs of each alternative. Children should be asked to identify the likely negative outcomes of particular strategies. To do this, the worker must define "cost" in a social sense. For example, the cost of a fight with child A may be that child A ignores or rejects child B. Training in making response decisions involves quickly assessing the benefits and costs of altematives and selecting the alternative that enhances rather than damages social relations.

Enactment. Finally, treatment should focus on enactment. Enactment involves implementing a strategy. The worker should have children practice implementation under differing scenarios -- routine settings on the playground or in the streets and then in more highly charged settings where interactions are complicated by isolation (say, on a back street) or by other conditions (perhaps by confrontation with several members of a gang). Younger children may need to practice through puppet or other play.

Special Considerations

Do the steps and skills apply to all children? It's not clear. Despite the fact that research on aggressive behavior is based on diverse samples of children, few significant effects by gender, age, or race/ethnicity have been found. Studies have included girls and boys, preschool through high school. Many studies have had adequate samples of African American and other minority children and many have been conducted in low-income schools and neighborhoods. Nevertheless, related theory and research on school failure, delinquency, and violence suggest that the relationship between information processing and aggression may be conditioned on social and demographic factors.

Gender. Boys generally engage in more delinquent and aggressive behavior than do girls. The ratios range from 2:1 to 7:1 (Regoli HeWitt, 1994; White, Brick, Hansell, 1993). Although the behavioral pap may be closing, recent research suggests that boys tend to be more instrumental, confrontational, and physically aggressive. In contrast, the interpersonal styles of girls appear to be more multiplex, indirect, and interpersonally strategic (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, Kaukiainen, 1992; Cairns, Cairns, Necketman, Ferguson, Gariepy, 1989; Masten, Garmezy, Tellegen, Pellegrini, 1988; Sanson, Prior, Smart, & Oberklaid, 1993).

Are such differences related to differences in processing of social information? Although a few studies have reported interactions between gender, information processing, and aggression (see Cirino Beck, 1991; Feldman & Dodge, 1987), too little is known to draw conclusions about differences between girls and boys in cognitive problem solving. That no major differences in cognitive processes have emerged to date may merely be a function measurement and of sampling strategies that tend to select more overtly aggressive children for studies (see Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). When this criterion is used, it may be difficult to detect important gender differences. Gender differences in aggressive and delinquent behavior suggest that gender may be a moderating variable.

Age. Cognitive and social developmental theory indicate strongly that age also is a moderating variable. Maturation is associated with changes in cognitive capacity, which must be considered in adopting a treatment strategy. Younger children (younger than age 6), for example, generally are unable to understand the feelings or needs of other children. They are more concrete in their thinking operations, and their behaviors tend to be more instrumentally overt (Finch, Nelson, & Ott, 1993). In addition, the social relationships of younger children are more aggressive. Although aggressive behavior among kindergarten and first grade children rarely results in injury, such behavior appears to be part of establishing social relationships over time. By age nine, children's social relationships become less physically aggressive, and they need better skills in verbal problem solving. In the second and third grades, many children who use aggressive problem-solving methods begin to be rejected by their more prosocial and socially skilled peers. Rejected and beyond the influence of the prosocial peer group, these children are at higher risk for delinquency and other problem behaviors (see Fraser, 1994). Thus, age and maturation appear to be directly related to aggression. Although the mechanisms are not clearly understood, processing social information is probably linked to children's cognitive and social development (Crick Dodge, 1994).

Race/ethnicity. Research on early aggression and information processing is based on studies of diverse populations of children. In developing the concept of hostile attribution, for example, Graham and Hudley (1994) selected 78 aggressive and 78 nonaggressive 12 to 13-year-old African American boys in Chapter One (supplemental funding) schools in Los Angeles. They found that aggressive children were more likely to attribute hostility to an ambiguous social circumstance (e.g., when a peer appears to cause the subject to spill water on his shirt), to assign blame to others rather than self or the circumstance, and to become angry toward others. Such findings support those of other investigators who have included white, African American, and children from other racial/ethnic backgrounds in their samples (see Coie et al., 1992).

To date, no racially or ethnically different patterns of processing social information have been reported. However, no studies have compared information processing across African American, Asian American, Hispanic, American Indian, white, and other children. And few studies have attempted to disaggregate the effects of poverty, class, and neighborhood from those of race/ethnicity. When race or ethnicity is a factor, the effects of culture and language must be separated from the differential exposure of children from minority groups to poverty and violence, both of which appear to condition a negative view about the intent of others.

Effectiveness of Skills Training

Although developmental research on cognitive processes in the etiology of aggressive behavior and violence is increasingly persuasive, few attempts have been made to apply this research co family preservation. Moreover, school- and clinic-based studies of interventions that attempt to train children in cognitive problem solving and thereby reduce delinquency and other antisocial behaviors have had equivocal findings (Dumas, 1989). However, recent controlled studies focusing on remediating the cognitive skills of aggressive children have demonstrated significant improvements in children's social competence, school comportment, self-esteem, and aggressive behavior (Battistich, Solomon, Watson, & Solomon, 1989; Kazdin, Esveldt-Dawson, French, & Unis, 1987a, 1987b; Lochman, Burch, Curry, & Lampron, 1984; Lochman & Curry, 1986; Lochman & Lampron, 1988).

Although these studies are not in the family-preservation field, they develop and test cognitive problem solving in ways that might be used in family preservation. During a four to five-month period, for example, Lochman (1992) administered a cognitive problem-solving skills program to fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade boys identified as being aggressive. Training ranged from 12 to 18 hours and included content on inhibiting impulsive behavior (controlling arousal), identifying social cues (encoding and interpretation), generating prosocial responses to different kinds of social circumstances (response search), evaluating each response (response decision), and enacting problem-solving strategies. Three years later, boys in the treated condition differed positively from those in the untreated and comparable condition in problem solving, self-esteem (both in the home and at school), and drug and alcohol involvement. The findings suggest that general cognitive problem-solving training, which is not specifically focused on a target behavior (such as drug use), may function as a moderating variable for various antisocial behaviors. At the same time, however, this study failed to find long-term effects on delinquency and classroom behavior. Thus, although the treatment program is similar to the sort of protocol that might be developed in FPS, the findings are not uniformly positive.

Other studies have produced more positive findings. These studies employ a multifaceted treatment model that, although not home based, is similar to many FPS programs. In a study of 97 children (7-13 years of age) referred for severe antisocial behavior, Kazdin, Siegel, and Bass (1992) compared the effects of cognitive problem-solving skills training, parenting training, and a combined condition of both child-focused problem-solving and parent-focused child-management training on antisocial behavior. At one-year follow-up, each condition had reduced antisocial, aggressive behavior, but the effects of the combined condition were significantly greater than the effects of either individual condition. Using a family-preservation model that incorporated cognitive problem solving with parenting and school-centered interventions, Henggeler, Melton, Smith, Schoenwald, and Hanley (1993) compared FPS to routine counseling and supervision in a sample of 84 seriously delinquent children. After an average of 2.4 years, the 43 youths randomly assigned to the FPS condition had significantly lower rearrest, self-reported delinquency, and incarceration rates. Like the Kazdin et al. (1992) study, these data suggest that cognitive problem-solving strategies are more effective when used as part of a set of interventions that focus on family, school, peer, and other factors that potentiate aggressive behavior (see Henppelet Borduin, 1990).

Although these studies are promising, no family-centered study has separately evaluated the relative contribution of cognitive problem solving, concrete services, parenting training, and other elements of treatment in family preservation. Until factorial studies are conducted, the argument for using cognitive problem solving in mS will be based on developmental theory controlled studies from clinic and school settings, and nonfactorial studies of FPS services that make use of cognitive-behavioral strategies as an element of family treatment. Although this evidence is increasingly promising, new studies need to articulate further cognitive problem-solving strategies for family preservation. If family preservation is to be more effective as an early intervention strategy for antisocial, aggressive behavior, treatment must be more closely tied to the social conditions, interpersonal relationships, and skills that promote a child's attachment to prosocial peers, success in school, and commitment to conventional activities.

REFERENCES

Asher, S. R., Renshaw, P. D., & Geraci, R. L. (1980). Children's friendships and social competence. International Journal of Linguistics, 7, 27-39.

Bath, H. I., & Haapala, D. A. (1993). Intensive family preservation services with abused and neglected children: An examination of group differences. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17, 213-225.

Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., & Solomon, J. (1989). Effects of an elementary school program to enhance prosocial behavior on children's cognitive-social problem-solving skills and strategies. Journal of Allied Developmental Psychology, 10, 147-169.

Betnard, T. J, (1990). Angry aggression among the "truly disaduantaged." Criminology, 18, 73-96.

Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M., Kaukiainen, A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Apgressive Behavior, 18, 117-127.

Cairns, R. B., Caims, B. D., Neckerman, H. J., Ferguson, L. L., Gariepp J. L. (1969). Growth and aggression: Childhood to early adolescence. Developmental Psychology 25, 320-330.

Cirino, R.J., & Beck, S.J. (1991). Social information processing and the efects of reputational, situational, developmental, and gender factors among children's sociometric groups. Merrill Paltner Quarterly, 37, 561-582.

Coie, J. D., & Jacobs, M. R. (1993) The role of social context in the prevention of conduct disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 263-275.

Coie, J. D., Lnchman, J. E., Terry, R., & Hyman, C. (1991). Predicting early adolescent disorder from childhood aggression and peer rejection. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 763-792.

Cole, E., & Duva, J. (1990). Family preservation: An orientation for administrators and practitioners. Washington, DC; Child Welfare League of America.

Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1989). Children's perceptions of peer entry and conflict situations: Social strategies, goals, and outcome expectations. In B. H. Schneider, J. Nadel, G. Attili, & R. P. Weissberg (Eds.), Social competence in delopmental perspective (pp. 396-399). Dordreche, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanism in children's social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74-101.

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722.

Crick, N. R., & Ladd, G. W. (1990). Children's perceptions of the outcomes of aggressive strategies: Do the ends justify being mean? Developmental Psychology 16, 612-620.

Dodge, K. A. (1991). Emocion and social information processing. In J. Garber & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), The development of emotion regulation and disregulation (FF. 159-161). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit. G. S. (1990). Mechanisms in the cycle of violence. Science, 250, 1678-1663.

Dodge, K. A., & Newman, J. P. (1981). Biased decision making processes in aggressive boys. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 375-379.

Dodge, K. A. Percic. G. S., McClaskey, C. L., & Brown, M. M. (166). Social competence in children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 51(2, serial no. 213).

Dodge, K. A., Price, J. M., Bachorowski, J. A., & Newman, J. P. (1990). Hostile attributional biases in severely aggressive adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99, 385-392.

Dodge, K. A., & Tomlin, A. M. (1987). Utilization of self-schemas as a mechanism of interpretational bias in aggressive children. Social Cognition, 5, 280-300.

Dore, M. M. (1993). Family preservation and poor families: When "homebuilding" is not enough. Families in Society, 74, 545-556.

Dumas, J. E. (1989). Treating antisocial behavior in children: Child and family approaches. Clinical Psychology Review, 9, 197-222.

D'Zucilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M. R. (1971). Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 78, 10-126.

Eggert, L. L. (1994). Anger management for youth: Stemming aggression and violence. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.

Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R., Elliott, D. S., Hawkins, J. D., Kandel, D. B., Klein, M. W., McCord, J., Rowe, D. C., & Tremblay, R. E. (1993). Advancing knowledge about the onset of delinquency and crime. In B. B. Lahey & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 283-342). New York: Plenum Press.

Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R., & Van Kammen, W. B. (1990). Long-term criminal outcomes of hyperactivity-impulsivity-attention deficit and conduct problems in childhood. In L. N. Robins & M. Rutter (Eds.), Straight and devious pathways from childhood to adulthood (pp. 62-81). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Feldman, E., & Dodge, K. A. (1987). Social information processing and sociometric status: Sex, age, and situation effects. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15, 211-227.

Feldman, L. H. (1991, December). Assessing the effectiveness of family preservation services in New Jersey within an ecological context. New Jersey: Bureau of Research, Evaluation and Quality Assurance, Division of Youth and Family Services.

Finch, A. J., Jr., Nelson, W. M., III, & Otc, E. S. (Eds.). (1993). Cognitive-behavioral procedures with children and adolescents; A practical guide. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Fraser, M. W. (1994, April). The social development of antisocial, aggressive behavior: Implications for family preservation services. Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the American Orthopsychiatric Association, Alexandria, VA.

Fraser, M. W., Pecora, P. J., & Haapala, D. A. (1991). Families in crisis. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyte

Garrison, S. R., & Stolberp, A. L. (1983). Modification of anger in children by affective imagery training. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 11, 115-130.

Gest, T., & Friedman, D. (1994, August 29). The new crime wave: A teen boom will fuel more violence no matter what Washington does. U.S. News and World Reort, 117, 2-28.

Gest, T., & Witkin, G., Hetter, K., & Wright, A. (1994, January 17). Violence in America. U.S. News and World Report, 1 16, 22-37.

Gouze, K, R, (1987). Attention and social problem solving as correlates of aggression in preschool males. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15, 181-197.

Graham, S., & Hudley, C. (1994). Attributions of aggressive and nonaggressive African-American male early adolescents: A study of construct accessibility. Develoemental Psychology, 30, 365-373.

Henggeler, S, W, (1989). Delinquency in adolescence. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Henggeler, S, W., & Borduin, C. M. (1990). Family Therapy and beyond: A multisystemic approach to treating the behavior problems of children and adolescents. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Henggeler, S, W., Melton, G. B., & Smith, L. A. (1992). Family preservation using multisystemic therapy: An effective alternative to incarcerating serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 953-961.

Henggeler, S, W., Melton, G. B., Smith, L. A., Schoenwald, S. K., Hanley, J. H. (1993). Family preservation using multisystemic treatment: Long-term follow-up to a clinical trial wich serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 2, 283-293.

Jenson, J, M., & Howard, M. O. (1990). Skills deficits, skills training, and delinquency. Children and youth Services Review, 12, 213-228.

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

Kazdin, A, E., Esveldt-Dawson, K., French, N. H., & Unis, A. S. (1987a). Effects of parent management training and problem-solving skills training combined in the treatment of antisocial child behavior. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26, 416-424.

Kazdin, A, E., Esveldt-Dawson K., French, N. H., & Unis, A. S. (1987b). Problem solving skills training and relationship therapy in the treatment of antisocial child behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 7-85.

Kazdin, A. E., Siegel, T. C., & Bass, D. (199S). 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.

Kinney, J., Haapala, D. A., & Booth, C. (1991). Keeping families together: The Homebuilders model. New York; Aldine de Gruyter.

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., Burch, P. R., Cum J. E, & Lampron, L. B. (1984). Treatment and generalization effects of cognitive-behavioral and goal-setting interventions with aggressive boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, 915-916.

Lochman, J. E., Curry, J. E (1986). Effects of social problem-solving training and self-instruction training with aggressive boys. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 15, 159-161.

Lochman, J. E., Dodge K. A. (1994). Social-cognitive processes of severely violent, moderately agpressive, and nonappressive boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 36-374.

Lochman, J. E., & Lampron, L. B. (1988). Cognitive-behaviotal interventions for aggressive boys: Seven-month follow-up effects. Journal of Children and Adolescent Psychotherapy 5, 12-22.

Loeber, R. (1988). Natural histories of conduct problems, delinquency, and associated substance use: Evidence for developmental progressions. In B. B. Lahey & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 73-124). New York: Plenum Press.

Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W. B., Farrington, D. P. (1991). Initiation, escalation, and desistance in juvenile offending and their correlates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 36-82.

Loeber, R., Wung, P., Keenan, K., Giroux, B., Stouchamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W. B., & Maughan, B. (1993). Developmental pathways in disruptive child behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 103-133.

Masten, A. S., Garmezy, N., Tellegen, A., & Pellegrini, D. S. (1988). Competence and stress in school children: The moderating effects of individual and family qualities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 29, 745-764.

Nasby, W., Hayden, B., & DePaulo, B. M. (1979). Attributional bias among aggressive boys to interpret unambiguous social stimuli as displays of hostility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 89, 459-468.

Nelson, K. (1990). Family-based services for juvenile offenders. Children and Youth Services Review, 12, 193-212.

Nelson, K., & Landsman, M. (1992). Alternative models of family preservation: Family-based services in context. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Patterson, G. R., Capaldi, D., & Bank, L. (1991). An early searter model for predicting delinquency. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 139-168). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associaes.

Pepler, D. J., Kinp, G., & Byrd, W. (1991). A social-cognitively based social skills training program for aggressive children. In D. J. Pepler K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and trentment of childhood aggression (pp. 361-379). Hillsdale, NI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Brown, M. M. (1988). Early family experience, social problem solving patterns, and children's social competence. Child Development,59,107-120.

Quiggle, N. L., Garber, J., Panak, W. E, & Dodge, K. A. (1992). Social information processing in aggressive and depressed children. Child Development, 63, 1305-1320.

Regoli, R. M., Hewit, J. D. (1994). Delinquency in society: A child-centered approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Renshaw, P. D., & Asher, S. R. (1983). Children's poals and strategies for social interaction. Merrill-Palmer, Quarterly, 19, 353-374.

Roff, J. D. (1992). Childhood apgression, peer status, and social class as predictors of delinquency. Psychological Reports, 70, 31-34.

Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children's responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology, Vol. 3 Social competence in children (pp. 49-74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.

Sanson, A., Prior, M., Smart, D., & Oberklaid, E (1993). Gender differences in aggression in childhood: Implications for a peaceful world. Australian Psychologist, 28, 8-92.

Slaby, R. G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: 1. Assessment. Developmental Psychology, 24, 580-588.

Spaid, W. M., & Fraser, M. W. (1991). The correlates of success/failure in brief and intensive family treatment: Implications for family preservation services. Children and Youth Services Review, 13, 77-99.

Spivak, G., Platc, J. J., & Shure, M. B. (1976). The problem solving approach to adjustment: A guide to research and intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Steinberg, M. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1983) Attributional bias in aggressive adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1, 312-321.

Strassberg, Z., & Dodge, K. A. (1992). The longitudinal relation between parental conflict strategies and children's sociometric status in kindergarten. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 38, 477-493.

University Associates. (1993 March). Evaluation of Michigan's Families First program. Lansing, MI: Author.

Weiss, B., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S. (1992). Some consequences of early harsh discipline: Child aggression and a maladaptive social information processing style. Child Development, 63, 1321-1335.

White, H. R., Brick, J., & Hansell, S. (1993, September). A longitudinal investipation of alcohol use and aggressian in adolescence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 11(SUFPL.), 62-77.

Wilson, W.J. (1927). The truly disadvantad. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Yuan, Y. T., McDonald, W. R., Wheeler, C. E., Struckman-Johnson, D., & Rivest, M. (1990). Evaluation of AB1562 in-home care demonstration projects. Volume 1: Final report. Sacramento, CA: Walter R. McDonald and Associates.

To earn .3 CEU (equivalent to three clock hours) for reading this article:

* Complete the test on the following pages or on a photocopy of it.

* Write one of the following: (1) a critical review of the article, (2) a detailed explanation of how you will be able to use the information in the article in your professional activity, or (3) a reflection on the relevance of the content of the article to human services generally. Your essay must be at least 300 words but no more than 500 words long and must be typed or word processed.

* Send the completed test, essay, and a $12.50 check payable to Family Service America, Inc., to

International raining Center

Family Service America, Inc.

11700 West Lake Park Drive

Milwaukee, WI 53S24

The International raining Center will notify you as to whether you have satisfactorily met the requirements for .3 CEU for this article. The center will send notification of your earned credits in quantities of .6 CEU to the American Council on Education's National Registry for Training Programs. re center will hold any completed test-essay unit until or unless it can be paired with another for submission of your .6 CEU to the National Registry.

An editor from Families in Society is available to facilitate your completion of the test or essay. Call 414-359-1040 for help.

For a description and rationale of the Families in Society Continuing Education Program, send a stamped, self-addressed 10 (business-size) envelope to:

Families in Society CEU Program

11700 West Lake Park Drive

Milwaukee, WI 53224

CEU Test No. 58(Sample test omitted)

Mark W. Fraser is Tate Professor for Children-in-Need, School of Social Work, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Copyright Family Service America Jan 1996
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved