Preventing adolescents' externalizing and internalizing symptoms: Effects of the Penn Resiliency Program.

IF 0.5 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
J J Cutuli, Jane E Gillham, Tara M Chaplin, Karen J Reivich, Martin E P Seligman, Robert J Gallop, Rachel M Abenavoli, Derek R Freres
{"title":"Preventing adolescents' externalizing and internalizing symptoms: Effects of the Penn Resiliency Program.","authors":"J J Cutuli,&nbsp;Jane E Gillham,&nbsp;Tara M Chaplin,&nbsp;Karen J Reivich,&nbsp;Martin E P Seligman,&nbsp;Robert J Gallop,&nbsp;Rachel M Abenavoli,&nbsp;Derek R Freres","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study reports secondary outcome analyses from a past study of the Penn Resiliency Program (PRP), a cognitive-behavioral depression prevention program for middle-school aged children. Middle school students (N = 697) were randomly assigned to PRP, PEP (an alternate intervention), or control conditions. Gillham et al., (2007) reported analyses examining PRP's effects on average and clinical levels of depression symptoms. We examine PRP's effects on parent-, teacher-, and self-reports of adolescents' externalizing and broader internalizing (depression/anxiety, somatic complaints, and social withdrawal) symptoms over three years of follow-up. Relative to no intervention control, PRP reduced parent-reports of adolescents' internalizing symptoms beginning at the first assessment after the intervention and persisting for most of the follow-up assessments. PRP also reduced parent-reported conduct problems relative to no-intervention. There was no evidence that the PRP program produced an effect on teacher- or self-report of adolescents' symptoms. Overall, PRP did not reduce symptoms relative to the alternate intervention, although there is a suggestion of a delayed effect for conduct problems. These findings are discussed with attention to developmental trajectories and the importance of interventions that address common risk factors for diverse forms of negative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":44209,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Emotional Education","volume":"5 2","pages":"67-79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3952879/pdf/nihms-557237.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Emotional Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study reports secondary outcome analyses from a past study of the Penn Resiliency Program (PRP), a cognitive-behavioral depression prevention program for middle-school aged children. Middle school students (N = 697) were randomly assigned to PRP, PEP (an alternate intervention), or control conditions. Gillham et al., (2007) reported analyses examining PRP's effects on average and clinical levels of depression symptoms. We examine PRP's effects on parent-, teacher-, and self-reports of adolescents' externalizing and broader internalizing (depression/anxiety, somatic complaints, and social withdrawal) symptoms over three years of follow-up. Relative to no intervention control, PRP reduced parent-reports of adolescents' internalizing symptoms beginning at the first assessment after the intervention and persisting for most of the follow-up assessments. PRP also reduced parent-reported conduct problems relative to no-intervention. There was no evidence that the PRP program produced an effect on teacher- or self-report of adolescents' symptoms. Overall, PRP did not reduce symptoms relative to the alternate intervention, although there is a suggestion of a delayed effect for conduct problems. These findings are discussed with attention to developmental trajectories and the importance of interventions that address common risk factors for diverse forms of negative outcomes.

Abstract Image

预防青少年的外化和内化症状:宾大弹性计划的效果。
本研究报告了宾夕法尼亚弹性计划(PRP)的次要结果分析,这是一项针对中学儿童的认知行为抑郁症预防计划。中学生(N = 697)被随机分配到PRP、PEP(一种替代干预)或控制条件。Gillham等人(2007)分析了PRP对抑郁症状的平均水平和临床水平的影响。在三年的随访中,我们研究了PRP对父母、老师和青少年外化和更广泛的内化(抑郁/焦虑、躯体抱怨和社交退缩)症状的自我报告的影响。与无干预对照相比,PRP减少了父母对青少年内化症状的报告,从干预后的第一次评估开始,并持续到大多数后续评估。与不干预相比,PRP还减少了家长报告的行为问题。没有证据表明PRP项目对教师或青少年症状的自我报告产生了影响。总的来说,相对于替代干预,PRP并没有减轻症状,尽管有迹象表明对行为问题有延迟效应。这些发现讨论了关注发展轨迹和干预措施的重要性,以解决各种形式的负面结果的共同风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: It is a peer-reviewed, international, electronic journal providing space for high quality, empirically based papers on effective intervention and evaluation in the area of emotional education. The journal has special issues dedicated to specific topics in emotional education, and a book review section. Some of the areas related covered by the journal include amongst others emotional intelligence, social and emotional development, educational resilience, social and emotional health, social and emotional literacy, social and emotional competence, social, emotional and behaviour difficulties, health promotion in schools, mental health in children and young people, mental health in schools, behaviour management and behaviour modification, teaching and learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信