Retrospective Study of Fire Setting Among Boys in a Child Welfare Sample

This study aimed to assess fire-setting behaviors within a child welfare sample. The youth were divided into four groups based on their fire-setting behavior (e.g., no incidents, one incident, multiple minor incidents, and multiple severe incidents). Groups were compared based on five factors: overt antisocial behavior, covert antisocial behavior, global adjustment, psychiatric history, and learning deficits. Fire setters displayed more delinquent behavior and had more extensive psychiatric histories than non-fire-setting youth. Further, the youth with multiple serious incidents of fire-setting behavior displayed more delinquent behavior and had more extensive psychiatric histories than any of the fire-setting groups. These findings clearly suggest that fire setters, as a group, are not homogeneous with respect to antisocial behavior or psychiatric impairment and that gravity of fire setting increased as a function of greater psychopathology and greater delinquency when compared to their peers.

Covert antisocial behavior, peer deviancy training, parenting processes, and sex differences in the development of antisocial behavior during childhood

Two longitudinal studies were used to examine the occurrence and consequences of peer deviancy training during childhood and the relative role of early covert antisocial behavior in risk for antisocial behavior in early adolescence. Peer deviancy training was apparent in a sample of at-risk first grade children, and it showed persistence and increased prevalence across the school year. Peer deviancy training, peer rejection, and unskilled parenting made additive contributions to the development of antisocial behavior during kindergarten and first grade and to antisocial behavior in fourth grade. Skilled parenting partially mitigated the association of peer deviancy training with antisocial behavior for boys. The appearance and growth of covert antisocial behavior was a predictor of fourth grade antisocial for boys and girls, more so than aggressive and overt antisocial behavior. Peer deviancy training and early covert antisocial behavior were key pathways to girls' antisocial behavior in fourth grade, and they complemented the roles of peer rejection and overt antisocial behavior for boys. The relationships of parenting and peer processes to trajectories of antisocial behavior were similar for boys and girls; but boys showed higher levels of antisocial behavior, were more involved in peer deviancy training, and were more likely to experience peer rejection.

Developmental pathways to antisocial behavior: The delayed-onset pathway in girls

Recent research has suggested that there are two distinct trajectories for the development of antisocial behavior in boys: a childhood-onset pathway and an adolescent-onset pathway. After reviewing the limited available research on antisocial girls, we propose that this influential method of conceptualizing the development of severe antisocial behavior may not apply to girls without some important modifications. Antisocial girls appear to show many of the correlates that have been associated with the childhood-onset pathway in boys, and they tend to show impaired adult adjustment, which is also similar to boys in the childhood-onset pathway. However, antisocial girls typically show an adolescent-onset to their antisocial behavior. We have proposed that these girls show a third developmental pathway which we have labeled the “delayed-onset” pathway. This model rests on the assumption that many of the putative pathogenic mechanisms that contribute to the development of antisocial behavior in girls, such as cognitive and neuropsychological deficits, a dysfunctional family environment, and/or the presence of a callous and unemotional interpersonal style, may be present in childhood, but they do not lead to severe and overt antisocial behavior until adolescence. Therefore, we propose that the delayed-onset pathway for girls is analogous to the childhood-onset pathway in boys and that there is no analogous pathway in girls to the adolescent-onset pathway in boys. Although this model clearly needs to be tested in future research, it highlights the need to test the applicability of current theoretical models for explaining the development of antisocial behavior in girls.