TY - JOUR
T1 - Understanding the ecological context of mental, emotional, and behavioral health problems
T2 - A person-centered approach
AU - Logan-Greene, Patricia
AU - Linn, Brad
AU - Hartinger-Saunders, Robin
AU - Nochajski, Thomas
AU - Wieczorek, William F.
AU - Rittner, Barbara
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PY - 2019/5
Y1 - 2019/5
N2 - Aims:: The social/environmental context of youth is important for mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) health. This study used person-oriented methods to examine the influences of family, neighborhood, and poverty on late adolescent MEB outcomes. Methods:: Latent class analysis was used to discern significant clusters of at-risk, diverse young men (N = 625) based on contextual factors; differences in MEB outcomes were examined. Results:: Four classes emerged. Resourced and Protected youth had low risk across all indicators. Non-resourced and Protected youth lived in poverty, poor neighborhoods, but had good parenting; despite low delinquency, substance use was elevated. Resourced but High Risk youth had negative parenting but good neighborhoods. Outcomes included elevated delinquency and mental health problems. Non-resourced and High Risk youth were poor, lived in bad neighborhoods, and experienced abusive parenting; MEB outcomes were poor. Conclusion:: Findings confirm the unique effects that negative parenting, neighborhoods, and poverty have on adolescent development. Implications are discussed.
AB - Aims:: The social/environmental context of youth is important for mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) health. This study used person-oriented methods to examine the influences of family, neighborhood, and poverty on late adolescent MEB outcomes. Methods:: Latent class analysis was used to discern significant clusters of at-risk, diverse young men (N = 625) based on contextual factors; differences in MEB outcomes were examined. Results:: Four classes emerged. Resourced and Protected youth had low risk across all indicators. Non-resourced and Protected youth lived in poverty, poor neighborhoods, but had good parenting; despite low delinquency, substance use was elevated. Resourced but High Risk youth had negative parenting but good neighborhoods. Outcomes included elevated delinquency and mental health problems. Non-resourced and High Risk youth were poor, lived in bad neighborhoods, and experienced abusive parenting; MEB outcomes were poor. Conclusion:: Findings confirm the unique effects that negative parenting, neighborhoods, and poverty have on adolescent development. Implications are discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060233336&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060233336&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jcop.22156
DO - 10.1002/jcop.22156
M3 - Article
C2 - 30656686
AN - SCOPUS:85060233336
SN - 0090-4392
VL - 47
SP - 833
EP - 855
JO - Journal of Community Psychology
JF - Journal of Community Psychology
IS - 4
ER -