Childhood-Limited Versus Persistent Antisocial Behavior: Why Do Some Recover and Others Do Not? The TRAILS Study

Rene Veenstra*, Siegwart Lindenberg, Frank C. Verhulst, Johan Ormel

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Possible differences between childhood-limited antisocial youth and their stable high-antisocial counterparts were examined. Children were 11 years old at wave 1 (T1) and 13.5 at wave 2 (T2). At both waves, the same parent, teacher, and self-reports of antisocial behavior were used. Stable highs and childhood-limited antisocial youth differed somewhat in family and individual background. Stable highs had less effortful control, perceived more overprotection, had a higher level of familial vulnerability to externalizing disorder, and lived less often with the same parents throughout their lives than the childhood-limited group. Both groups had similar levels of service use before T1, but after that period, the childhood-limited youth received more help from special education needs services than from problem behavior services, and vice versa for stable highs. The results suggest that the childhood-limited antisocial youth recovered not only from antisocial behavior but also from academic failure, peer rejection, and internalizing problems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)718-742
Number of pages25
JournalJournal of Early Adolescence
Volume29
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct-2009

Keywords

  • antisocial behavior
  • developmental psychopathology
  • elementary school
  • life course persistent
  • stability
  • CRIMINAL CAREER RESEARCH
  • CONDUCT PROBLEMS
  • AGGRESSIVE-BEHAVIOR
  • DEVELOPMENTAL TRAJECTORIES
  • EXTERNALIZING PROBLEMS
  • TEMPERAMENT
  • ADOLESCENCE
  • DESISTANCE
  • PREDICTORS
  • ADULTHOOD

Cite this