Longitudinal relations between sectarian and nonsectariancommunity violence and child adjustment in Northern Ireland

E. MARK CUMMINGS,a CHRISTINE E. MERRILEES,a LAURA K. TAYLOR,a PETER SHIRLOW,b

MARCIE C. GOEKE-MOREY,c AND ED CAIRNSd

aUniversity of Notre Dame; bQueens University, Belfast; cCatholic University of America; and dUniversity of Ulster

Abstract

Although relations between political violence and child adjustment are well documented, longitudinal research is needed to adequately address the manyquestions remaining about the contexts and developmental trajectories underlying the effects on children in areas of political violence. The studyexamined the relations between sectarian and nonsectarian community violence and adolescent adjustment problems over 4 consecutive years. Participantsincluded 999 mother–child dyads (482 boys, 517 girls), M ages ¼ 12.18 (SD ¼ 1.82), 13.24 (SD ¼ 1.83), 13.61 (SD ¼ 1.99), and 14.66 (SD ¼ 1.96) years,respectively, living in socially deprived neighborhoods in Belfast, Northern Ireland, a context of historical and ongoing political violence. In examiningtrajectories of adjustment problems, including youth experience with both sectarian and nonsectarian antisocial behaviors, sectarian antisocial behaviorsignificantly predicted more adjustment problems across the 4 years of the study. Experiencing sectarian antisocial behavior was related to increased adolescentadjustment problems, and this relationship was accentuated in neighborhoods characterized by higher crime rates. The discussion considers theimplications for further validating the distinction between sectarian and nonsectarian violence, including consideration of neighborhood crime levels,from the child’s perspective in a setting of political violence.

There is increasing concern worldwide with regard to the ad-justment of children exposed to political violence (Feerick &Prinz, 2003). Research has documented the risk for psychopa-thology in children growing up in contexts of political violence(Belsky, 2008; Garbarino & Kostelny, 1996; Qouta, Puna-maki, & El Sarraj, 2008; Sagi-Schwartz, 2008). Longitudinalresearch is rare, with few studies examining trajectories of rela-tions over multiple time points. Addressing these gaps in theresearch on political violence and child adjustment, the presentstudy examines relations between sectarian and nonsectarianantisocial behavior (SAB and NAB) and youth adjustmentover 4 consecutive years in Belfast, Northern Ireland, an areathat has experienced protracted political violence.

The field of developmental psychopathology emphasizesstudying relations between specific social contexts and risksfor child maladjustment (Cicchetti & Cohen, 1995; Cum-mings, Davies, & Campbell, 2000). Bronfenbrenner’s (1979)social ecological model of hierarchically nested ecosystemsprovides a framework for conceptualizing the social ecologyof political violence from the child’s perspective, includingthe effects of violence in the community (Cicchetti & Lynch,

1993; Elliott, Wilson, Huizinga, & Sampson, 1996; Lynch &Cicchetti, 1998; Salzinger, Feldman, Stockhammer, & Hood,2002). From a developmental psychopathology perspective,longitudinal studies that differentiate the effects of specificcontexts of community violence (e.g., sectarian vs. nonsec-tarian) on child adjustment significantly contribute to under-standing risks for the development of psychopathology(Cummings, Goeke-Morey, Schermerhorn, Merrilees, &Cairns, 2009; Dubow, Huessmann, & Boxer, 2009). The fieldof developmental psychopathology is also concerned withstudying at-risk developmental stages and ages (Cicchetti,2006); this study focuses on preadolescence and adolescence,periods during which youths are at heightened risk for beingvictims, witnesses, or perpetrators of sectarian violence (Shir-low & Murtagh, 2006).

A growing body of research indicates that children’s devel-opment is affected by neighborhood characteristics (Elliotet al., 1996; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000; Parente & Ma-honey, 2009; Sampson, Morenoff, & Raudenbush, 2005;Shinn & Toohey, 2003). Neighborhoods are geographicallyrelatively small, bounded, and symbolically influencedspaces, meaningful to residents, and relatively stable overtime (Ward, 2010). Moreover, the impact of neighborhoodon adjustment is arguably more important for less mobileand higher risk groups (e.g., economically and socially de-prived groups, the young, and the elderly; Ward, 2010).The present study focuses on youths and families living in so-cially deprived neighborhoods, with most residents sharing acommon ethnic identity within neighborhoods.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to: E. Mark Cummings,Department of Psychology, 204 Brownson Hall, University of NotreDame, Notre Dame, IN 46556; E-mail: edward.m.cummings.10@nd.edu.

This research was supported by NICHD Grant R01 HD046933 (to E.M.C.).We thank the many families in Northern Ireland who participated in the pro-ject. We also express our appreciation to the project staff, graduate students,and undergraduate students at the University of Notre Dame and the Univer-sity of Ulster.

Development and Psychopathology 25 (2013), 615–627# Cambridge University Press 2013doi:10.1017/S0954579413000059

615

In studies in the United States, community violence islinked with children’s adjustment problems (Gorman-Smith& Tolan, 1998; Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler, 2003; Jaycoxet al., 2002; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1998, 2002; Margolin & Gor-dis, 2000). Neighborhood violence has also been linked withchildren’s trajectories of aggression (Vanfossen, Brown, Kel-lam, Sokoloff, & Doering, 2010) and depressive symptoms(Wight, Botticello, & Aneshensel, 2006). Mayer and Jencks(1989) have argued that youths living in dangerous neighbor-hoods are at greater risk for adjustment problems because ofcontagion from the influence of the crime that surrounds themand a lack of social control that would minimize externalizingproblems. The present study is concerned with relations be-tween characteristics of community violence and trajectoriesof children’s adjustment problem over time.

Evidence is increasing that violence and conflict nega-tively affect children’s adjustment in contexts of political vio-lence (Ajdukovic & Biruski, 2008; Barber, 2008; Brook,Brook, & Whiteman, 2007; Dubow et al., 2010). For exam-ple, in South Africa, exposure to community violence hasbeen linked to greater psychological distress, moderated inpart by neighborhood factors (Barbarin, Richter, & de Wet,2001; Shields, Nadasen, & Pierce, 2008). In Israel, linksare reported between exposure to severe political violenceand psychopathological symptoms among 10- to 18-year-old youths (Slone & Shechner, 2009), and in Palestine, neigh-borhood political violence and disorganization are associatedwith posttraumatic stress, aggressive behavior, and adjust-ment problems (Barber, 2001; Dubow et al., 2010).

In these contexts, community violence is unlikely to be ahomogenous element of the social ecology. At least two typesof community violence can be distinguished in contexts ofpolitical violence: sectarian violence, which is associatedwith the political context of war and intergroup aggression,and nonsectarian violence, which is “ordinary” crime poten-tially found in any context. For examples, a few recent studieshave differentiated between child exposure to war and com-munity violence that is not war related (Dubow et al., 2010;Elbedour, ten Bensel, & Bastien, 1993; Slone & Shechner,2009). Discriminating between these types of violence holdspromise for advancing understanding of outcomes associatedwith political and nonpolitical discord at the community level(Cummings et al., 2009; McAloney, McCrystal, Percy, &McCartan, 2009).

The impact of sectarian and nonsectarian community vio-lence on youth’s adjustment may be moderated by other di-mensions of neighborhood discord, such as crime in specificcommunities. Higher crime rates may serve to further increasechildren’s emotional insecurity about community and therebyrelations with adjustment problems over time. Children’semotional insecurity, reflected in higher propensities foremotional and behavioral dysregulation and development ofadjustment problems, is sensitive to multiple sources of threatto safety and protection. The sources of safety and protectioninclude interparental, parent–child, family, and communitysystems (Waters & Cummings, 2000). Emotional security

has been repeatedly shown to be linked with adjustment prob-lems across age groups and over time (Cummings, George,McCoy, & Davies, 2012; Cummings, Schermerhorn, Davies,Goeke-Morey, & Cummings, 2006)

The impact of sectarian community violence on youth ad-justment has been shown in several recent studies to be medi-ated by emotional insecurity (Cummings, Merrilees, et al.,2010, Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al., 2010; Cummings,Merrilees, et al., 2011, 2012). Given the long-term effectson adjustment that have been associated with emotional inse-curity (Cummings & Davies, 2010; Cummings, George,et al., 2012), these demonstrated relations between sectariancommunity violence and emotional insecurity increase thelikelihood of lasting relations over time with youth’s adjust-ment problems. In addition, by further elevating children’ssecurity concerns about community, higher crime rates mayintensify the impact of sectarian community violence on ad-justment. By comparison, weaker relations are reported inthese studies between nonsectarian community violenceand youth’s emotional insecurity. Thus, higher crime maybe less likely to accentuate processes linked with adjustmentproblems owing to nonsectarian community violence, reduc-ing the likelihood of an intensification of relations with ad-justment problems.

Specifically, this present paper is concerned with compar-ing youth’s trajectories of adjustment problems over four timepoints associated with sectarian and nonsectarian communityantisocial behavior, including consideration of these relationsas a function of neighborhood crime rates. Given scant ex-ploration of trajectories of adjustment problems in contextsof historical political violence, the study of trajectories is ex-ploratory. Normative developmental trends toward declinesin adjustment problems over time in this age period basedon standardized assessments have been reported in high-risk social environments (Fagg, Curtis, Clark, Congdon, &Stansfeld, 2008). Regardless of the slopes of the trajectoriesfound, however, trajectories of behavior problems are ex-pected to be relatively elevated in high-crime neighborhoods.From a developmental psychopathology perspective, this di-rection further advances the examination of specific contextsof community violence by incorporating multiple indicatorsof violence and threat in cultures characterized by politicalviolence as they relate to children’s adjustment.

In Northern Ireland, sectarian community violence occursbetween two groups, specifically Catholics and Protestants(for a brief history of the sectarian conflict in Northern Ire-land, see Cairns & Darby, 1998), and contemporary studiesfocus on the 30-year period of violence from 1968 to 1998known as the “Troubles.” After many attempts to achievepeaceful solutions, the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement wasreached in 1998, eventually leading to intercommunity powersharing and the endorsement of cultural rights. Despite thesigning of peace accords, substantial sectarian violencecontinues, especially in socially deprived communities in Bel-fast (e.g., see Police Service of Northern Ireland, Central Sta-tistics Branch, Operational Support Department, 2006/2007),

E. M. Cummings et al.616

indicating sectarian tensions persist between the highly segre-gated Catholic and Protestant communities (MacGinty, Mul-doon, & Ferguson, 2007; McGrellis, 2005; Shirlow & Mur-tagh, 2006). Many neighborhoods and most schools inBelfast remain highly segregated (Hughes, Campbell, Hew-stone, & Cairns, 2007). Moreover, as paramilitary organiza-tions have disbanded and decommissioned, it has beenevident that young people, unaffiliated with such organiza-tions, have been at the forefront of sectarian rioting and crime(Haydon & Scraton, 2008; Shirlow & McEvoy, 2008). McA-loney and colleagues (2009) recently reported that over threequarters of adolescents (15- to 16-year-olds) in Belfast had ex-perienced violence in their communities, reflecting a socialand psychological legacy of the Troubles.

Nonsectarian violence in Northern Ireland is also on therise; for example, the number of reported nonpolitically mo-tivated assaults across Belfast rose 50% between 2000 and2008 (PService of Northern Ireland, 2010). This is likelythe result of the growth in intragroup antisocial behavior, in-cluding significant growth in physical assault violence, whichemerged as policing and other forms of militarization were re-duced. This increase in nonsectarian community violence is aphenomenon observed in other parts of the world in postac-cord periods (Darby, 2006).

Cummings and colleagues (2009) recently advanced anapproach to distinguish between these contexts of communityviolence in areas of intergroup conflict in Belfast. A first stepwas to determine the characteristic expressions of communityviolence in contexts of political violence by means of focusgroups, resulting in items reflecting SAB or NAB (Taylor,Merrilees, Cairns, & Cummings, 2009). Focus group partic-ipants described SAB as violence motivated by intergrouphostility, whereas NAB reflected intragroup violence thatdid not have political or sectarian bases. In order to further re-vise and validate these scales, these items were tested as pre-dictors of children’s adjustment problems in another area ofhistorical sectarian violence. Specifically, a two-wave pilotstudy was conducted with mothers in Derry/Londonderry,Northern Ireland; SAB was more closely linked than wasNAB with adjustment problems (Goeke-Morey et al.,2009). In addition, subsequent factor analyses and qualitativeanalyses of the responses of focus groups of Belfast mothersalso supported distinctions between sectarian and nonsectar-ian community violence (Goeke-Morey et al., 2009; Tayloret al., 2011).

Recent quantitative studies further support the validity ofthese distinctions. In cross-sectional (Cummings, Merrilees,et al., 2010; Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al., 2010) andthree-wave longitudinal (Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2011,2012) studies, SAB and NAB are linked with differentpathways of risk for adjustment problems. As already noted,compared to NAB, SAB is related to adjustment problems byelevating children’s emotional insecurity about multiple so-cial contexts (Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2010, 2011,2012; Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al., 2010). In contrast,NAB has been either directly related to children’s adjustment

problems or linked with family-level variables such as paren-tal monitoring of youth’s behavior and psychological control(Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2010, 2011; Merrilees et al.,in press). The distinction between SAB and NAB is thus per-tinent to identifying how children are affected by differenttypes of violence to advance theoretical models of the socialecology of political violence (Cummings et al., 2009).

The goal of the present study is to further examine the dis-tinction between SAB and NAB as it relates to trajectories ofchildren’s adjustment over time. This study advances exami-nation of intraindividual change in youth adjustment and theeffects of SAB and NAB on adjustment at each of four timepoints, increasing reliability of assessment of these relations.This is also the first study to model interindividual differencesin intraindividual change in a setting of political violence.Building on the proposition that distinguishing betweenSAB and NAB is significant to the prediction of children’sadjustment problems, the current paper examines the questionof whether either, or both, types of community violence fac-tor into children’s trajectories of adjustment problems overtime in a context of historical political violence.

Method

Participants

Participants included mothers and their children who partici-pated in at least one wave of a longitudinal study on politicalviolence and family processes in Belfast, Northern Ireland,with the children approximately evenly divided between girlsand boys (N ¼ 999 mother–child dyads; 482 boys and 517girls). Children’s mean age was 12.18 (SD ¼ 1.82), 13.24(SD ¼ 1.83), 13.61 (SD ¼ 1.99), and 14.66 years (SD ¼1.96), respectively, across the four time points. Forty-two per-cent of mothers were married or living as married (n ¼ 571),and 58% were in single-parent households (n¼ 413), includ-ing being separated, divorced, widowed, or having never mar-ried. Reflective of the overall population demographics ofNorthern Ireland (57% Protestant, 43% Catholic; Darby,2001), 61% of families identified as Protestant (n ¼ 610),38% as Catholic (n ¼ 379), and 10 families refused to selectone of the two affiliations (1%). Mothers, rather than fathers,were selected to participate for pragmatic reasons: (a) manyfamilies in working-class Belfast are led by single mothers;(b) mothers are more likely than fathers to be available forin-home surveys during the day; and (c) including manymothers and only a small number of fathers as parental re-porters could pose considerable problems for data analysisand interpretation of results.

Retention and attrition rates were examined across the fourtime points. Across waves, retention was approximately 80%of the sample from the previous time point. This rate of reten-tion is at the higher end of the range of retention reported forcomparable high-risk, longitudinal samples, with retentionrates in these studies ranging from 50% to 86% (e.g., Betan-court et al., 2010; Browning, Burrington, Leventhal, &

Community violence and child adjustment 617

Brooks-Gunn, 2008; Kronenberg et al., 2010). Of the originalsample of 695 mother–child dyads beginning participation atTime 1, 82% returned at Time 2 (n¼ 572), 67% (n¼ 466) atTime 3, and 61% (n¼ 422) at Time 4. At least three attemptswere made to locate each family at each time point. Exempli-fying reasons for attrition, and based on Time 4 as an exam-ple, reasons included inability to reach the family after threeattempted calls (39%), the family moved with no forwardingdetails (36%), and the family refused to participate (16%);reasons for the remaining 9% of attrition included death ofthe mother, the child went to jail, or the house was demol-ished, vacant, or blocked up when interviewers attemptedto find the family. The only differences across waves in theoriginal sample were that families with higher SAB, NAB,and objective crime at Time 1 were less likely to return atTimes 3 and Time 4 (Table 1).

A supplemental set of families living in the original studyareas was added to the longitudinal study at Time 3. Recruit-ment of new families oversampled relatively higher riskneighborhoods characterized by greater attrition. Goalswere to achieve similar relative distributions of familiesacross neighborhoods as was had at the outset of the studyand to elevate the sample size in order to better support ade-quate representation of neighborhoods for Time 3 and anysubsequent years of the longitudinal study. As anticipated,given the oversampling of families from higher risk neighbor-hoods, supplemental families scored higher on youth adjust-ment problems, SAB, NAB, and objective crime (Table 2).Of the combined 770 mother–child dyads participating atTime 3, 82% returned at Time 4 (n ¼ 631). No differenceswere found between families participating and not participat-ing at Times 3 and 4 (Table 1).

Procedures: Neighborhood and family selection

The original study areas were selected to obtain a representa-tive sample of Catholics and Protestants and variation inlevels of sectarian violence, while limiting socioeconomicdifferences (see Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al., 2010).Consistent with the segregated nature of life in Belfast, par-ticularly in the neighborhoods associated with historical poli-tical violence (Shirlow & Murtagh, 2006), the majority ofstudy participants lived in wards that were ethnically homo-genous (over 90% Catholic or Protestant; Northern IrelandStatistics & Research Agency, 2011). At the same time,many study neighborhoods were interfaced, that is, theyshared a border with neighborhoods predominantly popu-lated by the other group. Although families selected for thisstudy typically lived bordering the other community, theycontinued to live segregated lives (Cairns & Toner, 1993;Shirlow & Murtagh, 2006), with this Catholic/Protestant sep-aration permeating marital, educational, and professional re-lationships (Hughes et al., 2007).

A demographer expert in the ethnic, social, historical, andeconomic characteristics of Belfast identified neighborhoodsvarying in both historical and current politically motivated T

able

1.A

ttriti

onan

dre

tent

ion

com

pari

sons

acro

ssal

lfo

urtim

epo

ints

W1W

2R

etai

ned

W1W

2A

ttriti

onW

1W3

Ret

aine

dW

1W3

Attr

ition

W1W

3In

depe

nden

tt

test

MSD

MSD

MSD

MSD

Dif

fC

I

SA

B3.

015.

663.

206.

262.

735.

173.

676.

780.

94*

0.00

3,1.

85N

AB

2.31

3.42

2.08

3.18

2.00

3.07

2.81

3.89

0.81

**0.

28,1

.34

Tot

Pro

b22

.52

10.4

020

.82

11.4

522

.49

10.1

721

.67

11.4

60.

822

0.87

,2.5

0C

rim

e28

04.9

131

89.0

428

69.9

229

78.6

724

13.3

722

97.7

739

27.9

946

14.6

715

14.6

2***

955.

81,2

073.

43

W1W

4R

etai

ned

W1W

4A

ttriti

onW

1W4

Inde

pend

ent

tT

est

W3W

4R

etai

ned

W3W

4A

ttriti

on

MSD

MSD

Dif

fC

IM

SDM

SD

SA

B2.

574.

663.

787.

101.

21**

0.33

,2.0

84.

027.

194.

578.

24N

AB

1.98

3.05

2.70

3.80

0.72

**0.

21,1

.23

2.98

4.30

3.32

4.89

Tot

Pro

b23

.06

10.2

420

.91

11.0

52.

15*

0.52

,3.7

623

.08

10.1

522

.77

9.53

Cri

me

2420

.54

2325

.335

98.8

542

55.4

811

78.3

1***

651.

79,1

704.

8333

54.1

441

44.7

631

77.2

641

94.2

Not

e:W

1–W

4,W

aves

1–4.

*p,

.05.

**p

,.0

1.**

*p,

.001

.

E. M. Cummings et al.618

sectarian violence. To control for the possible confound ofsocioeconomic status, all study areas were from working-class, socially deprived wards. In Northern Ireland, all 582wards receive a Multiple Deprivation Rank based on income,employment, health, education, proximity to services, crime,and the quality of the living environment. All of the areas in-cluded in this study were in the lowest quartile in terms ofMultiple Deprivation Rank (Northern Ireland Statistics & Re-search Agency, 2011).

Within these targeted neighborhoods, data was collectedfrom 35 to 40 families, and all participation was voluntary.A family was eligible to participate if there was a child be-tween the ages of 10 and 17 years old living in the home, al-though a small number of families with slightly younger chil-dren were allowed to participate. For families with two ormore children within the indicated age range, the youngest in-terested child participated. This age period was selected be-cause children and adolescents in the target age range (a)have been shown to be aware of the social distinctions rele-vant to the study (Catholic/Protestant differences; Cairns,1987) and (b) are likely to be informed about or exposed tosectarian and nonsectarian violence, as observers, victims,or participants. Families added at Time 3 were identifiedand recruited following the same procedures within thesame study areas as for the original sample at Time 1.

Professional interviewers from an established market re-search firm conducted in-home surveys with mothers andchildren, which lasted approximately 1.0 and 0.5 hr, respec-tively. Given the close-knit nature of these communities,community leaders were first identified by the demographerexpert in these areas of Belfast, and letters were sent to thesecommunity leaders informing them that we planned to con-tact families in their communities concerning participationin a research study of political violence, community, and fam-ily relationships and child development. Next, letters with thesame description of the study were sent to families, invitingthem to participate. Families were then contacted by phoneor engaged door-to-door, consistent with local custom in Bel-fast. The confidential and voluntary nature of the study wasemphasized. Interviewers were frequently from these neigh-borhoods or similar neighborhoods, which facilitated rapportbuilding with participants. Before participating, mothers andchildren provided consent and assent, respectively; families

received £20 at Times 1 and 2 and £40 at Times 3 and 4for their participation. Research protocol and measures wereapproved by the institutional review boards at all participatinguniversities.

Measures

SAB and NAB. Scales assessed child’s awareness of SAB andNAB in their communities. As already noted, the measures,developed specifically for the social ecological context ofBelfast, reflect a culturally relevant way to distinguish be-tween political and everyday crime in contemporary NorthernIreland. Focus groups with mothers living in Belfast revealedthat individuals living in these areas clearly distinguished be-tween sectarian and nonsectarian threats to their communities(Taylor et al., 2009, 2011). From focus group transcripts,scales were developed and tested in a pilot project withmothers in Derry/Londonderry to establish the psychometricproperties, including factor analyses supporting the distinc-tiveness of the SAB versus NAB items and predictive validityof these measures (see Goeke-Morey et al., 2009, for a reportof instrument development). Original internal consistenciesfrom the pilot data of the two scales were .94 (SAB) and.68 (NAB). When tested together, the factor loadings wereclearly distinguishable, and the two factors for SAB andNAB were moderately correlated in the pilot study, r (104)¼ .47, p , .001 (Goeke-Morey et al., 2009). These two scaleshave also been distinguished in previous papers, includingconsistent differences in predictive validity, that is, differ-ences in correlates and relations with other elements of theecosystem and adjustment problems (Cummings, Merrilees,et al., 2010; Cummings et al., 2011; Cummings, Schermer-horn, et al., 2010).

In the current analyses, child-report versions of both scaleswere used. Using a 5-point scale (0¼ not in the last 3 months,1 ¼ once in the last 3 months, 2 ¼ every month, 3 ¼ everyweek, 4 ¼ every day) youths reported on how frequently inthe last 3 months a series of items occurred. The instructionswere as follows: “This set of questions is about your commu-nity. For these next questions, your community refers to the[insert denominational community participant identified ear-lier] community. And the OTHER community refers to the[insert other] community. These next questions are about

Table 2. Comparisons of supplemental and W3 attrition families

W1W3 Attrition W3 Suppl. Independent t Test

M SD M SD Diff CI

SAB 3.67 6.78 6.45 9.65 2.77*** 1.29, 4.26NAB 2.81 3.89 4.79 5.63 1.98*** 1.12, 2.84Total prob. 21.67 11.46 23.84 9.77 2.16* 0.34, 3.98Crime 3927.99 4614.67 4721.66 5710.09 793.67 2243.14, 1830.48

Note: W1, Wave 1; W3, Wave 3; SAB, sectarian antisocial behavior; NAB, nonsectarian antisocial behavior.*p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

Community violence and child adjustment 619

things that might happen in your community. Please reportonly events that actually occurred in the community, not inci-dents from movies or fictional television” (Cummings,Schermerhorn, et al., 2010, p. 841).

For the 12-item SAB scale, items included stones or ob-jects thrown over walls, name calling by people from theother community, and deaths or serious injury caused bythe other community (for the complete scale, see Cummings,Schermerhorn, et al., 2010). The 7-item NAB scale includeditems such as drunkenness, drugs being used or sold, andhome break-ins (see Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al.,2010, for the complete scale). Good internal consistenciesfor each scale were obtained across all four time points ofthe present study (Cronbach as ¼ 0.90, 0.95, 0.96, and0.98 for SAB and 0.73, 0.87, 0.84, and 0.95 for the NABfor Times 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Correlations betweenSAB and NAB within each time point were .53, .67, .55,and .53 (all p , .01), respectively.

Objective crime. The crime record data were calculated usingthe annual rates of crime and antisocial behavior that the PoliceService of Northern Ireland collects for every ward in NorthernIreland. For the current analyses, criminal offenses across allfour time points were collected for each of the study wards.This assessment for each family was thus calculated as thesum of total offenses from May 2006 to April 2010 for theirward. Two caveats should be considered. First, violent criminaloffenses included not only actual violence but also the threat ofviolence, and the severity or degree of violence is varied. Sec-ond, due to historic mistrust of the police, particularly in so-cially deprived and working-class areas of Belfast, whichcharacterized the neighborhoods in the current study, underre-porting of crime is common, ranging from 40% to 70%(MacGinty et al., 2007; Shirlow & Ellison, 2008). For example,the Police Federation alleges that the number of attacks on na-tional security targets in 2010 was over 300% greater than re-flected in public statements by the Police Service of NorthernIreland, attempting to make Northern Ireland “appear morenormal than it actually is” (BBC News, 2010).

Child adjustment problems. Total youth adjustment problemswere assessed with a composite of mother and child reportson the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Goodman,1997). Psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficul-ties Questionnaire are well established in UK samples and arepreferable to the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach,1991) for community samples for predicting adjustmentproblems (Goodman & Scott, 1999). The total problems scaleconsists of 20 items, five questions for each of four subscales:emotional problems (e.g., many worries or often seems wor-ried); peer problems (e.g., often fights with other children orbullies them); hyperactivity (e.g., restless, overactive, or can-not stay still for long); and conduct problems (e.g., steals fromhome, school, or elsewhere), respectively. The compositescore included mother and child responses, with higher scoresrepresenting more adjustment problems. A composite vari-

able was used for this outcome variable to reduce the possibleconfound of single-reporter bias. Good internal consistencyfor this variable was established in each of the four waves(Cronbach as ¼ 0.85, 0.84, 0.82, and 0.88, respectively).

Results

Overview of analyses

Means and standard deviations for all study variables at eachage are shown in Table 3. All data were modeled using a mul-tilevel modeling approach. Multilevel modeling is a preferredmethod of analyzing nested data such as repeated measuresdata or data clustered within communities or schools becauseit can accommodate the dependency of the data. More specif-ically, separate equations are specified for both the within-and the between-person levels of the data. This approachallows for the study of interindividual differences in intraindi-vidual change. For the within-person variables at Level 1, theoutcome variable is regressed on within-person predictorssuch as time and other time-varying factors in the data (i.e.,time-varying covariates). The Level 1 parameters are thenused as outcome variables regressed on Level 2 predictors.The data used in the current study are also nested by neighbor-hood and thus all Level 2 parameters are used as outcomevariables at Level 3. A three-level model is used to accountfor the nesting of the data (either within person or withinneighborhood). Ignoring this interdependence in the datacan lead to incorrect or misleading conclusions regarding hy-potheses of interest. An additional advantage of multilevelmodeling is that maximum-likelihood estimation accuratelyestimates parameters with missing data, assuming that dataare missing at random. All analyses were conducted using hi-erarchical linear modeling software (version 6.06; Rauden-bush, Bryk, Cheong, & Congdon, 2004). The time variable(age) and the time-varying covariates were centered at thegrand mean to enhance interpretability.

With four time points, the multilevel modeling approachfosters the examination of between-person differences in

Table 3. Means (standard deviations) for study variablesat each age

Age SAB NAB SDQ Child SDQ Mom

9 4.48 (10.37) 2.41 (3.70) 12.88 (7.50) 12.01 (6.33)10 2.94 (6.15) 2.01 (3.67) 10.30 (5.26) 10.39 (5.92)11 2.75 (6.19) 1.69 (2.96) 10.18 (5.83) 10.95 (5.79)12 3.20 (6.92) 2.42 (4.10) 10.04 (5.66) 11.47 (6.11)13 3.89 (7.97) 3.29 (5.17) 9.90 (5.24) 10.68 (5.57)14 4.53 (8.19) 4.37 (6.06) 10.24 (5.46) 11.09 (6.01)15 4.15 (8.00) 4.03 (5.54) 10.36 (5.27) 10.93 (6.00)16 3.27 (7.21) 5.02 (3.88) 9.87 (5.07) 10.51 (5.94)17 3.03 (6.43) 4.68 (5.62) 9.77 (4.91) 10.12 (5.82)18 1.55 (4.13) 5.66 (6.83) 9.16 (4.74) 8.67 (5.46)

Note: SAB, sectarian antisocial behavior; NAB, nonsectarian antisocial be-havior; SDQ, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.

E. M. Cummings et al.620

mean levels (i.e., intercepts), linear change over time, andquadratic change over time. Multiple waves of data also allowfor the examination of between-person differences in otherpredictor variables that are also changing over time, such asexposure to SAB and NAB. However, only three random ef-fects can be estimated with four waves of data. The examina-tion of change over time was modeled first to determine thebest fitting model for the outcome variable.

In the first step to assessing how children’s adjustmentproblems changed as children aged across the four timepoints, a model with a random intercept (Model A1) wastested (see Table 4). This model only allowed for random in-tercepts, or variability around mean levels without taking intoaccount change over time. Next, a model with a random inter-cept and a random linear slope was fitted (Model A2). Thismodel was a significantly better fitting model compared tothe random intercept model, diff x2 (5) ¼ 45.25, p , .001.

To further examine how adjustment problems changed aschildren aged, a model examining a quadratic slope (ModelA3) was assessed and compared with Model A2. Addingthe quadratic time parameter did not significantly improvemodel fit, difference in x2 (7) ¼ 11.88, p ¼ .10. Thus, timewas modeled with a random intercept and a random linearslope in all subsequent models.

We also examined SAB and NAB as time-varying covari-ates. Because only three random effects can be estimated withfour waves of data, we fixed both SAB and NAB to be non-random (Singer & Willet, 2003). The resulting model tests theeffects of SAB and NAB on children’s adjustment problems,

controlling for the change in adjustment problems over time(Model A4). Gender was also added as a Level 2 predictor,and objective crime data were added as the Level 3 predictor.The equations for Model A4 follow. For Level 1,

adjustment problems ¼ b0i þ b1i(age)þ b2(SAB)

þ b3(NAB)þ eij:

For Level 2,

b0i ¼ g00 þ g01(gender)þ z0i,

b1i ¼ g10 þ g11(gender)þ z1i,

b2 ¼ g20 þ g21(gender),

b3 ¼ g30 þ g31(gender):

For Level 3,

g00 ¼ g000 þ g001(total crime) þ m0,

g01 ¼ g010,

g10 ¼ g100 þ g101(total crime) þ m1,

g11 ¼ g110

g20 ¼ g200 þ g201(total crime),

g21 ¼ g210,

g30 ¼ g300 þ g301(total crime),

g31 ¼ g310:

Table 4. Results and statistical parameters for multilevel models

Coefficient SE t p df

Model A1Intercepta,b 20.81 0.71 29.15 ,.001 21

Model A2Intercepta,b 20.91 0.74 28.21 ,.001 21Linear slopeb 20.19 0.21 20.915 .370 21

Model A3Intercept 21.91 0.74 28.18 ,.001 21Linear slope 0.052 1.64 0.032 .68 21Quadratic slope 0.010 0.059 20.163 .87 21

Model A4Intercepta,b 20.95 0.26 79.32 ,.001 20Gender×Intercept 21.234 0.49 22.50 .013 917Crime× Intercept 0.000245 0.000208 1.181 .252 20Ageb 20.921 0.361 22.55 .019 20Gender×Age 0.261 0.217 1.207 .228 917Crime×Age 0.000107 0.000038 2.807 .011 20SAB 0.240 0.100 2.417 .016 2213Gender×SAB 20.068 0.065 21.058 .290 2213Crime×SAB 0.000019 0.000007 2.69 .008 2213NAB 0.204 0.153 1.327 .185 2213Gender×NAB 0.081 0.100 0.819 .413 2213Crime×NAB 20.000006 0.000011 20.529 .597 2213

Note: SAB, sectarian antisocial behavior; NAB, nonsectarian antisocial behavior.aA significant variance in the variance component at Level 2.bA significant variance in the variance component at Level 3.

Community violence and child adjustment 621

The results from this model indicate that gender (g ¼ –1.23,SE¼ 0.49, p¼ .013) predicts variability in intercepts, suggest-ing that at the average age, boys in the study have moreadjustment problems compared to girls. Results also reflect

that on average child adjustment problems decreased withage (b ¼ –0.92, SE ¼ 0.36, p ¼ .019) and that for youths inareas with higher crime rates, the decrease in adjustment prob-lems is less steep (g¼ –0.000107, SE¼ 0.000038, p¼ .011).

Figure 1. The relations between sectarian antisocial behavior (SAB) and children’s adjustment problems at three levels of neighborhood crime. [Acolor version of this figure can be viewed online at http://journals.cambridge.org/dpp]

Figure 2. The change in total problems over time at three levels of neighborhood crime.

E. M. Cummings et al.622

In other words, youths in high-crime areas are decreasing in to-tal adjustment problems at a slower rate (see Figure 1). Exam-ining the influence of the time-varying covariates, higher SAB(b ¼ 0.24, SE ¼ 0.10, p ¼ .016) predicted more adjustmentproblems, but NAB was not a significant time-varying covar-iate. Thus, controlling for the change in adjustment problemsover time, at each age, with both SAB and NAB included to-gether in the same model, SAB but not NAB related to higherlevels of adjustment problems.

Objective crime was also a significant predictor of varia-bility in the time-varying covariate of SAB (g ¼ 0.00002,SE ¼ 0.000007, p ¼ .008). The positive sign indicated thatthe relation between SAB and adjustment problems wasstronger in areas with higher crime levels as compared toareas of lower crime. A graph of this interaction can beseen in Figure 2. The objective crime values reflect the totalnumber of reported offenses over the course of the 4 years ofthe study. Neither gender nor the objective crime data weresignificant predictors of the variability in the relation betweenNAB and total problems.

Discussion

The current study supports the significance of politically mo-tivated community violence for children’s development inareas of historical political conflict, utilizing a multiwave,longitudinal research design. Moreover, relations betweenSAB and child adjustment problems were elevated in highercrime neighborhoods. The great majority of studies of politi-cal violence and children are based on cross-sectional or ret-rospective research designs; studies based on four or morewaves of data are rare, leaving questions about trajectoriesof development. This study advances the investigation ofthe impact of social ecologies of political violence on childadjustment by assessing relations over four time points withmultilevel modeling. The findings underscore the importanceof differentiating elements of community contexts associatedwith antisocial behavior and violence (SAB vs. NAB; high-crime neighborhoods vs. low-crime neighborhoods) in con-ceptualizing the risk for the development of psychopathologyamong youths in a setting of protracted conflict.

Based on a multilevel modeling approach, with measuresof NAB included in model testing, SAB predicted higheryouths adjustment problems each year across the 4 years ofthe study. The findings further support that SAB has differentlinks with trajectories of youth’s adjustment problems thandoes NAB, reinforcing the notion that distinctions betweenthese elements of the social ecology of community violencemerit consideration in characterizing risk for the developmentof adjustment problems in Belfast neighborhoods (Tayloret al., 2009, 2011). The study of SAB and NAB as time-vary-ing covariates allows for a more reliable estimate of the pre-dictor on the outcome than in past research based on cross-sectional or retrospective studies.

NAB was not related to children’s adjustment. At least inthe context of Belfast, the evidence suggests children may not

be highly threatened by nonsectarian community violence,reflected in the nonsignificant relations reported with chil-dren’s emotional insecurity about multiple social contexts(e.g., family and community; Cummings, Merrilees, et al.,2010, 2011, 2012; Cummings, Schemerhorn, et al., 2010).As noted already, children’s emotional insecurity is associ-ated with dysregulation in multiple emotional and regulatoryresponse processes, which in turn have been related to chil-dren’s adjustment problems over time (e.g., Cummings,George, et al., 2012). Based on the evidence thus far, theseprocesses appear to be less engaged by NAB than by SAB.

The lack of relations between nonsectarian communityviolence and child adjustment was found despite increasesin nonsectarian community violence in Belfast since the sign-ing of the Good Friday peace accord in 1998. In Northern Ire-land, as well as elsewhere (e.g., South Africa), increases innonsectarian conflict may be a result of changes in social or-ganizations and structures related to postaccord political pro-cesses. There are at least two possible bases for this increasein Northern Ireland. First, the Belfast Agreement committedto a reduction in policing and the removal of the army’s secur-ity role. Demilitarization led to a significant removal of secur-ity surveillance and state security presence in areas of highpolitical violence. Second, paramilitary groups agreed toend their use of punishment violence. In both instances, de-militarization led to less surveillance and direct control overcitizens, and a distinct state and nonstate policing vacuum (Mon-aghan & McLaughlin, 2006; Shirlow & Murtagh, 2006). In thissense, increases in nonsectarian community violence maysometimes constitute unintended consequences or aftermathsof peace accords, and there is reason for concern about rela-tions between NAB and child adjustment problems.

Some inconsistent evidence supports relations betweenNAB and children’s greater adjustment problems in Belfast(Cummings et al., 2011), and these relations may become evi-dent in future tests including process-oriented factors thatmay mediate relations between NAB and child adjustmentproblems (Cummings, Schermerhorn, et al., 2010). Recentstudies have begun to shed light on how one form or anotherof community antisocial behavior may have pathology-induc-ing power and the processes that may explain the differentialeffects. For example, the evidence thus far suggests that me-diators of effects on adjustment problems are different, withSAB more closely related to children’s emotional insecurityacross settings (e.g., community and family relationships;e.g., Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2010, 2011; Cummings,Schermerhorn, et al., 2010), whereas the effects of NABmay involve other processes, including parental behavioralcontrol practices (Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2010; Merri-lees et al., in press). In addition, considering the increasingprevalence of these forms of community discord over thepast decade in Northern Ireland, relations between NABand children’s adjustment merit continued study.

In the current study, relations between SAB and child ad-justment were particularly accentuated by higher levels ofcrime. One possible explanation is that higher background

Community violence and child adjustment 623

crime rates may amplify negative processes already associ-ated with SAB, such as elevated emotional insecurity aboutthe community (Cummings, Merrilees, et al., 2010, 2011).Thus, there are substantial bases for hypothesizing possiblerelations of SAB to emotional insecurity, which may be ac-centuated in contexts of higher crime. This moderation effectfor crime further underscores the importance of context forunderstanding child outcomes, with implications for a devel-opmental psychopathology perspective on children’s risk foradjustment problems in settings of intergroup conflict. Themessage is that youths growing up in areas of high crimeare particularly susceptible to adjustment problems whenalso exposed to sectarian community violence, further identi-fying contexts in which children are most at risk for the devel-opment of psychopathology. One possibility is that living inareas of high crime may sensitize children to threatening com-munity stressors, such as sectarian community violence,thereby elevating emotional and behavioral response pro-cesses associated with greater risk for the development of ad-justment problems. These processes have been documentedwith regard to other social stressors (e.g., marital conflict; Da-vies, Sturge-Apple, Winter, Cummings, & Farrell, 2006;Goeke-Morey, Papp, & Cummings, 2013), but study hasnot yet been extended to community stressors. Future re-search should examine process-oriented models for the jointeffects of these different elements of community contexts as-sociated with antisocial behavior and violence, includingwhether common mediating processes are involved andwhether effects are cumulative or interactive.

It is interesting that youths in high-crime areas did experi-ence higher rates of NAB; that is, NAB and crime rates werecorrelated. However, experiencing NAB in high-crime areaswas not related to increased adjustment problems. One possi-ble interpretation is that experiencing nonsectarian forms ofantisocial behavior may not induce the same sensitizationto crime that appears to be induced by sectarian forms of anti-social behavior. We are not suggesting that NAB is not a con-cern for families and youths in these areas but that the pro-cesses linking exposure to nonsectarian forms of antisocialbehavior and youths outcomes are different compared to ex-posure to sectarian forms.

Developmental change also merits comment. Controllingfor the effect of SAB and NAB on youth adjustment, adjust-ment problems decreased as children grew older, but less sofor children in high-crime areas. The decline in adjustmentproblems over time for this age range is consistent with re-search in other contexts involving high-risk environments.For example, in urban areas of East London, children’s agehas been found to be negatively correlated with adjustmentproblems across an age range of 8- to 15-year-olds (Fagget al., 2008). Bongers, Koot, van der Ende, & Verhulst (2003,2004) also reported linear decreases over time for multiple ad-justment problems between the ages of 4 and 18 years. How-ever, it remains for future research to identify the substantivebases for declines in developmental trajectories of adjustmentproblems over time; this is a topic that warrants further study.

Certain limitations should be acknowledged. First, mostchildren ranged between 10 and 15 years of age, reflectingour interest in studying age groups at risk for becoming par-ticipants as well as observers of sectarian conflict. Althoughevidence is limited on the relative vulnerability of children asa function of age to SAB or NAB, future research should fur-ther examine age as a possible vulnerability or protective fac-tor in social ecological contexts associated with historical po-litical violence (Muldoon, 2003; Slone & Shechner, 2009).Additional sources of information about key constructs, forexample, additional measures focused on adjustment prob-lems in adolescence, would strengthen tests. Second, genderdifferences may interact with age in contributing to adjust-ment outcomes, which is another issue that merits furtherstudy. The findings of this study indicating higher levels ofboys’ adjustment problems in these contexts are troubling(see also Dubow et al., 2010), given the greater likelihoodthat boys rather than girls will become involved in interethnicconflict and violence (Ajdukovic & Biruski, 2008; Barber,2008; Dubow et al., 2010; Shirlow & Murtagh, 2006). Third,to follow up on these issues, another direction is askingyouths about their role in SAB or NAB, including victim, wit-ness, or perpetrator. Social identity may also factor in theserelations (Merrilees et al., in press). Fourth, the inclusion ofan enrichment sample at Time 3 may have also possibly intro-duced bias to the trajectories of adjustment problems. Thesebiases were controlled or minimized by using a maximum-likelihood estimation approach in the analyses, which ade-quately estimates missing data. However, if missingness of ei-ther the original or the enrichment samples is not at random,estimates may be biased. Fifth, culturally distinct forms ofSAB may vary widely across societal contexts, so that thegeneralizability of these assessments to other cultures remainsto be demonstrated. In each area studied, it will be importantto develop culturally appropriate measures, given that expres-sions of political violence may be context specific (Cum-mings et al., 2009).

The implications for advancing peace processes merit con-sideration. Agreements between political leaders are only astart toward sustained peace processes because, as MacGintyand colleagues (2007) have pointed out, “reaching a peacedeal is not the same as reaching peace.” Therefore, it is criticalto understand and address the effects of political strife oncommunities, families, and children for any high likelihoodof sustained peace because it is the children growing up todaywho will have to take the peace process forward in the years tocome. An active role of youth is evident in ongoing inter-group discord in Belfast and many other parts of the world(Baker, 1990; Blattman & Annan, 2009; Dubow et al.,2010; Hammack, 2006; Humphreys & Weinstein, 2008; Shir-low & Murtagh, 2006).

These results suggest that neighborhood crime imposes agreat cost to youth adjustment, intensifying the direct effectsof exposure to SAB. The findings also have policy implica-tions. Although the financial and community costs of SAB,especially rioting, are largely recognized, the costs for youth

E. M. Cummings et al.624

mental health and individual adjustment have received less at-tention. Youths may be both victims and actors in contexts ofsectarian discord. Public policies should aim not only to bet-ter understand the causes of sectarian violence and crime butalso to understand the consequences for youths’ well-beingand adjustment. This more comprehensive approach, guidedby empirical research, can open up a more informed debateon what sectarian crime is, and for what reasons and underwhat conditions it is reproduced. The present results indicatethe significance of distinguishing sectarian and nonsectariancommunity violence when evaluating the impact of socialecologies of historical political violence on children’s adjust-ment. The study of conflict processes at multiple levels of

analysis can provide bases for better conceptualization ofthe impact of intergroup conflict and violence on children,with possible generalizability to sectarian and ethnic conflictin other regions. The findings support a social ecologicalmodel that recognizes the impact of neighborhood and com-munity discord on youths’ development of psychopathologyin contexts of political violence. With regard to the field ofviolence exposure effects, the results also have implicationsfor examining the effects of nonpolitical conflict and violenceon youth. The findings suggest that measuring both neighbor-hood-level crime and individual exposure to violence mayshed further light on the relationships between multiple levelsof the social ecology and youths’ adjustment.

References

Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist: 4–18and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Departmentof Psychiatry.

Ajdukovic, D., & Biruski, D. C. (2008). Caught between the ethnic sides:Children growing up in a divided post-war community. InternationalJournal of Behavioral Development, 32, 337–347.

Baker, A. (1990). The psychological impact of the intifada on Palestinianchildren in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. American Journal ofOrthopsychiatry, 60, 496–505.

Barbarin, O. A., Richter, L. M., & de Wet, T. (2001). Exposure to violence,coping resources, and psychological adjustment of South African chil-dren. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 71, 16–25.

Barber, B. K. (2001). Political violence, social integration, and youth func-tioning: Palestinian youth from the Intifada. Journal of CommunityPsychology, 29, 259–280.

Barber, B. K. (Ed.). (2008). Adolescents and war: How youth deal with po-litical violence. New York: Oxford University Press.

BBC News. (2010, December 10). Terrorist activity “played down”—PoliceFederation. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11973018

Belsky, J. (2008). War, trauma and children’s development: Observationsfrom a modern evolutionary perspective. International Journal of Behav-ioral Development, 32, 260–271.

Betancourt, T. S., Borisova, I. I., Williams, T. P., Brennan, R. T., Whitfield,T. H., de la Soudiere, M., et al. (2010). Sierra Leone’s former child sol-diers: A follow-up study of psychosocial adjustment and communityreintegration. Child Development, 81, 1077–1095.

Blattman, C., & Annan, J. (2009). The consequences of child soldiering. Re-trieved from http://www.chrisblattman.com/documents/research/2009.Consequences.RESTAT.pdf

Bongers, I. L., Koot, H. M., van der Ende, J., & Verhulst, F. C. (2003). Thenormative development of child and adolescent problem behavior. Jour-nal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 179–192.

Bongers, I. L., Koot, H. M., van der Ende, J., & Verhulst, F. C. (2004). De-velopmental trajectories of externalizing behaviors in childhood and ado-lescence. Child Development, 75, 1523–1537.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experimentsby nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., & Whiteman, M. (2007). Growing up in a violentsociety: Longitudinal predictors of violence in Colombian adolescents.American Journal of Community Psychology, 40, 82–95.

Browning, C. R., Burrington, L. A., Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J.(2008). Neighborhood structural inequality, collective efficacy, and sex-ual risk behavior among urban youth. Journal of Health and Social Be-havior, 49, 269–285.

Cairns, E. (1987). Caught in the crossfire: Children and the Northern Irelandconflict. Belfast: Appletree Press.

Cairns, E., & Darby, J. (1998). The conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, con-sequences, and controls. American Psychologist, 53, 754–760.

Cairns, E., & Toner, I. (1993). Children and political violence in NorthernIreland: From riots to reconciliation. In L. A. Leavitt & N. A. Fox(Eds.), The psychological effects of war and violence on children (pp.215–229). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cicchetti, D. (2006). Development and psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti(Ed.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and method(2nd ed., pp. 1–23). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Cicchetti, D., & Cohen, D. J. (1995). Perspectives of developmental psycho-pathology. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psycho-pathology: Vol. 1. Theory and method (pp. 3–20). New York: Wiley.

Cicchetti, D., & Lynch, M. (1993). Toward an ecological/transactional modelof community violence and child maltreatment: Consequences forchildren’s development. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Pro-cesses, 56, 96–118.

Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2010). Marital conflict and children: Anemotional security perspective. New York: Guilford Press.

Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Campbell, S. B. (2000). Developmentalpsychopathology and family processes: Theory, research, and clinicalimplications. New York: Guilford Press.

Cummings, E. M., George, M. R. W., McCoy, K. P., & Davies, P. T. (2012).Interparental conflict in kindergarten and adolescent adjustment: Pro-spective investigation of emotional security as an explanatory mecha-nism. Child Development, 83, 1703–1715.

Cummings, E. M., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Schermerhorn, A. C., Merrilees, C.E., & Cairns, E. (2009). Children and political violence from a social eco-logical perspective: Implications from research on children and familiesin Northern Ireland. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 12,16–38.

Cummings, E. M., Merrilees, C. M., Schermerhorn, A. C., Goeke-Morey, M.C., Shirlow, P., & Cairns, E. (2010). Testing a social ecological model forrelations between political violence and child adjustment in Northern Ire-land. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 405–418.

Cummings, E. M., Merrilees, C. E., Schermerhorn, A. C., Goeke-Morey, M.C., Shirlow, P., & Cairns, E. (2011). Longitudinal pathways between po-litical violence and child adjustment: The role of emotional security aboutthe community in Northern Ireland. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychol-ogy, 39, 213–224.

Cummings, E. M., Merrilees, C. E., Schermerhorn, A. C., Goeke-Morey, M.C., Shirlow, P., & Cairns, E. (2012). Political violence and child adjust-ment: Longitudinal tests of sectarian antisocial behavior, family conflictand insecurity as explanatory pathways. Child Development, 83, 461–468.

Cummings, E. M., Schermerhorn, A. C., Davies, P. T., Goeke-Morey, M., &Cummings, J. S. (2006). Interparental discord and child adjustment: Pro-spective investigations of emotional security as an explanatory mecha-nism. Child Development, 77, 132–152.

Cummings, E., Schermerhorn, A., Merrilees, C., Goeke-Morey, M., Shirlow,P., & Cairns, E. (2010). Political violence and child adjustment in North-ern Ireland: Testing pathways in a social–ecological model including sin-gle- and two-parent families. Developmental Psychology, 46, 827–841.

Darby, J. (2001). The effects of violence on peace processes. Washington,DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Darby, J. (2006). Violence and reconstruction. Notre Dame, IN: Universityof Notre Dame Press.

Davies, P. T., Sturge-Apple, M. L., Winter, M. A., Cummings, E. M., & Far-rell, D. (2006). Child adaptational development in contexts of interparen-tal conflict over time. Child Development, 77, 218–233.

Community violence and child adjustment 625

Dubow, E., Boxer, P., Huesmann, L., Shikaki, K., Landau, S., Gvirsman, S.D., et al. (2010). Exposure to conflict and violence across contexts: Re-lations to adjustment among Palestinian children. Journal of ClinicalChild & Adolescent Psychology, 39, 103–116.

Dubow, E., Huesmann, L., & Boxer, P. (2009). A social–cognitive–ecologi-cal framework for understanding the impact of exposure to persistent eth-nic–political violence on children’s psychosocial adjustment. ClinicalChild and Family Psychology Review, 12, 113–126.

Elbedour, S., ten Bensel, R., & Bastien, D. T. (1993). Ecological integratedmodel of children in war: Individual and social psychology. Child Abuse& Neglect, 17, 805–819.

Elliott, D. S.Wilson, W. J., Huizinga, D., & Sampson, R. J. (1996). The ef-fects of neighborhood disadvantage on adolescent development. Journalof Research in Crime & Delinquency, 33, 389–426.

Fagg, J., Curtis, S., Clark, C., Congdon, P., & Stansfeld, S. (2008). Neigh-bourhood perceptions among inner-city adolescents: Relationships withtheir individual characteristics and with independently assessed neigh-bourhood conditions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 128–142.

Feerick, M. M., & Prinz, R. J. (2003). Next steps in research on children ex-posed to community violence or war/terrorism. Clinical Child and Fam-ily Psychology Review, 6, 303–305.

Garbarino, J., & Kostelny, K. (1996). The effects of political violence on Pa-lestinian children’s behavior problems: A risk accumulation model. ChildDevelopment, 67, 33–46.

Goeke-Morey, M. C., Cummings, E. M., Ellis, K., Merrilees, C. E., Scher-merhorn, A. C., Shirlow, P., et al. (2009). The differential impact on chil-dren of inter- and intra-community violence in Northern Ireland. Peaceand Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 15, 367–383.

Goeke-Morey, M. C., Papp, L. M., & Cummings, E. M. (2013). Changes inmarital conflict and youths’ responses across childhood and adolescence:A test of sensitization. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 241–251.

Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A re-search note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Dis-ciplines, 38, 581–586.

Goodman, R., & Scott, S. (1999). Comparing the Strengths and DifficultiesQuestionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist: Is small beautiful? Jour-nal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 17–24.

Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to communityviolence and developmental problems among inner-city youth. Develop-ment and Psychopathology, 10, 101–116.

Guerra, N. G., Huesmann, L. R., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violenceexposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementaryschool children. Child Development, 74, 1561–1576.

Hammack, P. (2006). Identity, conflict, and coexistence: Life stories of Israeliand Palestinian adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 21, 323–369.

Haydon, D., & Scraton, P. (2008). Conflict, regulation and marginalization inthe North of Ireland: The experiences of children and young people. Cur-rent Issues in Criminal Justice, 20, 59–78.

Hughes, J., Campbell, A., Hewstone, M., & Cairns, E. (2007) Segregation inNorthern Ireland—Implications for community relations policy. PolicyStudies, 28, 35–53.

Humphreys, M., & Weinstein, J. (2008). Who rebels? The determinants ofparticipation in civil war. American Journal of Political Science, 52,436–455.

Jaycox, L. H., Stein, B. D., Kataoka, S. H., Wong, M., Fink, A., Escudero, P.,et al. (2002). Violence exposure, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depres-sive symptoms among recent immigrant schoolchildren. Journal of theAmerican Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 41, 1104–1110.

Kronenberg, M. E., Hansel, T. C., Brennan, A. M., Osofsky, H. J., Osofsky, J.D., & Lawrason, B. (2010). Children of Katrina: Lessons learned aboutpostdisaster symptoms and recovery patterns. Child Development, 81,1241–1259.

Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in:The effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes.Psychological Bulletin, 126, 309–337.

Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1998). An ecological–transactional analysis ofchildren and contexts: The longitudinal interplay among child maltreat-ment, community violence, and children’s symptomatology. Develop-ment and Psychopathology, 10, 235–257.

Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (2002). Links between community violence andthe family system: Evidence from children’s feelings of relatedness andperceptions of parent behavior. Family Process, 41, 519–532.

MacGinty, R., Muldoon, O. T., & Ferguson, N. (2007). No war, no peace:Northern Ireland after the Agreement. Political Psychology, 28, 1–11.

Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and communityviolence on children. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 445–479.

Mayer, S. E., & Jencks, C. (1989). Growing up in poor neighborhoods: Howmuch does it matter? Science, 243, 1441–1445.

McAloney, K., McCrystal, P., Percy, A., & McCartan, C. (2009). Damagedyouth: Prevalence of community violence exposure and implications foradolescent well-being in post-conflict Northern Ireland. Journal of Com-munity Psychology, 37, 635–648.

McGrellis, S. (2005). Pushing the boundaries in Northern Ireland: Youngpeople, violence and sectarianism. Contemporary Politics, 11, 53–71.

Merrilees, C. E., Cairns, E., Taylor, L. K., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Shirlow, P.,& Cummings, E. M. (in press). Social identity and youth aggressiveand delinquent behaviors in a context of political violence. PoliticalPsychology.

Merrilees, C. E., Cummings, E. M., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Schermerhorn, A.C., Shirlow, P., & Cairns, E. (2011). Parenting control in contexts of po-litical violence: Testing bi-directional relations between violence expo-sure and control in post-accord Belfast. Parenting: Science and Practice,11, 308–325.

Monaghan, R., & McLaughlin, S. (2006). Informal justice in the city. SourceSpace & Polity, 10, 171–186.

Muldoon, O. (2003). Perceptions of stressful life events in Northern Irishschool children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychologyand Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 44, 193–201.

Northern Ireland Statistics & Research Agency, Northern Ireland Neighbour-hood Information Service. (2011). NINIS data catalogue. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme/DataCatalogue.asp?button¼Crime

Parente, M. E., & Mahoney, J. L. (2009). Residential mobility and exposureto neighborhood crime: Risks for young children’s aggression. Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 37, 559–578.

Police Service of Northern Ireland, Central Statistics Branch, OperationalSupport Department. (2006–2007). Statistics on the security situation:1st April 2006–31st March 2007 (PSNI Annual Statistical Report No.6). Retrieved from http://www.psni.police.uk/6._statistics_relating_to_the_security_situation.pdf

Qouta, S., Punamaki, R., & El Sarraj, E. (2008). Child development and fam-ily mental health in war and military violence: The Palestinian experi-ence. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 310–321.

Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. T. (2004).HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago: ScientificSoftware International.

Sagi-Schwartz, A. (2008). The well-being of children living in chronic warzones: The Palestinian–Israeli case. International Journal of BehavioralDevelopment, 32, 322–336.

Salzinger, S., Feldman, R. S., Stockhammer, T., & Hood, J. (2002). An eco-logical framework for understanding risk for exposure to community vio-lence and the effects of exposure on children and adolescents. Aggressionand Violent Behavior, 7, 423–451.

Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Raudenbush, S. (2005). Social anatomy ofracial and ethnic disparities in violence. American Journal of PublicHealth, 35, 224–232.

Shields, N., Nadasen, K., & Pierce, L. (2008). The effects of community vio-lence on children in Cape Town, South Africa. Child Abuse & Neglect,32, 589–601.

Shinn, M., & Toohey, S. M. (2003). Community contexts of human welfare.Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 427–459.

Shirlow, P., & Ellison, G. (2008). Community attitudes to crime, anti-socialbehaviour and policing in the Greater New Lodge. Unpublished manu-script.

Shirlow, P., & McEvoy, K. (2008). Beyond the wire: Former prisoners andconflict transformation in Northern Ireland. London: Pluto Press.

Shirlow, P., & Murtagh, B. (2006). Belfast: Segregation, violence and thecity. London: Pluto Press.

Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis:Methods for studying change and event occurrence. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Slone, M., & Shechner, T. (2009). Psychiatric consequences for Israeli ado-lescents of protracted political violence: 1998–2004. Journal of ChildPsychology and Psychiatry, 50, 280–289.

Taylor, L. K., Merrilees, C. E., Cairns, E., & Cummings, E. M. (2009). Qual-itative assessment of mother’s perceptions of community and sectarian

E. M. Cummings et al.626

violence in Northern Ireland: Implications for child security and adjust-ment. Paper presented at the 5th International Congress of Qualitative In-quiry, Urbana, IL, May 20–23.

Taylor, L. K., Merrilees, C. E., Campbell, A., Shirlow, P., Cairns, E., Goeke-Morey, M. C., et al. (2011). Sectarian and nonsectarian violence:Mothers’ appraisals of political conflict in Northern Ireland. Peace andConflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 17, 343–366.

Vanfossen, B., Brown, C., Kellam, S., Sokoloff, N., & Doering, S. (2010).Neighborhood context and the development of aggression in boys andgirls. Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 329–349.

Ward, C. (2010). Neighbourhood indicators: Monitoring child rights andwell-being at a small area level. In A. Dawes, R. Bray, & A. Van DerMerwe (Eds.), Monitoring child well-being: A South African rights-based approach (pp. 73–90). Cape Town: HSRC Press.

Waters, E., & Cummings, E. M. (2000). A secure base from which to exploreclose relationships. Child Development, 49, 164–172.

Wight, R., Botticello, A., & Aneshensel, C. (2006). Socioeconomic context,social support, and adolescent mental health: A multilevel investigation.Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 35, 109–120.

Community violence and child adjustment 627