The Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (SCCAP):
Initiative for Dissemination of Evidence-based Treatments for Childhood and Adolescent Mental
Health Problems
With additional support from Florida International University and The Children’s Trust.
Keynote Evidence-based School-based Violence and Prevention Programs
John E. Lochman, Ph.D., ABPP Professor and Doddridge Saxon Chair of Clinical Psychology
The University of Alabama
Topics
Prevention and treatment
Evidence-based programs
Typical elements of cognitive behavioral preventive
interventions
Myths or not
What do school-based interventions
address? – The IOM Continuum
Evidence-based prevention and
treatment interventions
Three Developmental Periods
Preschool and Early Childhood
Later Childhood
Early Adolescence
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in preschool and early childhood
Universal prevention programs
Good Behavior Game (Embry, 2002)
Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (Greenberg & Kusche, 1996)
LIFT program (Reid & Eddy, 2002; Eddy et al, 2003)
Second Step Program (Grossman et al, 1997; Taub, 2001)
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in preschool and early childhood
Treatment and targeted prevention programs
Incredible Years multicomponent program, with child and teacher
training (Dinosaur School) and 12-20 parent training sessions (Webster-Stratton & Hammond, 1997; Webster-Stratton, 1998; Reid et al, 2007)
Triple P (Positive Parenting Program) is a 5-tier intervention that
includes (1) media-based parent information, (2) 1-2 session parent training, (3) 4 session behavioral training for moderate problems, (4) 12 session behavioral training for more severe problems, and (5) 11 tailored sessions that includes a focus on parental dysfunction
Montreal Delinquency Prevention Program (Tremblay et
al, 1996) was a multicomponent program for 2nd and 3rd graders, including parent training and social skills and self control training for children
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in preschool and early childhood
Treatment and targeted prevention programs (continued)
Fast Track (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999, 2002, 2004,
2010) is a comprehensive preventive intervention that
included classroom-level PATHS lessons, parent training,
friendship groups and tutoring for at-risk kindergarten-age
children - from 1st through 10th grades
Family Check-UP (Shaw et al, 2006) is a 3 session
intervention based on motivational interviewing techniques
Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) (Brinkmeyer & Eyberg, 2003; Nixon et al, 2003) is a highly individualized
12-16 session intervention,
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in later childhood
Universal prevention programs
Seattle Social Development Project (Hawkins et al, 1999;
Lonczak et al, 2001) - behavior management training for teachers, parent training, child social skill training
Bullying Prevention Program (Olweus, 1993; Berryhill &
Prinz, 2003) - reduce acceptance by school staff of bullying
Positive Behavior Supports (Sugai & Horner, 2002; Todd et al,
2002) - Workshops for teachers and students, outlining positive behavioral expectations
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in later childhood
Treatment and targeted prevention programs
Problem Solving Skills Training & Parent
Management Training (Kazdin et al, 1987; 1989; 1992)
Anger Coping, and Coping Power, Programs (Lochman, 1992; Lochman & Wells, 2002, 2003, 2004; Lochman et al, 2009)
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in early adolescence
Universal prevention programs
Life Skills Training (Botvin & Griffin, 2004)
Responding in Peaceful and Positive Ways (Farrell
et al, 2001)
School Transitional Environment Project (Felner et
al, 2001)
Positive Youth Development (Caplan et al, 1992) -
Sessions in 6th and 7th grades address stress management,
problem solving and assertiveness, social networks, and
substance and health information
Evidence-based prevention and treatment
interventions in early adolescence
Treatment and targeted prevention programs
The Art of Self-Control (Feindler & Ecton, 1986)
Other intensive, effective, multicomponent
programs are Multisystemic Therapy (Henggler &
Lee, 2003) and Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (Chamberlain & Smith, 2003) - are not based in schools, but typically can include therapists’ direct contact with schools
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems School-based interventions address reciprocal relations between
children’s cognitions, emotions and behavior
To address these reciprocal processes, intervention’s have both
behavioral elements (using basic behavioral principles, focusing on the
influence of external contingencies) and cognitive elements (internal
information-processing)
Certain common elements exist in many school-based programs
for children with aggressive and conduct problem behavior
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Goal Setting
Children identify long-term and short-term goals for
themselves in their home and school settings
short-term goals are typically “prosocial opposites” of problem
behaviors, and lead to monitoring and reinforcement
Research has indicated that a goal-setting component in a CBI
program can help to generalize behavioral change into school
and home settings
Likely leads children to focus more on the consequences of
their daily behaviors
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Organizational and study skills, which are important for the
concomitant academic problems that aggressive children have
Children identify useful and not-useful study skills, and then
plan to use the useful ones when completing homework and
long-term projects at school
Children and parents jointly create a homework contract which
specifies when and where homework will be done, and how
parents will monitor homework completion and provide
contingent rewards for home work completion
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Awareness of emotions, especially anger, and of associated
physiological arousal
Children increase their accuracy in identifying emotions in others
There is an initial focus on a wide range of emotions children experience,
including emotions that they perceive as making them vulnerable
(sadness, anxiety), and which they may not recognize in themselves
There is focused attention on the cognitive (ruminative “angry thoughts”)
and physiological correlates of anger
Using aids such as anger thermometers, children learn to identify different
levels of anger that they experience, and they identify “triggers” that lead
to each level of anger
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Anger management and self-regulation Attention to anger awareness leads into a focus on how children can better manage their
arousal
Children are taught a set of coping methods that they can use when anger-aroused, and
which can aid then in recovering more quickly from an aroused state
The self-regulation methods typically include use of distraction techniques, relaxation
training (e.g. abdominal breathing, or progressive relaxation), and use of coping
internalized self-statements
The coping self statements are meant to lead into more deliberative processing of
possible solutions to the social problem that is experienced
Typically a series of graded exposure activities are used to assist children in practicing
their self-regulation skills first in indirect ways (e.g. through puppet role-plays) and then
in direct person-to-person role-plays
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Perspective-taking and attribution retraining Before children can accurately perceive the problem situations they face, they must
develop an ability to accurately perceive others’ perspectives and intentions
After a set of fun game-like tasks that illustrate how a single stimulus can be perceived in
quite different ways, children can engage in role-play tasks where different people’s
different perceptions of events and of others’ intentions are explored
Although the focus is primarily often on children’s perceptions of their peer interactions,
clinicians can also focus on adult-child interactions if warranted
The primary focus is on retraining the hostile attribution bias evident in reactive
aggressive children, encouraging them to experience that it is sometimes hard to tell
what others intend in problematic situations (rather than erroneously assuming hostile
intentions in ambiguous situations)
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Social problem-solving skills Along with anger management, problem solving skill training is the most common CBI
technique used with aggressive children
Children learn a step-wise approach to thinking about problem resolution, typically
including steps for problem identification, generation of choices or solutions to resolve
the problem, consideration of consequences for each solution, and a method for making
a decision about which choice to enact
Problem solving can be more successful when a positive goal to be achieved is identified,
and when the child initially tries to resolve problems which trigger low to moderate
levels of anger
Brainstorming about consequences (perceived as positive and negative; short and long
term) is likely one of the most important aspects of the problem-solving process
A series of activities is again used, ranging from discussion, to game-like tasks, to role-
playing, to video or audio recording an enactment of the problem solving process
Typical elements of school-based
prevention programs for children with
conduct problems (cont.)
Social skills, dealing with peer pressure, and involvement in
less-deviant peer groups
Because of the associated social skills deficits of many (but not all)
aggressive children, training in social skills with peers is often an element
of CBI
As children get closer to adolescence, there is often a focus on handling
developmentally-appropriate risks, such as peer pressure to engage in
antisocial behavior
CBI can explicitly focus on children’s current involvement in potentially
deviant peer groups, and can address how to move to other peer groups
that are somewhat less risky
Myths – or Not
Myths – or Not Multicomponent interventions are more useful than
simpler single component intervention
Booster sessions are necessary
Interventions have differing effectiveness in neighborhoods that vary socioeconomically
Group interventions with aggressive children are iatrogenic
Parent engagement in preventive intervention is only a function of parent characteristics
A good workshop is sufficient training for school staff to implement prevention programs
The characteristics of schools and school staff affect the implementation of programs
Myths – or Not
Multicomponent interventions are more useful
than simpler single component interventions
Multicomponent interventions
Overall, multicomponent intervention programs that
involve child and parent components have stronger
outcomes than do single components for children and for
parents
There are few universal prevention multicomponent
programs that have been to be effective, although the
LIFT program is an exception
Effect Sizes of Contrasts of Coping Power with
Control Cell: Outcomes at 1 Year Follow-up
Lochman & Wells (2004), Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 571-578
CP Child Component
Only
versus Control
CP Child + Parent
Components
versus Control
Delinquency - .37*
Substance Use (Parent-
rated) - .66*
School Behavioral
Improvement .42* .34*
So, myth or not?
Not a myth for important outcomes in the
community
BUT IS a myth for school-based behavioral
problems; child-only preventive interventions
can be as effective as multicomponent
intervention
Myths – or Not
Booster sessions are necessary
Myths – or Not
A remarkably understudied assumption, with few randomized tests of whether boosters promote long-term maintenance or produce long-term preventive effects, as assumed
Have been positive effects of a brief booster to the Anger Coping program in maintaining observed classroom disruptive off-task behaviors at a 3 year follow-up (Lochman,
1992), and of a booster for a family-focused prevention program on child aggression at a 1 year follow-up (Tolan et al, 2009)
However, boosters have not produced additional effects in a treatment for adults with impulse-control problems (Hodgins
et al, 2009) nor for a classroom social problem solving program to reduce aggression (Daunic et al, 2006)
Brief Coping Power – Growth Curve Analyses
Time 1-5 – on Teachers’ BASC Ratings of
Externalizing Behavior Problems
Coping Power delivered during 5th grade (24 child sessions, 10 parent sessions)
CP Booster – monthly individual sessions in grade 6
CP-Only:60: CP-Booster:60; Control:120
COEFFICIENT p VALUE
CP-Only vs
Control
-2.79 .016
CP-Booster vs
Control
-1.28 ns
Teacher BASC Externalizing
Ratings by Condition
27.61
31.44
35.26
39.09
42.92
Teacher Rating Externalizing Composite
0 0.97 1.93 2.90 3.87
Year
Control
CP only
CP-Booster
So, myth or not?
Not a myth for preventive family interventions
BUT may be a myth for school-based
interventions
Myths – or Not
Interventions are most effective in higher
socoieconomic neighborhoods
Neighborhood Effects Exposure to neighborhood problems increases children’s
aggressive behaviors (Colder, Mott, Levy & Flay, 2000; Guerra, Huesmann &
Spindler, 2003), with heightened effects during middle childhood (Ingoldsby & Shaw, 2002).
Neighborhood problems contribute to poor parenting
(Pinderhughes, Nix, Foster, Jones & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2001),
although the neighborhood effects continue to add to the
effects of poor parenting on children’s aggressive behaviors (Greenberg, Lengua, Coie, Pinderhughes & CPPRG, 1999; Schwab-Stone et al, 1995)
In addition to these direct and mediated effects, community
contextual factors may influence the ability of preventive
interventions to affect later parenting processes and
children’s behavior
TOCA Aggression: Coping Power and
Neighborhood Disadvantage (Lochman et al, 2007, SRCD)
Level 2 Time Slope
TRT,G110
TRT,G210
Level 3
Neighborhood Intercept, G001
Neigh X Time Slope, G101
Neigh X TRT X Time, G111
Neigh X SQTime, G201
Neigh X TRT X SQTime, G211
ns (sig w/out neigh
predictors)
ns
.207418 (.001***)
ns
ns
-.015370 (.05*)
.035886 (.03*)
TOCA Aggression: Coping Power X
Neighborhood Disadvantage
-2.81 -1.64 -0.47 0.71 1.88 3.05
TOCABEH*YEAR*CP*CONDIS
CT
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
A
G
G
C
O
N
_
C
CPOWER = 0.000000
CONDIS2 = -0.530310
CPOWER = 0.000000
CONDIS2 = 0.755966
CPOWER = 1.000000
CONDIS2 = -0.530310
CPOWER = 1.000000
CONDIS2 = 0.755966
Conclusion
Neighborhood disadvantage, as measured by census data, have an effect on the Rx X Time Slope:
on children’s aggressive behavior, with intervention children and parents in the better neighborhoods showing most improvement
So, myth or not?
NOT a myth - Is support for the assumption
that school-based interventions fare better
with children from higher SES neighborhoods
through a 3 year follow-up
Myths – or Not
Group interventions with aggressive children
are iatrogenic
Group Formats Although overall Coping Power program effects have
significantly reduced children’s problem behavior, it is
plausible that the degree of positive effects may be reduced
or truncated to some degree by deviant peer effects and
other behavioral management problems with groups of
children.
– The steepest growth of substance use occurs among adolescents
with drug-using peers (Chassin et al., 1996; Curran et al., 1997).
– Similarly, aggressive children within classrooms with high rates of
other aggressive children are more likely to increase their aggression
during that academic year (Barth et al., 2004).
Intervention Research on
Deviant Group Effects
By a 1-year follow-up, Dishion and Andrews (1995) found that
youth who had received youth ATP sessions had higher rates
of tobacco use and of teacher-rated delinquent behaviors
than did the control children, and these iatrogenic effects
were evident even if the parents had also received
intervention in the combined condition.
– At a 3-year follow-up, the teen intervention conditions continued to
have more tobacco use and delinquency (Poulin et al., 2001).
– Analyses of the iatrogenic group conditions revealed that subtle
dynamics of deviancy training during unstructured transitions in the
groups predicted growth in self reported smoking and teacher ratings
of delinquency (Dishion et al., 2001).
Pilot Study of Individual vs Group
format for Coping Power
11 schools randomly assigned to either the ICP (individually
delivered Coping Power) or GCP (group delivered Coping
Power) condition (ICP: 30; GCP: 30)
abbreviated CP intervention: 24 child sessions and 10
parent sessions during the 4th grade year
Assessments: T1, T2 (after 5 sessions), T3 (post; 98%
retention)
Baseline-Post (T1-T3) Dominance/Revenge Social Goals – ICP vs GCP contrast
Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p= 01**
OJ J DP Sa ml p e I CP v s GCP
Co n d i t i o n Gr o u p - CP I n d i v i d u a l - CP
L Sme a n _ SGCc o mp
- 1 . 2 0 0 0
- 1 . 1 0 0 0
- 1 . 0 0 0 0
- 0 . 9 0 0 0
- 0 . 8 0 0 0
- 0 . 7 0 0 0
- 0 . 6 0 0 0
- 0 . 5 0 0 0
- 0 . 4 0 0 0
- 0 . 3 0 0 0
- 0 . 2 0 0 0
- 0 . 1 0 0 0
0
0 . 1 0 0 0
0 . 2 0 0 0
Ti me Po i n t
1 2 3
Baseline-Post (T1-T3) Self-Dysregulation – ICP vs GCP contrast
Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p=.03*
OJ J DP Sa ml p e I CP v s GCP
Co n d i t i o n Gr o u p - CP I n d i v i d u a l - CP
L Sme a n _ To t ADI
1 . 1 7 0 0
1 . 1 8 0 0
1 . 1 9 0 0
1 . 2 0 0 0
1 . 2 1 0 0
1 . 2 2 0 0
1 . 2 3 0 0
1 . 2 4 0 0
1 . 2 5 0 0
1 . 2 6 0 0
1 . 2 7 0 0
1 . 2 8 0 0
1 . 2 9 0 0
1 . 3 0 0 0
1 . 3 1 0 0
1 . 3 2 0 0
1 . 3 3 0 0
1 . 3 4 0 0
1 . 3 5 0 0
1 . 3 6 0 0
1 . 3 7 0 0
1 . 3 8 0 0
1 . 3 9 0 0
Ti me Po i n t
1 2 3
Baseline-Post (T1-T3) parent-rated BASC Conduct Problems – ICP vs GCP contrast
Repeated Measures Anova: Time X Cond: p=.008*
OJ J DP Sa ml p e I CP v s GCP
Co n d i t i o n Gr o u p - CP I n d i v i d u a l - CP
L Sme a n _ CPp a r e n t
4 . 0 0 0 0
5 . 0 0 0 0
6 . 0 0 0 0
7 . 0 0 0 0
Ti me Po i n t
1 2 3
Conclusion
Individual format (ICP) is more effective than Group
Format (GCP) in reducing parent-rated children’s
conduct problems
GCP was more effective than ICP in reducing
children’s dominance/revenge-oriented social goals
and in improving their self-regulation
Thus, group and individual delivery of programs
may affect different types of outcomes
So, myth or not?
NOT a myth for child behavior outcome – an
individually delivered intervention did better
than a group intervention
HOWEVER, other outcomes are better with a
group format than with an individual format,
so mixed…..
Myths – or Not
Parent engagement in preventive intervention
is only a function of parent characteristics
Parenting Practices Mediate Effect of Family Context
on Parent Attendance at CP Parent Sessions Ryan, Boxmeyer & Lochman, Behavioral Disorders, 2009
Maternal
Depression
Contextual
Factors
Community
Support
Community
Problems
SES/Parent
Education
Parenting
Child Social
Goals
Attendance
Dominant
Social Goals
Revenge
Social
Goals
Parent
Attendance
Parental
Monitoring
Positive
Parenting
Parent
Involvement
Enhancing parent engagement:
through parents
Dishion and Kavanagh (2003) have used a 3-
session family check-up to enhance parent
motivation and parent engagement in
intervention
Feedback
Form: Tool
to
communicate
and connect
family
strength and
areas of
concerns.
Action
Planning
Form
combines
goal setting
and MI
strategies.
Enhancing parent engagement:
through children
Lag effects of child engagement and parent
engagement during Coping Power sessions
Parent and Child Engagement Across early, Middle
and Late Intervention Ellis, Lindsey, Barker, Boxmeyer & Lochman, under review
Parent T1 Parent T2 Parent T3
Child T1 Child T2 Child T3
0.59 0.81
0.62 0.47
0.19
0.340.11
Parent
engagement:
attendance
Child
engagement:
attendance,
goal points
earned, group
points earned
So, myth or not?
Parent engagement is affected by parent
characteristics, such as their parenting patterns
However, it is a myth that parenting characteristics
such as motivation can not be changed (e.g. with
the Family Check-up), and that child characteristics,
such as children’s initial engagement in their own
sessions, can not directly affect parent engagement
Myths – or Not
A good basic workshop is sufficient training
for school staff to implement prevention
programs
Coping Power Field Trial in 57 Schools
Lochman, Boxmeyer, Powell, Qu, Wells, & Windle (2009). Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Training process for school counselors (randomly assigned to receive Basic Training or Intensive Training):
(1) 3 days of workshop training
(2) Monthly meetings (2 hours) while intervention underway
For CP-IT counselors only:
(3) Individualized feedback on audiotaped sessions
(4) Technical assistance from trainers via telephone and email contacts
CP-Intensive
vs Control
Estimate (SE)
Behavior Problems
BASC Externalizing
(teacher-report) -.41* (.11)
BASC Externalizing
(parent-report) -.23*(.12)
NYS Minor Assault
(child-report) -.25** (.12)
Targeted Processes
BASC Social/Academic
(teacher) .35* (.13)
BASC Social (parent)
Outcome Expectations
(child) -.24* (.08)
APQ Inconsistent Discipline
(parent)
**p<.01, *p<.05,
CP-Intensive vs
Control
Estimate (SE)
CP-Basic
vs Control:
Estimate (SE)
Behavior Problems
BASC Externalizing
(teacher-report) -.41* (.11)
BASC Externalizing
(parent-report) -.23*(.12)
NYS Minor Assault (child-
report) -.25** (.12)
Targeted Processes
BASC Social/Academic
(teacher) .35* (.13) .24+ (.13)
BASC Social (parent)
Outcome Expectations
(child) -.24* (.08)
APQ Inconsistent
Discipline (parent)
**p<.01, *p<.05, +p=.06
Conclusions/Implications for Training
Evidence-based prevention programs such as Coping
Power can be disseminated effectively to counselors in
real-world settings, although:
The intensity of training makes a difference in whether
improvements in children’s outcomes and mediating processes
occur
Ongoing supervisory feedback about program implementation
(particularly to foster client engagement) may be critical to
promoting positive outcomes
So, myth or not?
It is a myth that training intensity will not
influence the implementation of new
prevention programs
Myths – or Not
The characteristics of schools and school staff
affect the implementation of programs
Counselor and School Characteristics
Predicting Program Delivery *p<.05, +p<.10
Lochman, Powell, Boxmeyer, Qu, Wells, & Windle. (2009).
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice
Objectives
Completed
Sessions
Scheduled
Agreeableness .086* (.042) .185+ (.103)
Managerial Control -.286+ (.149)
Counselor and School Characteristics
Predicting Counselor Engagement **p<.01, *p<.05
With
Children
With
Parents
Conscientiousness .068* (.032)
Agreeableness .112** (.039)
Managerial Control X Cynicism -.734** (.200)
Autonomy X Cynicism .674** (.173)
Autonomy X Cynicism
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Low Autonomy High Autonomy
En
gagem
ent
wit
h C
hild
ren
Cynicism No
Cynicism Yes
Conclusions About Counselor and
School Characteristics
The GOOD NEWS: It is ok to be neurotic, not particularly
open-minded, not particularly extraverted, and cynical if you
are in the right work environment
Degree and quality of implementation can be influenced by
agreeableness and conscientiousness of counselors and
by characteristics of the school setting which interact with
counselor characteristics (counselor cynicism in interaction
with school autonomy and rigid managerial control)
So, myth or not?
It is not a myth that counselor and school
characteristics can influence the
implementation of new programs
For more information, please go to the main website and browse for workshops on this topic or check out our additional resources.
Additional Resources Online resources: 1. Coping Power website: http://www.rfts.ca/cope/index.html 2. Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology website: http://effective childtherapy.com 3. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: http://www.clemson.edu/olweus/history.htm
Books: 1. Larson J., & Lochman J.E. (2002). Helping Schoolchildren Cope With Anger: A Cognitive Behavioral Intervention. New York: Guilford Press. 2. Murrihy, R.C., Kidman, A.D., & Ollendick, T.H. (2010). The Fast Track Project: Preventing Severe Conduct Problems in School-Age Youth. New York: Springer.
Selected Peer-reviewed Journal Articles: 1. Embry, D. (2002). The good behavior game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 5(4), 273-297. 2. Farrell, A.D., Meyer, A.L., Kung, E.M., & Sullivan, T.N. (2001). Development and evaluation of school-based violence prevention programs. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30 (1), 207-220. 3. Ingoldsby, E.M. & Shaw, D.S. (2002). Neighborhood contextual factors and early-starting antisocial pathways. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5 (1), 21-55. 4. Lochman J.E., Boxmeyer C., Powell N., Qu L., Wells K., & Windle M. (2009) Dissemination of the Coping Power program: Importance of intensity of counselor training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 397–409. 5. Sugai, G., & Horner, R.R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35 (2), 245-259.
Full Reference List Keynote: Evidence-based School-based Violence and Prevention Programs Websites: 1. Coping Power website: http://www.rfts.ca/cope/index.html 2. Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology website: http://effective childtherapy.com 3. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: http://www.clemson.edu/olweus/history.htm Books: Brinkmeyer, M., & Eyberg, S. M. (2003). Parent-child interaction therapy for oppositional
children. In A. E. Kazdin&J. R.Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 204–223). New York: Guilford.
Chamberlain, P., & Smith, D. K. (2003). Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: The Oregon Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care model. In A. E. Kazdin & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 282–300). New York: Guilford Press.
Dishion, T. J., & Kavanagh, K. (2003). Intervening in adolescent problem behavior: A family-centered approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Greenberg, M. T., & Kusché, C. A. (1993). Promoting social and emotional development in deaf children: The PATHS Project. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Henggeler, S. W., & Lee, T. (2003). Multisystemic treatment of serious clinical problems. In A. E. Kazdin & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 301–322). New York: Guilford Press.
Larson J., & Lochman J.E. (2002). Helping Schoolchildren Cope With Anger: A Cognitive Behavioral Intervention. New York: Guilford Press.
Murrihy, R.C., Kidman, A.D., & Ollendick, T.H. (2010). The Fast Track Project: Preventing Severe Conduct Problems in School-Age Youth. New York: Springer.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
Reid, J. B., & Eddy, J. M. (2002). Preventive efforts during the elementary school years: The linking the interests of families and teachers project. In J. B.Reid, G. R.Patterson, & J.Snyder (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention (pp. 219–233). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Todd, A. W., Lewis-Palmer, T., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Phillips, D. (2002). A guide to understanding and using the SET. Eugene: University of Oregon.
Tremblay, R. E., Mâsse, L. C., Pagani-Kurtz, L., et al (1996). From childhood physical aggression to adolescent maladjustment: the Montreal prevention experiment. In Preventing Childhood Disorders, Substance Abuse, and Delinquency (Eds R. d. V. Peters & R. J. McMahon), pp. 268– 298.Thousand Oaks:Sage.
Peer-reviewed Journal Articles: Barth, J. M., Dunlap, S. T., Dane, H., Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). Classroom environment
influences on aggression, peer relations, and academic focus. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 115–133.
Berryhill, J.C. & Prinz, R.J. (2003). Environmental interventions to enhance student adjustment: Implications for prevention. Prevention Science, 4 (2), 65-87.
Botvin GJ, Griffin KW. (2004). Life skills training: empirical predictions and future directions. Journal of Primary Prevention, 25, 211–32.
Full Reference List Caplan, M., Weissberg, R. P., Grober, J., Sivo, P. J., Grady, K., & Jacoby, C. (1992). Social
competence promotion with inner-city and suburban young adolescents: Effects on social adjustment and alcohol use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 56–63.
Chassin L, Curran PJ, Hussong AM, Colder CR. (1996). The relation of parental alcoholism to adolescent alcohol use: A longitudinal follow-up study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 70–80.
Colder, C.R., Mott, J., Levy, S., & Flay, B. (2000). The relation of perceived neighborhood danger to childhood aggression: A test of mediating mechanisms. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 83–103.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Initial impact of the fast track prevention trial for conduct problems II. Classroom effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 648–657.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2002). Evaluation of the first three years of the Fast Track Prevention Trial with children at high risk for adolescent conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 19–35.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2004). The effects of the Fast Track Program on serious problem outcomes at the end of elementary school. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 650–661.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2010). The difficulty of maintaining positive intervention effects: A look at disruptive behavior, deviant peer relations, and social skills during the middle school years. Journal of Early Adolescence, 6, 131–157.
Curran, P., Stice, E, & Chassin, L. (1997). The relation between adolescent alcohol use and peer alcohol use: a longitudinal random coefficients model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 130–40.
Daunic, A. P., Smith, S.W., Brank, E. M., & Penfield, R. D. (2006). Classroom based cognitive–behavioral intervention to prevent aggression: Efficacy and social validity. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 123–139.
Dishion, T. J., & Andrews, D. W. (1995). Preventing escalation in problem behaviors with high-risk young adolescents: Immediate and 1-year outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 538–548.
Dishion, T. J., Poulin, F. & Burraston, B. (2001). Peer group dynamics associated with iatrogenic effect in group interventions with high-risk young adolescents. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 79–92.
Eddy, J.M., Reid, J.B., Stoolmiller, M., & Fetrow, R.A. (2003). Outcomes during middle school for an elementary school-based preventive intervention for conduct problems: Follow-up results from a randomized trial. Behavior Therapy, 34, 535–552.
Embry, D. (2002). The good behavior game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 5(4), 273-297.
Farrell, A.D., Meyer, A.L., Kung, E.M., & Sullivan, T.N. (2001). Development and evaluation of school-based violence prevention programs. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30 (1), 207-220.
Farrell, A. D., Meyer, A. L., & White, K. S. (2001). Evaluation of Responding in Peaceful and Positive ways (RIPP): A school-based prevention program for reducing violence among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 451–463.
Feindler, E. L., Ecton, R. B., Kingsley, D., & Dubey, D.R. (1986). Group anger-control training for institutionalized psychiatric male adolescents. Behavior Therapy, 17, 109–123.
Full Reference List Felner, R. D., Favazza, A., Shim, M., Stephen, B., Gu, K., & Noonan, N. (2001). Whole school
improvement and restructuring as prevention and promotion: Lessons from STEP and the Project on High Performance Learning Communities. Journal of School Psychology, Special Issue: Schooling and Mental Health Issues, 39, 177−202.
Greenberg, M. T., Lengua, L. J., Coie, J., Pinderhughes, E., & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Predicting developmental outcomes at school entry using a multiple-risk model: Four American communities. Developmental Psychology,35, 403–417.
Grossman, D. C., Neckerman, H. J., Koepsell, T. D., Liu, P. Y., & Asher, K. N. (1997). Effectiveness of a violence prevention curriculum among children in elementary school: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1605–1611.
Guerra, N.G., Huesmann, L.R., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development, 74(5), 1561–1576.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Kosterman, R., Abbott, R., & Hill, K. G. (1999). Preventing adolescent health-risk behaviors by strengthening protection during childhood. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 153, 226–234.
Hodgins , D. C. Currie , S. R. Currie , G. Fick , G. H. (2009). Randomized trial of brief motivational treatments for pathological gamblers: More is not necessarily better. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 950-960.
Ingoldsby, E.M. & Shaw, D.S. (2002). Neighborhood contextual factors and early-starting antisocial pathways. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5 (1), 21-55.
Kazdin, A. E. (1987). Treatment of antisocial behavior in children: Current status and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 187-203.
Kazdin, A. E., Bass, D., Siegcl, T, & Thomas, C. (1989). Cognitive-behavioral therapy and relationship therapy in the treatment of children referred for antisocial behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 522-535.
Kazdin, A. E., Siegel, T. C., & Bass, D. (1992). Cognitive problem-solving skills training and parent management training in the treatment of antisocial behavior in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 733–747.
Lochman, J. E. (1992). Cognitive-behavioral intervention with aggressive boys: Three-year follow-up and preventive effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 426–432.
Lochman J.E., Boxmeyer C., Powell N., Qu L., Wells K., & Windle M. (2009). Dissemination of the Coping Power program: Importance of intensity of counselor training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 397–409.
Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2002). The Coping Power Program at the middle school transition:
Universal and indicated prevention effects. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, S40–S54.
Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2003). Effectiveness study of Coping Power and classroom intervention with aggressive children: Outcomes at a one-year follow-up. Behavior Therapy, 34, 493–515.
Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). The Coping Power program for preadolescent aggressive boys and their parents: Outcome effects at the one-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 571–578.
Full Reference List Lochman, J. E., Powell, N. P., Boxmeyer, C. L., Qu, L., Wells, K. C., & Windle, M. (2009).
Implementation of a school-based prevention program: Effects of counselor and school characteristics. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 476–482.
Lonczak, H.S., Huang, B., Catalano, R.F., Hawkins, J.D., Hill, K.G., Abbott, R.D., Ryan, J.A.M., & Kosterman, R. (2001) The social predictors of adolescent alcohol misuse: A test of the Social Development Model. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62, 179–189.
Nixon, R. D. V., Sweeney, L., Erickson, D. B., & Touyz, S.W. (2003). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy: A comparison of standard and abbreviated treatments for oppositional defiant preschoolers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 251–260.
Pinderhughes, E. E., Nix, R., Foster, E. M., Jones, D. & The Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2001). Parenting in Context: Impact of Neighborhood Poverty, Residential Stability, Public Services, Social Networks, and Danger on Parental Behaviors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 941–953.
Poulin, F., Dishion, T. J., & Burraston, B. (2001). 3-year iatrogenic effects associated with aggregating highrisk adolescents in cognitive-behavioral preventive interventions. Applied Developmental Science, 5, 214–224.
Reid, M. J., Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (2007). Enhancing a classroom social competence and problem-solving curriculum by offering parent training to families of moderate- to high-risk elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 36, 605–620.
Ryan, S.M., Boxmeyer, C.L., & Lochman, J.E. (2009). Influence of Risk Factors for Child Disruptive Behavior on Parent Attendance at a Preventive Intervention. Behavioral Disorders, 35 (1), 41–52.
Schwab-Stone, M.E., Ayers, T.S., Kasprow, W., Voyce, C., Barone, T. C., Shriver et al. (1995). No safe haven: a study of violence exposure in an urban community. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 1343–1352.
Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Supplee, L., Gardner, F., & Arnds, K. (2006). Randomized trial of a family centered approach to the prevention of early conduct problems: 2-Year effects of the family check-up in early childhood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74, 1–9.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R.H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 23–50.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R.R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35 (2), 245-259.
Taub, J. (2001). Evaluation of the Second Step violence prevention program at a rural elementary school. School Psychology Review, 31, 186–200.
Tolan, P.H., Gorman-Smith, G., Henry, D., & Schoeny, M. (2009). The benefits of booster interventions: Evidence from a family-focused prevention program. Prevention Science, 10 (4), 287-297.
Webster-Stratton, C. (1998). Preventing conduct problems in Head Start children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 715–730.
Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (1997). Treating children with early-onset conduct problems: A comparison of child and parent training interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65 (1), 93-109.
Retrieved from http://www.EffectiveChildTherapy.fiu.edu