U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OFF ICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

BJA NI J OJJDP BJS OVC

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

National Institute of Justice

Jeremy Travis, Director

continued...

Violence Among Middle School and

High School Students: Analysis and

Implications for Prevention

by Daniel Lockwood, Ph.D.

October 1997

who know each other. This study of violent incidents among middle and high

school students focused not only on the

types and frequency of these incidents

but also on their dynamics—the locations,

the “opening moves,” the relationship between disputants, the goals and justifications of the aggressor, the role of third

parties, and other factors.

The violent incidents were analyzed to

create general models of the sequence or

pattern of events in the interactions among

disputants. The analysis confirmed that

the opening moves involved such actions

as minor slights and teasing, and the incidents took place largely among young

people who knew each other. What is

perhaps most troubling is the finding that

the students’ violent behavior did not

stem from lack of values. Rather, it was

grounded in a well-developed set of values that holds such behavior to be a justifiable, commonsense way to achieve

certain goals.

Information about the typical steps that

culminate in violent incidents, the rationales for those incidents, the most common

locations where the incidents take place,

and how the disputants and others are reAdolescent violence is partly attributable

to escalating sequences of events that

culminate in outcomes unintended by the

participants. Although the young people

who engage in violence do not intend the

outcome, they nevertheless suffer the

consequences—either the harm that comes

from being victimized or the punishment

that comes from being the aggressor. This

type of violence is extensive. An estimated

16 percent of all high school students in

this country have been in one or more

physical fights on school property in the

course of a year.1

 Victimization rates for

simple assault are highest among young

people ages 12 to 19.2

 The problem is increasing, because while some types of

violent crime are declining, the risk of

being a victim of this type of crime has

risen since the mid-1980s among juveniles ages 12 to 17. The same is true with

the more serious offense of aggravated assault; juvenile arrests for this offense are

projected to rise.3

Aggravated assault and even homicide,

which include young people as victims

and offenders, often result from events

similar to those triggering less serious

offenses—transactions over seemingly

trivial matters, occurring between people

Issues and Findings

Discussed in this Brief: Violent

incidents among at-risk middle

school and high school students,

which often escalate from seemingly trivial events. The type and

frequency of these incidents are

identified in this study, but the major focus is on such factors as the

relationship among the antagonists; the sequence of events in the

confrontation, including the

“opening moves”; and the goals

and justifications cited by the students. The information was drawn

from indepth interviews with 110

students who attend public schools

in which the level of violence is high.

Key issues:

• Data from assault studies reveal

that arguments resulting in violence are a considerable problem

for American youths, as both

victims and aggressors. The problem is growing, as juveniles’ risk of

victimization has risen since the

mid-1980s, especially among

African-Americans. For aggravated

assault, the juvenile arrest rate is

projected to rise.

• There are few ethnographic

studies of violence among middle

and high school students, but

studies of adult offenders reveal

concepts that may apply to the

analysis of these students’ behavior.

• The study design was chosen

specifically for its value in generat-
2

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

The study’s perspective

The interviews were open-ended, with the

students encouraged to speak at length

about the violent incidents in which they

had been involved. A total of 250 “incidents,” most taking place within the past

year, came to light in the interviews. The

conversations explored the dynamics of

the incidents from the perspective of the

young people and were concerned with

behavior, emotions, values, and attitudes

at different steps of the violent encounter.

The researchers examined such factors as

goals, excuses, and justifications for the

incidents. This approach stemmed from

the researchers’ “social interactionist”

perspective, which explains behavior

through the analysis of interaction among

people. Thus, from this perspective force

or violence is viewed as rational behavior

to the extent it is designed to effect

change in the target of the violence.4

There has been little research in the nature of violent interactions among middle

and high school students, especially

qualitative ethnographic studies conducted

from a social interactionist perspective.

This type of research requires considerable investments in time and other resources, as well as the skills of trained

interviewers.5

 However, such studies

have been conducted among adults, and

they disclose key information about the

dynamics of the violent events. These

studies, which concerned dispute-related

violence and were based on interviews

with adult convicted offenders, reveal

salient themes:

• A “character contest” may develop in

which neither party will back down. The

disputants then create a “working agreement” that the situation calls for violence.6

• A key step in the transaction is often

an event that the offender interprets as an

offense requiring saving face.

lated can be useful in designing effective

prevention programs aimed at developing

nonviolent responses. In fact, the analysis

was conducted with the express purpose

of generating information that can be

used to take preventive action. Knowing

where in the sequence of events leading

to a violent incident a certain action takes

place can aid in identifying points for intervention. If such intervention occurs

during the early, opening moves, it might

be possible to prevent escalation to more

serious violence. Changing the cultural

norms or values that justify these violent

incidents may be a more difficult task.

The students, their schools,

and their neighborhoods

The study was based on the experiences

of middle school and high school students.

The middle school is in an economically

disadvantaged African-American section of

a large Southern city. The neighborhood

this middle school serves, which includes

a public housing complex, has experienced

some of the highest rates of reported violent crime in the country. The high school

is an “alternative school” attended by

children who have committed serious violations of school rules, largely those involving illegal drugs, possession of handguns,

or fighting. Many students in this high

school, which is located in a large city in

the southern part of the Midwest, come

from high-crime areas, including public

housing communities.

Since the schools were selected for having high rates of violence, the students in

the study were assumed to stand a greater

chance of becoming involved with violence.

For that reason, their involvement cannot

be said to reflect the behavior of the general student bodies of middle schools and

high schools.

ing information that can be used

to create or enhance violence prevention programs. This information

could be incorporated into the curriculums of school-based conflict

resolution programs.

Key findings:

• In the largest proportion of violent incidents, the “opening move”

involved a relatively minor affront

but escalated from there. Few

opening moves were predatory.

• The largest number of incidents

took place among young people

who knew each other, and the

school or the home was the place

where most incidents began.

• The most common goal was retribution, and the justifications and excuses offered indicated this stemmed

not from an absence of values but

from a well-developed value system

in which violence is acceptable.

• The findings regarding location,

duration, relationship of disputants, and the roles of peers and

adults can be used in designing

and improving violence prevention

programs. The patterns of events

created by the researchers can indicate areas for intervention, with a

focus on the opening moves.

• In adopting the findings to violence prevention programs, reducing

the frequency of opening moves may

be the most promising approach.

Changing the underlying value system is more difficult, although it is

central to reducing violence.

Target audience: Teachers and

other educational staff; staff of

youth agencies; public health, juvenile justice, and criminal justice officials and practitioners; researchers

and practitioners in conflict resolution and related areas; and others

concerned with violence prevention.

Issues and Findings

continued...
3

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

• Offenders often make a rational

choice to be violent, a choice with generally one of three goals: to gain compliance, to restore justice, or to assert

and defend identities.7

These themes may be relevant to the

study of juveniles and suggest areas

for preventive intervention. Indeed,

the intent of the present study is to

contribute knowledge that can be used

to prevent violence among young

people. School-based conflict resolution programs, which have increased

greatly in recent years, may be especially appropriate mechanisms for

such intervention.8 Many of them follow interactive “social problem solving” or “social skills” models, whose

curriculums would be suitable to integrating the findings of studies that use

the concepts analyzed here. These curriculums might be enhanced by incorporating into their simulations, role

playing, and psychodramas (structured

human relations exercises) the details

of incident locations, the relationships

among participants, opening moves,

the patterns and sequences of events,

and the goals and justifications cited

for acting violently—all of which are

treated in this study. Prevention programs might focus on the specific

events or “moves” leading up to a violent incident and intervene at that point

to modify behavior or take other action.

Characteristics of the incidents

Frequency and seriousness. Violence was defined in this study as “an

act carried out with the intention, or

perceived intention, of physically injuring another person.”9

 Each of the

250 incidents included at least one

physical indicator of force or violence

and included such behaviors as throwing something at the other person;

pushing, grabbing, or shoving; slapping,

Study Design and Method

he information about violent incidents among students in middle school

and high school was based on interviews

conducted with 70 boys and 40 girls who

attended public schools in which the rate

of violence was high. Of these 110 students, 58 were selected at random from

a student body of about 750 at a middle

school in an economically disadvantaged

African-American section of a large

Southern city. The neighborhood the

school served, which included a public

housing project, had some of the country’s

highest rates of reported violent crime.

Another 52 students volunteered from an

alternative school, a high school attended

by students who had committed serious

violations of school rules. This school is

located in a large city in the southern part

of the Midwest.

Of the total number, 86 were AfricanAmerican and 24 were white. Only students who received permission from their

parents to participate were included in

the study.

The 110 interviews yielded 250 incidents,

almost all of which (90 percent) occurred

within 12 months of the interview and

half within 6 months. The structure of

the interviews, most of which lasted

about an hour, was open-ended, with respondents encouraged to speak at length

about violent incidents in which they had

been involved.

To permit quantitative analysis, the content of the interviews was converted to a

database, and the violent incident became

the unit of analysis. Qualitative analysis

was conducted as well from a selection of

interview excerpts and the ideas emerging

from them.* In addition, the incidents

were analyzed to reveal the sequence of

events they shared in common, with each

“move” (or event) in the overall transaction identified and the sequences then

grouped to reveal typical patterns.

*This type of qualitative analysis was based on

the use of QSR NUD.IST software.

T

kicking, hitting with a fist; hitting with

an object; threatening with a gun or

knife; or using a gun or knife.

These behaviors constitute a scale of

least serious to most serious. Kicking,

biting, or hitting with the fist was the

most frequent violent incident, occurring in two-thirds of the cases. (See exhibit 1.) Use of a knife occurred least

frequently (in 2 percent of the incidents).

The most serious behavior on the

scale, using a gun, occurred 5 percent

of the time. None of the incidents involving guns took place in school. Half

the gun incidents were robberies in

which respondents were victims or offenders, and in most of the rest the

guns were brandished for self-defense.

Gender differences. The involvement of girls was more extensive than

might be expected. The average number of incidents per student was about

the same for the 40 girls in the study

as it was for the 70 boys. While boys

tended to fight mainly with other boys,

girls were involved in almost as many

fights with boys as with other girls.

Moreover, girls were the offenders in

all incidents in which knives were

used. Most of these knife incidents

began in school.

Relationships of antagonists. The

largest number of incidents took place

among people who knew each other.

More than half (58 percent) were

among acquaintances, 16 percent
4

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

among friends, and 15 percent among

family members (mostly siblings or

cousins). Only 11 percent were among

strangers.

Criminal circumstances. While 26

incidents occurred during a crime,

only 3 of these were related to illegal

drugs. The others were mostly robberies and thefts, incidents that placed

young people at risk of serious injury,

since guns often played a role.

Role of adults. The adults in charge

of these young people found out about

only half the incidents. Of the other

half, teachers, mothers, and police officers became involved at some point

in the sequence of events. Police were

on the scene in 18 percent of the violent transactions, generally after the

final combat.

Role of peers. Made up largely of

friends and relatives, third parties

were present in about 60 percent of

the incidents. Their most common role

was to encourage violence or to join in

fights out of loyalty to a combatant. In

only nine incidents did they attempt to

mediate disputes.

Duration of incidents. The large

majority of the incidents were short

lived. While 70 percent lasted 15 minutes or less from the initial provocation

to the final combat, only 20 percent

took an hour or longer.

Commitment to violence. “Working

agreements” similar to those revealed

in the studies of adults’ disputerelated violence were common. These

are agreements in which invitations or

challenges to fight are offered and then

accepted. They preceded actual combat in almost two-thirds (62 percent)

of the incidents.

Feelings of disputants. Fear was

infrequently felt among the students,

occurring in only 14 percent of the incidents. Not surprisingly, most of the

incidents that provoked fear were the

ones involving guns. Anger was more

common than fear, with students in 62

percent of the incidents saying they

experienced it. However, anger was

seldom offered as an excuse for engaging in violence.

The “opening moves”

The “opening move” is the action of

the student, the student antagonist, or

third party that initiates the violent incident.10 Analysis of the sequence of

events constituting the incidents revealed

common patterns—“scripts” or specific

sequences of events that followed these

opening moves.

Types. Few opening moves involved

robbery or theft. Many more involved

unprovoked offensive touching. (The

types, number, and percentage of the

moves are presented in exhibit 2.) In

very few scripts (less than 10 percent)

did any move following the opening

move aim at avoiding violence, such as

an attempt to take evasive action or influence this attempt. In the large majority of incidents (about 70 percent),

the students described the antagonist—not themselves—as the one

making the opening move.

Locations. About three-quarters of

the violent incidents began in school

or at home. (Exhibit 3 shows where the

incidents began.) Of the school-based

incidents, about half took place in

school itself, and of these, about half

occurred in the classroom. Gyms and

other institutional recreation areas—

sites supervised by adults—were often

the locus of violent conflict in addition

to classrooms. The structured activities

that brought young people together in

these settings facilitated confrontations.

Goals and values

The students cited these as the most

frequent aims of their violent behavior:

• Retribution—punishing the antagonist for something he or she did (40

percent of all goals).

Exhibit 1: Type and Frequency of Violence in Incidents Among Selected

Public School Students

Number of Incidents* Percentage of All

Incidents (n=250)

Threw something 36 14%

Pushed, grabbed, shoved 138 55%

Slapped 42 17%

Kicked/bit/hit with fist 168 67%

Hit with something 35 14%

Beat up 52 21%

Threatened with gun 25 10%

Threatened with knife 19 8%

Used knife 6 2%

Used gun 13 5%

Note: Percentages do not equal 100% because there were multiple responses.

* Incidents in which behavior occurred at least once.
5

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

• Compliance—convincing the antagonist to desist from an offensive

course of action (22 percent).

• Defense of one’s self or others (21

percent).

• Promotion of one’s image—by

saving face, defending one’s honor,

or enhancing or maintaining one’s

reputation (8 percent).

Rationalizing violence

The explanations the students offered

for the violent-incident behavior confirm their belief that this type of behavior is acceptable. (Exhibit 4 presents

the type, number, and percentage of

these reasons.) Explanations categorized as “justifications” are those in

which the young people accepted responsibility for their violent actions

but denied the actions were wrong.

The vast majority (84 percent of the

accounts) fell into this category. The

others were categorized as “excuses,”

or explanations in which the young

people admitted the act was wrong but

denied responsibility.

Justifications. The primary themes

that justified violence in the eyes of

these young people corroborate the

Exhibit 2: Opening Moves in Violent Incidents Among Students—

Type and Number

Number Percentage

Unprovoked offensive touching:

throws, pushes, grabs, shoves, slaps, kicks, or hits 33 13%

Possessions: interferes with something owned or being used 32 13%

Request to do something 26 10%

Backbiting: someone says something bad about another

person to someone else and this gets back to the person 23 9%

Play: verbal teasing (playful “put downs”) or rough physical play 23 9%

Insults: not meant to be playful 18 7%

Crimesa 16 5%

Accusations of wrongdoing 13 5%

Defense of others 11 4%

Challenges: physical or nonverbal gestures 7 3%

Threats of physical harm 7 3%

Advances to boyfriend or girlfriend of actor 7 3%

Told authority figure about bad behavior of actor 3 1%

Other actions perceived as offensiveb 23 9%

Otherc 6 2%

Total 248 100%d

a Armed robbery with gun (10 incidents), unarmed robbery (3), theft (3). b Examples: youth is offended because other youth made his sister pregnant (1 incident),

pushes desk (1), spills juice (1), pen makes loud sound (1), throws basketball on court

(1), monopolizes basketball (1). c Gang initiation—drive-by shooting (2 incidents), joins group fight—cannot explain reason for fight (1), debate over politics (1), unspecified argument (1), other (1). d Percentages do not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Middle School Students’ Justifications for Violence—From the Interviews

tudents rationalized their violent

behavior in a variety of ways.

Student 2: He took the cards out of my

hand and threw them at me and then he

threw a shoe at me and then I hit him

back.

Student 21: I felt good because I felt he

got what he deserved because he hit me

in the head.

Student 14: She tried to jump my

cousin. She say something about my

cousin stole her ring or something, and

then my cousin say, “How I’m going to

steal your ring?” I kept on saying in my

mind if she slaps my cousin, I’m going

over there. She slapped my cousin and

calling all kinds of names. I said, “All right

there, don’t call me names.” I walked

over there and she hit me and she

slapped my cousin, so I pushed her out.

S Student 10: I had a conflict with a girl.

She wanted to steal from me. I don’t like

nobody to steal from me. You want something from me, you ask me for it. If I got it,

I’ll give it to you. If I can’t give it to you I’ll

tell you I can’t give it to you ‘cause it might

not be mine. But she wanted to steal from

me, so we got into a big argument.
6

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

findings about rational goals. The students generally fought to retaliate, to

defend themselves, or to resist the

antagonist’s demands. Their actions

were bolstered by a strong belief system,

evident in these justifications, which

served to neutralize any guilt. The students who acted violently usually said

the victim had done something to deserve harm. This expression of cultural

values, seen in such accounts, is the

primary justification for violence. (Examples from the interviews are presented in “Middle School Students’

Justifications for Violence—From the

Interviews.”)

Excuses. Examples of this type of rationale are students’ contentions that

their free will was impaired by anger,

Exhibit 3: Location of “Opening Move” in Violence by Students

Number Percentage

School Locations (subtotal) (112) (45%)

Classroom 44 17.9%

Hall or stairs 23 9.4%

School bus 12 4.9%

Physical education: gym (9), locker room

(1), playing fields (2) 12 4.9%

Cafeteria 7 2.8%

Outside school, on grounds 5 2.0%

Other location in school 5 2.0%

School recreation room 2 0.8%

School bathroom 2 0.8%

Home Locations (subtotal) (56) (23%)

Inside home 45 18.3%

Outside home, on property 11 4.5%

Public Areas (subtotal) (73) (30%)

Sidewalk or street 42 17.1%

Outside public basketball court 7 2.8%

Other area of park, including playground, pool 7 2.8%

Outside commercial establishment, store, mall, etc. 4 1.6%

Travel to school: walking to bus (3), waiting for bus (3) 6 2.4%

Other public locations 7 2.8%

Other: Church recreation room (2), summer camp (2),

social work agency recreation room (1) 5 2%

Total All Locations 246 100.0%

that they were pushed into the incident

by aggressors, or that they did not mean

to do it. That the percentage of excuses

was small is further evidence that the

young people in this study viewed violence as a rational, socially acceptable

response.

Possibilities for preventive

intervention

Markers for intervention. There are

several ways in which the study findings

could be applied to the design of programs to counter violence. Analysis of

the gender of disputants indicated that

girls matched boys in number of violent incidents, and this suggests that

programs should focus on them as well.

Supervising adults—specifically

teachers, mothers, and police officers—

are prime candidates for training in

conflict resolution, since the study revealed that at some point they may be

called in to manage the confrontations.

The study also revealed that the violent incidents are very brief. This allows only a limited amount of time for

intervention, and because at the start

of the incident peers, teachers, and

parents are the third parties most

likely to be on the scene, they would

be the best mediators.

The findings regarding location of violent incidents also reveal areas for intervention. The great majority occur at

school or at home, highlighting the importance of school staff and parents in

violence prevention. Of school locations, the classroom was the site of the

largest proportion of incidents, raising

the possibility of adopting programs in

how to handle relationships in the

classroom. The classroom teacher

would be the likely candidate to direct

these programs. In general, conflict

tends to erupt in settings like schools,

indicating that structured settings in

which adolescents are placed are

likely sites for nonviolence programs.

Preventing opening moves from

escalating. The social interactionist

perspective is a useful basis for developing policies, programs, and practices to address school-based violence

prevention. The findings of this study

indicate that such initiatives should

focus on specific aspects of the transactions, identified here, that precede

violent behavior. (See “The Sequence

of Events—A Model.”) The aim of

such early intervention would be to

prevent more serious incidents.

Reducing the occurrence of opening

moves appears to be the most promising approach to preventing escalation

to violence. Social skill curriculums
7

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

Exhibit 4: Justifications and Excuses for Violence

Number Percentage

Justifications (subtotal) (167) (84%)

Retaliation for harmful behavior 57 28.8%

Antagonist’s behavior offensive 35 17.7%

Self-defense or to stop victimization 27 13.6%

Loyalties appealed to; aid intimate or friend 25 12.6%

Antagonist’s behavior posed threat 14 7.1%

Antagonist refused request 5 2.5%

Fight was inevitable 2 1.0%

Help stranger being beaten 1 0.5%

Promote image 1 0.5%

Excuses (subtotal) (31) (16%)

Free will impaired by anger 13 6.6%

Reluctant; pushed into it by antagonist 11 5.6%

Unintentional; did not mean to do it 5 2.5%

Wanted money 1 0.5%

Free will impaired by alcohol 1 0.5%

Total All Justifications and Excuses 198* 100.0%

* The total is 198 incidents, not 250, because in the other 52 either the interview content

was insufficient or the student was a passive victim who did not respond violently.

The Sequence of Events—A Model

ach event in each violent incident

was categorized by type, and the events

were analyzed to reveal sequences or

patterns that can serve as general models

of the students’ interactions. An example

of one common pattern is presented here

(the general model is illustrated schematically in exhibit 5).* These patterns could

be useful as sources of role-playing scenarios in social skill exercises for students.

This example, drawn from the interview

transcripts, shows that the presence of

third parties can escalate the conflict.

Over the summer this girl fell off her bike

and we were laughing, and then for some

reason, she started not liking us. Me and my

cousin and her got to cussing. She lived up

the street and she was walking up the street

and started to say something to us and we

started whistling and stuff. She just be trying

to make me come there and fight her but I

ain’t never fight her. She would stand out

there in the street and say, “What’s up?

Wanna come out here and do something?

Come on.” I would just go in the house. I

would be outside and I wouldn’t say nothing

to her and she would just say like “A. got

crabs,” and stuff, just say something to me

for no reason . . . I guess she had got mad.

They got a go-cart and they were riding up

and down the street, and then she made

faces . . . She stopped in our driveway and

say, “Y’all want to do something?” Her and

my cousin begin to fight and my grandmother came out there and broke it up and

she went back to her house and got her

daddy, and then my grandma and her dad

started in on it. He was saying stuff like he

E wasn’t going to talk. He used guns and

stuff. I was scared because when we were

outside he might shoot the house up.

Him and my grandma was out there

fussing, and the police they be walking

around on the streets and stuff, and my

Mama had told them to go down there

because he said he would use guns and

stuff . . . They went up there and told him,

“Don’t be saying stuff like that around

children and stuff.” He said they should

learn to sit down and talk things out.

*Space limitations prohibit presentation of

all the sequence patterns that emerged

from the analysis. They are reported in a

forthcoming book by the researcher (tentatively titled Violent Interactions Among

Middle and High School Students).

could incorporate the development of

nonviolent responses to behavior that

otherwise might follow the same route.

Some of the typical opening moves

identified in this study could be

adopted in the role playing that is part

of these curriculums.

One of the most frequent opening

moves is offensive touching. The design of school-based violence prevention programs could include policies

and practices that strongly discourage

this type of behavior, however minor

some of its expressions may appear. A

well-defined system of rules and discipline could go far to prevent bullies

and others who persecute children in

schools from engaging in such behavior. All types of offensive touching—

throwing something at someone, or

pushing, grabbing, shoving, slapping,

kicking, or hitting someone—should

be considered by everyone in the school
8

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

to be very serious, wrongful behavior.

The study findings reveal many instances in which these opening moves

escalate to fierce combats, suggesting

that efforts to reduce this behavior will

reduce serious violent incidents.

Where the opening move involves

possessions or a possessory interest—

behavior seen as often as offensive

touching—young people could be

taught the social skills needed to manage conflicts arising from these situations.

And given the many violent incidents

that begin with teasing and rough play,

another promising strategy is to promote

programs to encourage civic values

that discourage ridicule (“put downs”),

teasing, and rough play in school.

Specific prevention strategies can be

matched to other categories in the typology of opening moves. Although insults and backbiting, for example, are

minor affronts, they can be viewed as

high-risk behaviors and dealt with as

part of the strategy. Peer mediators,

who today are often a familiar presence in school, can also receive training to defuse events triggered by the

opening moves.

Tackling the values issue

A preference for violent retaliation

over other forms of redress, a strong

belief in punishment, and a sensitivity

to perceived injustice and mistreatment

are core values at the heart of these

students’ violent responses. Students

adopt the styles of parents, teachers,

and other adults around them, and students’ norms will not change unless

these models change. Changing these

norms may be very difficult. It may be

easier to decrease the frequency of the

moves, especially the opening moves,

in the violent transaction that arises

from these values, than to change the

values themselves. Nonetheless, a

comprehensive violence prevention

program could also include activities

aimed at changing the values and attitudes that justify violence.

If any belief warrants change, it is retribution, as this was the primary justification for violence. It was the goal in

a large proportion (40 percent) of the

incidents in which students rationally

decided to act violently. Analysis of

justifications and excuses also showed

the prominence of retribution in neutralizing guilt—the violent act was seen

as a logical response to a perceived

harm and therefore judged acceptable

by the assailant. This suggests that

changing beliefs and attitudes about

the acceptability of punishment and

violent retribution is central to reducing violent conflict. One way schools

can do this is by adopting a “civic values” approach, establishing and highlighting rules against retributive

punishment of students by students.

Small-group interactive sessions could

also role play the destructive consequences of personal retributive justice.

While belief in retribution is deeply

embedded in youth culture, and challenges to the value of physical punishment will be resisted, changing young

people’s belief in retaliation deserves

serious consideration as an aim of

school-based programs.

Through role playing and simulations,

young people can learn nonviolent

Exhibit 5: General Model of Sequence Pattern Following Backbiting

Respondent Antagonist

Backbiting

Accusation of 

wrongdoing

Denial of 

accusation

 Verbal attempts 

to influence 

Insults

Fight begins Violence

 Verbal attempts 

to influence 
9

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

means of persuasion. These exercises

can be created from the typical sequences or patterns of events brought

to light here.

Notes

1. Kann, Laura, et al., “Youth Risk Behavior

Surveillance—United States, 1993,” CDC Surveillance Summaries. Morbidity and Mortality

Weekly Report 44 No. SS–1, Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, March 24, 1995:29.

2. Taylor, Bruce M., Changes in Criminal Victimization, 1994–95, Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1997:3.

3. Snyder, Howard N., and Melissa Sickmund,

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: A Focus on Violence, Pittsburgh: National Center for Juvenile

Justice, 1995. Their estimates of the projected

increase in juvenile arrests for aggravated assault range from 21 percent to 129 percent in

the next 15 years.

4. For this theoretical framework see Tedeschi,

James T., and Richard B. Felson, Violence, Aggression, and Coercive Actions, Washington, D.C.:

American Psychological Association, 1994.

5. Recent reviews of the literature on adolescent violence have called for such studies. See

American Psychological Association, Violence

and Youth, Washington, D.C., 1993; Reiss,

Albert J., and Jeffrey A. Roth, Understanding

and Preventing Violence, Washington, D.C.:

National Academy Press, 1993.

6. Luckenbill, David F., “Criminal Homicide

as a Situated Transaction,” Social Problems 25

(1977):176–86.

7. Tedeschi and Felson, Violence, Aggression,

and Coercive Actions.

8. Some find these programs promising. See

Elliott, Delbert S., Youth Violence: An Overview

(Boulder, Colorado: The Center for the Study

and Prevention of Violence, 1994); Tolan,

Patrick and Nancy Guerra, What Works in Reducing Adolescent Violence: An Empirical Review of the Field (Boulder, Colorado: The

Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, 1994). Others disagree. See Webster,

Daniel, “The Unconvincing Case for SchoolBased Conflict Resolution Programs for Adolescents,” Health Affairs 12 (1993):126–141.

9. The definition, borrowed from Richard J.

Gelles, was operationalized by using his widely

adopted “Conflict Tactics Technique Scale”

(Gelles, Richard J., Family Violence, Beverly

Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1979).

10. For a paper devoted exclusively to these

opening moves, see Lockwood, Daniel, “The

Opening Move in Violent Interactions Among

Selected African-American Middle School Students,” Challenge 7 (1996):25–41.

Findings and conclusions of the research reported here are those of the author and do not

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Daniel Lockwood, Ph.D., is an

Associate Professor of Criminal

Justice in the Department of Social

and Behavioral Sciences, Savannah

State University. The research for

this study was supported by NIJ

grant 94–IJ–CX–0062.

NCJ 166363

The National Institute of Justice is a

component of the Office of Justice

Programs, which also includes the Bureau

of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice

Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for

Victims of Crime.
Related Publications

Listed below are selected free publications from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Office

of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) related to adolescent violence and violence

prevention. These publications can be obtained from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service

(NCJRS), telephone 800–851–3420, e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org, or write NCJRS, P.O. Box 6000,

Rockville, MD 20849–6000.

NIJ Publications

DeJong, William

Building the Peace: The Resolving

Conflict Creatively Program (RCCP)

NIJ Program Focus, 1994

NCJ 149549

Partnerships Against Violence Network

(PAVNET) Online Users Guide

NIJ Research in Brief, 1995

NCJ 152057

Roth, Jeffrey A.

Understanding and Preventing Violence

NIJ Research in Brief, 1994

NCJ 145645

OJJDP Publications

Conflict Resolution Education: A Guide to

Implementing Programs in Schools, YouthServing Organizations, and Community and

Juvenile Justice Settings

OJJDP Program Report, 1996

NCJ 160935

Epidemiology of Serious Violence

OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 1997

NCJ 165152

Reducing Youth Gun Violence:

An Overview of Programs and Initiatives

OJJDP Research Report, 1996

NCJ 154303

Snyder, Howard N., and Melissa Sickmund

Juvenile Offenders and Victims:

1997 Update on Violence

OJJDP Statistics Summary, 1997

NCJ 165703

The Youngest Delinquents:

Offenders Under Age 15

OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 1997

NCJ 165256
Qty. Presenter Name and NCJ Number Subtotal

 

 

 Total 

Name 

Address 

City State ZIP Daytime phone ( ) 

___ Payment enclosed (U.S. dollars) ___ Deduct this item from my NCJRS Deposit Account, account no. 

Charge my: ___ MasterCard ___VISA Account no. 

Exp. Date ________________________ Signature 

The Latest Criminal Justice

Videotape Series from NIJ:

Research in Progress Seminars

Learn about the latest developments in criminal justice research from prominent criminal justice experts.

Each 60-minute tape presents a well-known scholar discussing his or her current studies and how they relate to

existing criminal justice research and includes the lecturer’s responses to audience questions.

To order any of these tapes, please complete and return this form with your payment ($19, U.S.; $24, Canada and

other countries) to National Criminal Justice Reference Service, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849–6000.

Call 800–851–3420, or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org if you have any questions.

Please send me the following tapes:

NCJ 152235—Alfred Blumstein, Ph.D.,

Professor, Carnegie Mellon University: Youth

Violence, Guns, and Illicit Drug Markets.

NCJ 152236—Peter W. Greenwood, Ph.D.,

Director, Criminal Justice Research

Program, The RAND Corporation: Three

Strikes, You’re Out: Benefits and Costs of

California’s New Mandatory-Sentencing Law.

NCJ 152237—Christian Pfeiffer, Ph.D.,

Director, Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen: Sentencing Policy and

Crime Rates in Reunified Germany.

NCJ 152238—Arthur L. Kellermann, M.D.,

M.P.H., Director, Center for Injury Control,

and Associate Professor, Emory University:

Understanding and Preventing Violence: A Public

Health Perspective.

NCJ 152692—James Inciardi, Ph.D.,

Director, Drug and Alcohol Center,

University of Delaware: A Corrections-Based

Continuum of Effective Drug Abuse Treatment.

NCJ 153271—Marvin Wolfgang, Ph.D.,

Director, Legal Studies and Criminology,

University of Pennsylvania: Crime in a Birth

Cohort: A Replication in the People’s Republic of

China.

NCJ 153730—Lawrence W. Sherman,

Ph.D., Professor, University of Maryland:

Reducing Gun Violence: Community Policing

Against Gun Crime.

NCJ 153272—Cathy Spatz Widom, Ph.D.,

Professor, State University of New York–

Albany: The Cycle of Violence Revisited Six Years

Later.

NCJ 153273—Wesley Skogan, Ph.D.,

Professor, Northwestern University:

Community Policing in Chicago: Fact or Fiction?

NCJ 153850—Scott H. Decker, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Missouri–St. Louis,

and Susan Pennell, San Diego Association of

Governments: Monitoring the Illegal Firearms

Market.

NCJ 154277—Terrie Moffitt, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Wisconsin: Partner

Violence Among Young Adults.

NCJ 156923—Orlando Rodriguez, Ph.D.,

Director, Hispanic Research Center,

Fordham University: The New Immigrant

Hispanic Populations: Implications for Crime and

Delinquency in the Next Decade.

NCJ 156924—Robert Sampson, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Chicago:

Communities and Crime: A Study in Chicago.

NCJ 156925—John Monahan, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Virginia: Mental

Illness and Violent Crime.

NCJ 157643—Benjamin E. Saunders,

Ph.D., and Dean G. Kilpatrick, Ph.D.,

Medical University of South Carolina:

Prevalence and Consequences of Child Victimiza- ✂

tion: Preliminary Results from the National

Survey of Adolescents.

NCJ 159739—Joel H. Garner, Ph.D.,

Research Director, Joint Centers for Justice

Studies: Use of Force By and Against the Police.

NCJ 159740—Kim English, Research

Director, Colorado Division of Criminal

Justice: Managing Adult Sex Offenders in

Community Settings: A Containment Approach.

NCJ 160765—Michael Tonry, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Minnesota:

Ethnicity, Crime, and Immigration.

NCJ 160766—David M. Kennedy, Ph.D.,

Professor Harvard University: Juvenile

Gun Violence and Gun Markets in Boston.

NCJ 161259—Robert Crutchfield, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of Washington:

Labor Markets, Employment, and Crime.

NCJ 161836—Geoffrey Alpert, Ph.D.,

Professor, University of South Carolina:

Police in Pursuit: Policy and Practice.

NCJ 163056—Daniel Brookoff, M.D.,

Ph.D., Associate Director, Medical Education,

Memphis Methodist Hospital: Drug Use and

Domestic Violence.

(continued on back)
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Quick Access to NIJ Publication News

For news about NIJ’s most recent publications, including solicitations for grant applications,

subscribe to JUSTINFO, the bimonthly newsletter sent to you via e-mail. Here’s how:

Or check out the “What’s New” section at the Justice Information Center home page:

http://www.ncjrs.org

■ Send an e-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org

■ Leave the subject line blank

■ Type subscribe justinfo your name

 (e.g., subscribe justinfo Jane Doe) in the body of the message

BULK RATE

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/NIJ

Permit No. G–91

NCJ 163057—Marcia Chaiken, Ph.D.,

Research Director of LINC, Alexandria, VA:

Youth Afterschool Programs and the Role

of Law Enforcement.

NCJ 163058—Eric Wish, Ph.D., Director,

Center for Substance Abuse Research,

University of Maryland: Dependence and Drug

Treatment Needs Among Adult Arrestees.

NCJ 163059—Jeffrey Fagan, Ph.D.,

Professor, Columbia University: Adolescent

Violence: A View From the Street.

NCJ 163921—Patricia Tjaden, Ph.D.,

Senior Researcher, Center for Policy

Research: The Crime of Stalking: How Big

Is the Problem?

NCJ 164262—Andrew Golub, Ph.D.,

Principal Research Associate, National

Development and Research Institutes, Inc:

Crack’s Decline: Some Surprises Across U.S. Cities.

NCJ 164725—Ronald Huff, Ph.D., Professor,

Ohio State University: Criminal Behavior of

Gang Members.

NCJ 164726—James Austin, Ph.D.,

Executive Vice President, National Council

on Crime and Delinquency: Sentencing

Guidelines: A State Perspective.

NCJ 165585—Garen Wintemute, M.D.,

Director, Violence Prevention Research–

Program, University of California–Davis:

Predicting Criminal Behavior Among Authorized

Purchasers of Handguns.