Return to Syllabi List

Seminar in Prevention Research PSY 591 Ln # 13003
Spring 2002
Irwin Sandler
Ph: 727-6121
e-mail: Irwin.Sandler@ASU.EDU
Rm 221 Tech Center
Office Hours Monday 2:00 -5:00; By Appointment

OVERVIEW

Over the past decade prevention has gained increased visibility as an exciting approach to reducing a wide array of problems in our society including problems in mental health, substance abuse, crime, and health. The accomplishments of prevention in the area of physical health have been well-acknowledged, where prevention strategies have been successful in conquering a wide range of diseases and reducing the incidence of others. Progress in prevention of behavioral health problems has been more modest however, and has been characterized by shifting definitions and a wide array of approaches. However, the past two decades have seen exciting advances in prevention of behavioral health problems. These advances include a) clarification of definitional issues b) convergence on important conceptual themes concerning the roles of developmental theory, experimental trials, community partnerships c) advances in research methodology and d) emergence of empirical findings supporting the efficacy of preventive interventions. These advances can be seen in the recent report of the Institute of Medicine (Haggerty & Mrazek, 1994), and meta-analytic reviews of the effects of prevention programs (e.g. Durlak, 1998; Greenberg, Domitrovich & Bumbarger, (2001); Tobler, 2000), and recent publications (e.g. Coie, et al., 1993) which describe the development of a new multidisciplinary field of prevention, which has been termed “prevention science.” The objectives of this class are a) to introduce you to critical concepts in this emerging field b) discuss controversies and issues c) familiarize you with exemplars of excellent work in prevention and d) provide an opportunity to develop your skills in writing a prevention research grant proposal.

The syllabus has two sections – one presenting basic concepts in prevention science and the second presenting examples of prevention research.

Critical concepts. Prevention is a multidisciplinary field that draws its critical concepts from a wide range of disciplines and professions including public health, epidemiology, developmental psychology, applied social sciences (e.g. community psychology, applied social psychology, sociology, applied anthropology, etc.) and others.
1. Historical overview, defining concepts and objectives
2. Integrating developmental and ecological theory and prevention
3. Cross-cultural perspectives on prevention
4. Issues in experimental evaluation of the efficacy of prevention
5. Issue in implementing and disseminating prevention programs in the community.

Exemplars of prevention. The past decade has also seen the emergence of exemplars of preventive interventions that have developed evidence of efficacy in well-controlled field trials. A second objective of this course is to familiarize you with multiple exemplars of well-evaluated preventive interventions. The exemplars were selected based on two criteria a) they represent alternative major conceptual approaches to prevention b) they illustrate universal, selected and indicated approaches to prevention and c) they represent specific problems (outcomes) that have been the focus of prevention research. I have identified seven areas where we may look at exemplars of prevention. Other areas exist. We have time to study five areas of exemplars for this class, and we will make this decision at our first meeting. Prevention is a very powerful general approach which potentially can apply across a wide range of outcomes.

1. Improving adaptation to stressful situations
2. Enhancing individual social competencies
3. Prevention of substance abuse problems
4. Prevention of externalizing problems
5. Infancy and early childhood approaches to prevention

Dialogue among prevention researchers and practitioners. There are several organizations with a special focus on prevention {e.g. Society for Community Research and Action (SCRA) and the Society for Prevention Research (SPR)}. The Society for Prevention Research is a newly emerging group which includes a wide array of researchers who focus on prevention across multiple outcomes, substance abuse, mental health, alcohol, and others. The Society for Community Research and Action has been a major forum for prevention researchers for many years, but includes a broader agenda than prevention per se. One easy way to join in and listen in on the dialogue amongst prevention researchers is to join the list serve of these two organizations. The list serve for SPR can be accessed through subscribing to <blooming@tigger.oslc.org>. For the SCRA the list serve is <SCRA-L@LISTSERV.UIC.ED>. If you are on e-mail I would like you to join this list serve for the semester and read it at least one time per week. When relevant we will discuss the list serve correspondence in class.

Prevention studies appear in a wide range of journals in the social science including the American Journal of Community Psychology, Journal of Primary Prevention, Journal of Applied and Preventive Psychology, Development and Psychopathology, American Journal of Public Health, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, and others.

COURSE ASSIGNMENTS

Class discussion (25% of grade). The readings will be discussed in class in two ways a) what are the major points the author is trying to convey, b) what are the different points of controversy and the dilemmas in the field. One student will be responsible to be the primary discussant on each paper. As primary discussant you will be responsible for bringing out the major points and bringing up critical points for discussion concerning these points. You may also discuss important implications of the work that were not brought out in the paper or bring in material that illustrates the authors’ points, etc. Occasionally, there will be controversy between two different papers. In those cases I will ask the discussant to take the side of their own paper and to argue as their author would (including pointing out the shortcomings of the other paper). I will point out the controversies where I see them, and would like the primary discussant to point them out elsewhere. The primary discussants will hand in a written summary of their comments on their paper (around one to two pages). It is everyone’s responsibility to read all the papers before coming to class, and to participate in the class discussion.

Grant proposal. The major class assignment is to develop a grant proposal for an experimental test of the efficacy or effectiveness of a preventive intervention. Your task is to propose an experimental preventive intervention and to address all the issues involved in order to convince a review panel of prevention research experts that your proposal accomplishes important prevention objectives, that you can evaluate it’s preventive effect and that it should be funded.

Or

Analysis of a community prevention program. The purpose of this class project is to apply the concepts you are learning in the class to a prevention program currently being implemented in a community agency. The project would involve addressing three questions. 1. What is the theory of the program? What outcomes is it designed to accomplish? What are the theoretical pathways by which it is expected to change these outcomes? What is the evidence in the literature to support the theory of the program? 2. What is the action theory of the program? What change strategies are being used to accomplish the outcomes? What is the evidence from the literature that supports the efficacy of these change strategies? 3. How would you evaluate the effectiveness of the program? You can either build on an existing evaluation strategy that the program has in place or you can present a new evaluation design. Your report can either be in the form of a grant proposal that the agency can use to apply for funds to extend or evaluate their program, or in the form of a more traditional class paper. This project should be done in collaboration with the community agency and the agency should receive a copy of your report.

Your proposal or analysis of community prevention program will be written in two stages:

a) Pre-prospectus (25% of grade) - This is a five page idea piece. It provides an overview of your proposal, why you think it’s important and how you plan to evaluate it. The pre-prospectus will be handed out to the class, and will be presented orally in class for discussion. If you choose the analysis of the community program this paper should be a preliminary description of your report or a pre-prospectus of the proposal you will write for them.

b) Grant proposal (50% of grade) - This will be written using the standard USPHS 398 grant application form. The proposal will be specific aims, background and significance, and research design and methods and human subjects sections. All issues involved in developing a grant proposal need to be addressed including budget, human subjects, letters of support. The proposal will be presented in class during the final class sessions. If you are doing a grant proposal for a community program you may use the forms of the agency to whom you are applying for funds. If there is no specific form, you will use the USPHS 398 application form.

Semester Overview

Week of Topic

Jan 21 – History and major concepts of prevention and promotion
Jan 28 – Integrating developmental and ecological theory
Feb 04 – Cross-cultural issues in prevention
Feb 11 – Evaluating the efficacy of prevention programs through randomized trials
Feb 18 – Dissemination of effective prevention programs
Feb 25 – Student presentation of class project ideas
Mar 04 – Grant writing
Mar 11 – Spring Break
Mar 18 – Preventing the negative effects of stress exposure
Mar 25 – Promoting cognitive-affective-social competence
Apr 01 – Prevention of substance use and abuse
Apr 08 – Prevention of problems of aggression
Apr 15 – Infancy and early childhood approaches to prevention

READING ASSIGNMENTS

Week 1 (Jan 21) - History and Major Concepts
Required:

1. G. Rose (1992). Strategies of prevention: The individual and the population. In M. Marmot & P. Elliot (Eds.), Coronary heart disease epidemiology: From aetiology to public health. (pp. 311- 324). Oxford: Oxford university press

2. Mrazek, P. J. & Haggerty, R. J. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for prevention research (Summary) (pp 1 - 42). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

3. Cowen, E. L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological wellness: Challenges and opportunities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 149 - 179.

The objectives of this session are
a) Understand the basic definitions in the emerging field of prevention such as primary, secondary and tertiary prevention, universal, selected and indicated and understand the implications of these definitions.
b) Identify alternative objectives of the field such as prevention of disorder, prevention of symptoms, prevention of problems, promotion of wellness, changing developmental trajectories
c) Obtain a historical perspective on prevention in the area of mental health

Supplemental:

1. Durlak, J. A., & Wells, A. M. (1997). Primary prevention mental health programs for children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 115-152.

2. Gordon, R. (1987). An operational classification of disease prevention. In J. A. Steinberg and M. M. Silverman (Eds.), Preventing mental disorder: A research perspective. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 87-1492.

3. Price, R. (1983). The education of a prevention psychologist. In R.D. Felner, L. A. Jason, J. N. Moritsugu, & S. S. Farber (Eds.), Prevention psychology: Theory, research and practice (pp. 290297). New York: Pergammon.

4. Mrazek, P. J. & Haggerty, R. J. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for prevention research. Washington, D. C. - National Academy Press.

5. Cowen, E. L. (1983). Primary prevention in mental health: Past present and future. In R.D. Felner, L. A. Jason, J. N., Montsugu, & S. S. Farber (Eds.), Prevention psychology: Theory, research and practice (pp. 290-297). New York: Pergammon.

Week 2. (Jan 28) - Integrating development and ecological theory and prevention
Required:

1. Lorion, R. P., Price, R. H., & Eaton, W. W. (1990). The prevention of child and adolescent disorder: From theory to research. In D. Shafer, I. Phillips, & N. B. Enzer (Eds.), Prevention of mental disorders alcohol and other drug use in children and adolescents. OSAP Prevention Monograph-2 (pp. 55-97). Rockville, MD: DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 90-1646.

2. Sameroff, A., & Feise, B. (1990). Conceptual issues in D. Shaffer, Iphillips, & B. Enzer (Eds.), Prevention of mental disorders alcohol and other drug use in children and adolescents. OSAP Prevention Monograph-2 (pp. 23-55). Rockville, MD: DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 90-1646.

3. Kellam, S. G., Koretz, D., & Moscicki, E. (1999). Core elements of developmental epidemiologically based prevention research. American Journal of Community. Psychology, 27, 463-483.

The objectives of this session are
a) Understand the link between developmental theory and the design of preventive interventions prevention as a change in developmental trajectories. Identify the “small theory” underlying preventive interventions.
b) Understand the concept of risk from a developmental perspective
c) Think through the implications of the multi-level developmental perspective for the conceptualization of preventive interventions.

Supplemental

1. Coie, J. D., Watt, N. F., West, S. G., Hawkins, J. D., Asamow, J. R., Marklman, H. J., Ramey, C., Shure, M. B., & Long, B. (1993). The science of prevention: A conceptual framework and some directions for a national research program. American Psychologist, 48, 1013-1023.

2. Mrazek, P. J. & Haggerty, R. J. (1994). Reducing ,risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for prevention research. Washington, D.C. : National Academy Press. Pg. 215-315. This chapter has illustrative prevention programs at each developmental stage. Read page 215-223 plus the section on prevention programs for any one selected developmental stage.

3. Loeber, R. (1987). Meaningful outcome criteria in prevention research. development. In J. A. Steinberg and M. M. Silverman (Eds.), Preventing mental disorder: A research perspective (pp 186-202). DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 87-1492.

4. Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., Kessler, R. C., Jensen, P. S., & Kupfer, D. J. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 337-3343.

5. Anthony, J. C. (1990). Prevention research in the context of epidemiology, with a discussion of public health models. In P. Muehrer (Ed.), Conceptual research models for preventing mental disorders. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 90-1713.

6. Bell, R. (1986). Age-specific manifestations in changing psychosocial risk. In D. C. Farran and J. D. McKinney (Eds. ), The concept of risk in intellectual and psychosocial development. (Pp. 169-185). New York: Academic Press.

7. Caldwell, R. A., & Bogat, A., & Davidson, W. S. (1988). The assessment of child abuse potential and the prevention of child abuse and neglect: A policy analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 609-625.

8. Boyle, M. H., & Offord, D. R. (1990). Primary prevention of conduct disorder: Issues and prospects. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 227-233.

9. Compas, B. E., Connor, J., & Wadsworth, M. Prevention of depression. (1996). In R. P. Weissberg, T. P. Gullotta, R. L. Hampton, B. A. Ryan, & G. R. Adams (Eds.), Enhancing children’s wellness: Issues in children’s and families’ lives. (pp. 129-174) Vol. 8. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Week 3 (Feb 4) - Cross cultural issues in prevention

1. Dumka, L. E., Lopez, Vera, & Jacobs-Carter, S. (2002). Parenting interventions adapted for Latino families: Progress and prospects. Manuscript submitted for publication.

2. Casas, J. M. (1992). A culturally sensitive model for evaluating alcohol and other drug abuse prevention programs: A Hispanic perspective. In M. A. Orlandi, R. Weston, & L. G. Epstein (Eds.5), Cultural competence for evaluators: A guide for alcohol and other drug abuse prevention practitioners working with ethnic/racial communities. (pp. 75-117) Washington, D.C.: DHHS Publication No. ( ADM)92-1884.

3. Gonzales, N. A., & Kim, L. S. (1997). Stress and coping in an ethnic minority context: Children’s cultural ecologies. In S. Wolchik and I. Sandler (Eds.), Handbook of children’s coping: Linking theory and intervention (pp. 481-515). New York: Plenum.

Supplemental
1. Castro, F. G., Cota, M. K., & Vega, S. C. (1999). Health promotion in Latino populations: A sociocultural model for program planning, development, and evaluation. In R. M. Huff & M. V. Kline (Eds.), Promoting health in multicultural populations: A handbook for practitioners (pp. 137-168). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

2. Orlandi, M.A., Weston, R., & Epstein, L. G. (1992), Cultural competence for evaluators: A guide for alcohol and other drug abuse prevention practitioners working with ethnic/racial communities. Washington, D.C.: DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 92-1884.

3. Bernal, M., Bonilla, J., & Bellido, C. (1995). Ecological validity and cultural sensitivity for outcome research: Issues for the cultural adaptation and development of psychological treatments with Hispanics. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23, 67-83.

4. Malgady, R. G., Rogler, L. H., & Constantino, G. (1990). Hero/heroine modeling for Puerto Rican adolescents: A preventive mental health intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 469-474.

Week 4 (Feb 11): Evaluation of the efficacy of prevention programs
Required:

1. Price, R. H., & Smith, S. S. (1985). A guide to evaluating prevention program in mental health. (pp. 57 -115). DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 85-1365.

2. Brown, H. C., & Liao, J. (1999). Principles for designing randomized prevention trials in mental health: An emerging developmental epidemiology framework. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 673-711.

Supplemental

1. Lorion, R. (1993). Evaluating preventive interventions: Guidelines for the serious social change agent. In R. D. Felner, L. A., Jason, S. Farber, & J. N. Moritsugu (Eds.), Preventive psychology: Theory, research and practice (pp. 251-268). New York: Pergammon.

2. Begg, C. Cho, M., Eastwood, S., et al. (1995). Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement. Journal of the American Medical Association, 276, 637-639.

The objectives of this session are that you understand the basic elements of the evaluation of an experimental trial of a theoretically derived preventive intervention including description of program, sample selection and attrition, design, program delivery, cost, proximal and distal outcomes, mediation of program effects, follow-up. The Price and Smith paper present an overview of these issues and the Brown and Liao paper presents more recent developments in the evaluation of randomized experimental trials of program efficacy.

Week 5 (Feb 18): Evaluation of dissemination and effectiveness

1. Price, R.H. & Lorion, R.P. (1989). Prevention programming as organizational reinvention: From research to implementation. In D. Schaefer, I. Phillips, & N.B. Enzer (Eds.), Prevention of mental disorders, alcohol and other drug use in children and adolescents. OSAP Prevention Monograph - 2 (pp.97-123). Rockville, Md.: DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 90-1646.

2. Price, R. H., & Smith, S. S. (1985). A guide to evaluating prevention program in mental health. (pp. 115-130). DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 85-1365.

3. Elias, M. J. (1997). Reinterpreting dissemination of prevention programs as widespread implementation with effectiveness and fide1ity. In R. P. Weissberg, T. P. Gullotta, R. L. Hampton, B. A. Ryan, & G. R. Adams (Eds.), Establishing preventive services. Vol. 9. (pp. 253-289).

Objectives of the session:
The objectives of this session are to identify the issues in the implementation of prevention programs in the community. Key concepts include characteristics of effective innovator, organizational readiness, fidelity of implementation, adaptiveness of implementation, true vs. manifest implementation, barriers to effective dissemination of innovation, community coalition building model; dissemination as continuous implementation and adaptation.

Supplemental:

1. Rappaport, J, Seidman, E., & Davidson, W. S., III. (1977). Demonstration research and manifest versus true adoption: The natural history of a research project to divert adolescents from the legal system. In R. Munoz, L. Snowden, & J. Kelly, (Eds.). Social and psychological research in community settings. (pp. 101-132).

2. Kelly, J. G. (1987). Seven criteria when conducting community- based prevention research: A research agenda and commentary. In. J. A. Steinberg, and M. M. Silverman (Eds.), Preventing mental disorder: A research perspective. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 87-1492.

3. Backer, T.E, Liberman, R.P., & Kuehnel, T.G. (1986). Dissemination and adoption of innovative psychosocial interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 11-118.

4. Butterfoss, F., Goodman, R. M. and Wandersman, A. (1993 ). Community coalitions for prevention and health promotion. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 8, 315-330.

5. Mayer, J. P., & Davidson, W. S. II. (1999). Dissemination of innovations. In J. Rappaport, & E. Seidman, (Eds.) The Handbook of Community Psychology. New York: Plenum.

6. Goodman, R. M., Wandersman, A., Chinman, M., Imm, P., & Morrissey, E. (1996). An ecological assessment of community-based interventions for prevention and health promotion: Approaches to measuring community coalitions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 33-63.

7. Hawkins, D., & Catalano, R. (1992). Communities that care: Action for drug abuse prevention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

8. Morrisey, E. , Wandersman, A., Seybolt, D., Nation, M., Crusto, C. & Davino, K. (1997). Toward a framework for bridging the gap between science and practice in prevention: A focus on evaluator and practitioner perspectives. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20, 367-377.

9. McElhaney, S. J. (1995). Getting started: The NMHA guide to establishing community-based prevention programs. National Mental Health Association.

10. Linney, J. A., & Wandersman, A. (1991). Prevention Plus III: Assessing alcohol and other drug prevention programs at the school and community level. A four-step guide to useful program assessment. OSAP. DHHS Pub. No. (ADM) 91-1817.

Week 6 (Feb 25) Class presentation of grant proposal or paper idea

Week 7 (Mar 4): Essentials of writing a prevention research grant

1. Applications for a Public Health Service Grant, PHS 398.
Pay particular attention to the Research Plan, pages 15-19.

2. Grant examples:
Please read one of the two proposals. Pay particular attention to the research plan. How do the authors use each of the main sections of the Research Plan to present their proposal. As you consider these issues you should first think about the function of each of these sections of a grant proposal, Specific Aims, Background and Significance, Preliminary Studies/Progress Report, Research Design and Methods.

3. Gonzales, N. Evaluation of Bridges/Puentes to Junior High School Program.

4. Sandler, I. Child Bereavement Program.
These are two examples of RO1 grant proposals for experimental preventive interventions.

5. E.R. Oetting (1986). Ten fatal mistakes in grant writing. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 570-573.

Supplemental:

1. Pequegnat, W., & Stover, E. (1995). How to write a successful research grant application: Guide for social and behavioral scientists. New York: Plenum.

March 11 – 15 No class – Spring Break

Week 8 (March 18). Prevention strategies based on a stress and coping theoretical model

1. Sandler, I.N., Gensheimer & Braver, S. (2000). Stress: Theory, research and action In J. Rappaport and E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of Community Psychology (pp. 187-215). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

2. Wolchik, S. A., West, S. G., Sandler, I. N., Tein, J.-Y., Coatsworth, D., Lengua, L., Weiss, Anderson, E., R., Greene, S. M., & Griffin, W. (2000). The New Beginnings Program for Divorced Families: An experimental evaluation of theory-based single-component and dual-component programs. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 843-856.

3. Wolchik, S. A., Sandler, I. N., Millsap, R. E., Plummer, B. A., Greene, S. M., Anderson, E. R., Dawson-McClure, S. R., Hipke, K., & Haine, R. (2002). Six-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of preventive intervention for children of divorce. Manuscript submitted for publication.

The chapter reviews theory on stress and adaptation and considers their implications for the design and evaluation of preventive interventions. The major issues for you to consider are a) what is the epidemiologic evidence that we should develop preventive interventions for people who experience stress and b) what have we learned about the adaptation processes that can be used to develop a theoretical base for the intervention and inform us about the potential points for intervention. The articles present examples of preventive interventions with children of divorce.

Supplemental:
1. Vinokur, A., D., Price, R. H., & Schul, Y. (1995). Impact of the JOBS intervention on unemployed workers varying in risk for depression. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 39-75.

2. Sandler, I., Wolchik, S., Ayers, T., Davis, C., & Haine, R. (in press). Correlational and experimental study of resilience for children of divorce and parentally-bereaved children. In S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities.

3. Martinez, C. R., & Forgatch, M. S. (2001). Preventing Problems with boys’ noncompliance: Effects of a parent training intervention for divorcing mothers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 416-428.

4. Rotheram-Borus, M. J., Stein, J. A., & Lin Y. Y. (2001). Impact of parent death and an intervention on the adjustment of adolescents whose parents have HIV/AIDS. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 763-773.

5. Pedro-Carroll, J. The Children of Divorce Intervention Program: Fostering resilient outcomes for school-aged children. (1997). In G. W. Albee & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Primary prevention works: Issues in children’s and families’ lives. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

6. Caplan, R.D., Vinokur, A.D., Price, R.H., & Van Ryn M. (1989). Job seeking, reemployment, and mental health: A randomized field experiment in coping with job loss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 759-769.

7. Van Ryn, M., & Vinokur, A. (1992). How did it work? An examination of the mechanisms through which an intervention for the unemployed promoted job-search behavior. American Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 577-599.

Week 9 (March 25). Promoting healthy cognitive-affective development

1. Weissberg, R. P., & Greenberg, M. T. School and community competence-enhancement and prevention programs. In W. Damon (Series Editor) & I. E. Sigel & K. A. Renninger (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 5. Child psychology in practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

2. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Initial impact of the Fast Tack Prevention Trial for Conduct Problems: II. Classroom effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 648-658.

3. Gillham, J. E., Reivitch, K. J., Jaycox, L. H., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1995). Prevention of depressive symptoms in school children: Two year follow-up. Psychological Science, _6, 343-351.

The Weissberg and Greenberg is a major conceptual review and conceptual reformulation of the school-based social skill training approach to prevention. Pay particular attention to what they conceptualize as three major issues in the development and evaluation of such programs and the individual person-centered models that Weissberg criticizes as well as the directions he would like us to take and the issues he identifies in the development and evaluation of such programs.
The Greenberg paper presents an evaluation of a universal cognitive-affective skill building program, the PATHS curriculum and the Gillham presents a follow-up evaluation of a selected cognitive skill building program for prevention of depression.

Week 10 (April 1): Prevention of Substance Use and Abuse

1. Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dusenbury L., Botvin, E. M. & Diaz, T. Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse. prevention trial in a white middle-class population. (1997). Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1106-1111.

2. Peterson, A. V., Kealey, K. A., Mann, S. L., Marek, P. M., & Sarason, I. G. (2000). Hutchinson smoking prevention project: Long-term randomized trial in school-based tobacco use prevention – results on smoking. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 1979-1991.

3. Clayton, R. R., Scutchfield, F. D., & Wyatt, S. W. (2000). Hutchinson smoking prevention project: A new gold standard in prevention science requires transdisciplinary thinking. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 1964-1965.

4. Wagenaar, A., & Perry, C. (1994). Community strategies for the reduction of youth drinking: Theory and application. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 319-345.

5. Spoth, R. L., Redmond, C., & Shin, C. (2001). Randomized trial of brief family interventions for general populations: Adolescent substance use outcomes 4 years following baseline. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 627-642.

The purpose of these readings is to review the major theoretical models for the prevention of substance use and abuse, life skills training, community interventions and family skill building. The first three articles are linked, in that they all deal with the life skills training approach and present tests of the efficacy and dissemination of the model. The Wagenaar & Perry describes community level strategies, and the Spoth describes the evaluation of a universal, school-based family skill building intervention.

Supplemental

1. Pentz, M.A., Dwyer, J.H., MacKinnon, D.P., Flay, B.R., Hansen, W.B., Wang, E.Y.I., & Johnson, C.A. A multicommunity trial for primary prevention of adolescent drug abuse: Effects on drug use prevalence. Journal of the American Medical Association, 261, 3259-3266.

2. Perry, et al. (1996). Project Northland: Outcomes of a communitywide alcohol use prevention program during early adolescence. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 956-965.

3. Sorensen, G., Emmons, K., Hunt, M. K., & Johnston, D. (1998). Implications of the results of community intervention trials. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 379-416.

4. Lynam, D. R., Milich, R., Zimmerman, R., Novak, S. P., Logan, T. K., Martin, C., Leukefeld, C., & Clayton, R. (1999). Project Dare: No effects at 10 year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 590-593.

Week 11 (April 8). Prevention of problems of aggression

1. Conduct Problems Prevent Research Group. (1992). A developmental and clinical model for the prevention of conduct disorder: The Fast Track Program. Developmental and Psychopathology, 4, 509-529.

2. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (1999). Initial impact of the Fast Track Prevention Trial for Conduct Problems: 1. The high risk sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 631-648.

3. Biglan, A., & Taylor, T. K. (2000). Why have we been more successful in reducing tobacco use than violent crime? American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 269 – 302.

These papers present two different approaches to the prevention of problems of aggression. The first two papers present the theory and the short term outcomes of a multi-component program designed to prevent conduct disorder in high risk, early onset conduct disorder children. The third paper presents a school-based system wide approach to prevention of the problem of bullying.

Supplemental

1. Reid, J. B., Eddy, J. M., Fetrow, R. A., & Stoolmiller, M. (1999). Description and immediate impacts of a preventive intervention for conduct problems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 483-517.

2. Stoolmiller, M., Eddy, J. M., & Reid, J. B. (2000). Detecting and describing preventive intervention effects in a universal school-based randomized trial targeting delinquent and violent behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 296-306.

3. Tolan, P. (1995). Crime prevention: Focus on youth. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime. Crime Prevention: Focus on youth. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press Institute for Contemporary Studies

4. Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among school children: Basic facts and effects of an intervention program. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 411-448).

Week 12 (April 15): Early childhood interventions

1. Seitz, V. (1991). Intervention programs for impoverished children: A comparison of educational and family support models. Annals of Child Development, 7, 73-103.

2. Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Hernderson, C. R., Hanks, C., Cole, R., Tatelbaum, R., McConnochie, K. M., Sidora, K., Luckey, D. W., Shaver, D., Engelhardt, K., James, D., & Barnard, K. (1997), Effects of prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses on pregnancy outcomes, childhood injuries, and repeated childbearing. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 637-643.

3. Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Robertson, D. L., & Mann, E. A. (2001). Long-term effects of an early childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest: A 15-year follow-up of low-income children in public schools. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2339-2346.

The Seitz paper is a review comparing alternative models of preventive interventions in early childhood, early education and family support. The paper presents the models and provides brief descriptions of evaluation data on several major exemplars of each. Directions for research and program development are considered. The Kitzman et al. paper is a long term follow-up of a home visiting program for high risk mothers and the Reynolds et al. paper is a 15 year follow-up of an early childhood intervention program.

Supplemental:

1. Haskins, R. (1989), Beyond metaphor: The efficacy of early childhood education. American Psychologist, 44, 274-283.

2. Yoshikawa, H. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency. In The future of children: Long-term outcomes of early childhood programs. Vol. 5. 51-75. 3. Olds, D., Eckenrode, J., Henderson, C. R., Kitzman, H., Powers, J., Cole, R., Sidora, K., Morris, P., Pettitt, L. M., & Luckey, D. Long-term effects of home visitation on maternal life course and child abuse and neglect. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 63 7-643 .

3. Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (1988). The High Scope/Perry Preschool Program. In R. H. Price, E. L. Cowen, R. P. Lonon, & J. Ramos-McKay (Eds. ), Fourteen ounces of prevention: A casebook for practitioners (pp. 53-65).

Week 13 – 15 Student presentations of their projects.

Return to Top