Journal of Abnormal Psychology2012, Vol. 121, No. 1, 95–108© 2011 American Psychological Association0021-843X/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0025078A Quasi-Experimental Analysis of the Influence of NeighborhoodDisadvantage on Child and Adolescent Conduct ProblemsJackson A. GoodnightBenjamin B. LaheyUniversity of DaytonUniversity of ChicagoThis document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.Carol A. Van HulleJoseph L. RodgersUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonUniversity of OklahomaPaul J. RathouzIrwin D. WaldmanUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public HealthEmory UniversityBrian M. D’OnofrioIndiana UniversityA quasi-experimental comparison of cousins differentially exposed to levels of neighborhood disadvantage (ND) was used with extensive measured covariates to test the hypothesis that neighborhood risk hasindependent effects on youth conduct problems (CPs). Multilevel analyses were based on mother-ratedND and both mother-reported CPs across 4 –13 years (n 7,077) and youth-reported CPs across 10 –13years (n4,524) from the Children of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. ND was robustlyrelated to CPs reported by both informants when controlling for both measured risk factors that arecorrelated with ND and unmeasured confounds. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis thatND has influence on conduct problems.Keywords: neighborhoods, quasi-experiments, cousin comparisons, conduct problems, delinquencyseveral reasons. One possibility is that environmental factorsinherent in such high-risk neighborhoods exert causal influences on conduct problems (CPs). Another possibility is thatindividual- and family level factors that are correlated with neighborhood disadvantage (ND), such as inadequate parental supervision and low family income, actually cause increased risk for CPs, with the relation between ND and youth CPs being noncausal. At present, the existing research literature does not clearly support either of these alternative explanations more than the other. This is an important shortcoming, as determining whether ND is a causal risk factor for CPs or only a spurious correlate would have major implications for prevention science and public policy (Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000).Children growing up in disadvantaged neighborhoods characterized by poverty, low levels of social organization and cohesion, and high levels of residential instability and crime are at increased risk for a host of negative outcomes, including academic failure, depression and anxiety, teenage pregnancy,and conduct problems (Harding, 2003; Leventhal & BrooksGunn, 2000; Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997). These children may experience increased risk for these outcomes forThis article was published Online First September 26, 2011.Jackson A. Goodnight, Department of Psychology, University of Dayton; Benjamin B. Lahey, Department of Health Sciences, University of Chicago; Carol A. Van Hulle, Waisman Center, University of WisconsinMadison; Joseph L. Rodgers, Department of Psychology, University of Oklahoma; Paul J. Rathouz, Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health; Irwin D. Waldman, Department of Psychology, Emory University;Brian M. D’Onofrio, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University.This research was supported by grants R01-MH070025 and R01HD061384 to Benjamin B. Lahey. The research was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Indiana University and the University ofChicago.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jackson A. Goodnight, Department of Psychology, University of Dayton, 300 College Park, Dayton, OH 45469-1430. E-mail: .udayton.eduFactors Associated With the Magnitude ofCorrelations With Neighborhood CharacteristicsA review of regional and national studies found that ND isassociated with higher levels of CPs, including defiant, aggressive,and delinquent behaviors, in childhood and adolescence (Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000). These studies varied widely in theirestimates of the magnitude of the association, however, with somestudies finding no main effect association at all (e.g., Beyers,Bates, Pettit, & Dodge, 2003; Lynam et al., 2000). Understandingthe sources of these inconsistencies in findings may shed light onhow research on neighborhood effects should proceed.GOODNIGHT ET AL.This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.Measurement of Neighborhood RiskInconsistencies in findings from previous studies may resultfrom differences in measurement of neighborhood characteristics.Some studies used census-based measures of neighborhood characteristics, whereas others used maternal ratings of neighborhoodrisks. Although there is some evidence that these approachescapture similar information (e.g., Ingoldsby & Shaw, 2002; Sampson, 1997), some studies have found differences depending onmeasurement approach. Ingoldsby and Shaw (2002) found thatmother-reported neighborhood characteristics independently predicted trajectories of CPs, whereas census-based measures ofneighborhood characteristics were not associated with CP trajectories after controlling for measured covariates. Sampson et al.(1997) have demonstrated that census-based measures of economic disadvantage and residential instability exert an indirectinfluence on conduct problems by contributing to low levels ofinformal social control. Thus, measuring neighborhood social processes may provide a more direct estimate of neighborhood risk.However, it is also possible that differences in effects of ND acrossmeasurement approaches may be influenced by shared methodbias in cases where caregivers report on both ND and conductproblems.This is a two page paper based on the attache article.Download a copy of the article and write a brief summary of the:1. Reason for the study.2. Research question(s).3. Hypothesis4. Conclusions5. How this research would be relevant to a professional working in your field of study?Organize your assignment into the following sections:Title of study:APA reference:Reason for study:Research question(s):Hypothesis:Conclusions:Relevance to field:Your assignment should be a brief 1-2 page synopsis. Save your assignment as a Word Document.