Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Differences in at Risk Versus Offender Adolescents: A Dimensional Approach of Antisocial Behavior

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Psychiatric Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study investigated gender differences in the main components of antisocial behavior in an at-risk versus an offender group of adolescents. One-hundred and forty-three adolescents divided into two different risk groups [at risk (n = 54) and offenders (n = 89)] were compared according to gender (111 boys and 32 girls). Externalizing symptoms were assessed with the Delinquent and Aggressive subscales of the Youth Self-report Questionnaire, internalizing problems with the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Beck Depressive Inventory and personality traits with the Barratt-Impulsiveness Scale as well as the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory. Results revealed a consistent interaction pattern, with girls presenting higher levels of externalizing symptoms, more motor impulsivity and a more arrogant and deceitful interpersonal style than boys in the at-risk group. In contrast, in the offenders’ group, psychopathic traits were more present in boys than in girls. Regarding internalizing problems, girls showed more depression than boys, independently of the risk group. Among offending youths, girls present equally severe externalizing problems, and problematic personality traits as boys. At-risk girls have the highest rates of difficulties across the tested domains and should therefore be specifically targeted for prevention and intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Harradine S, J Kodz, Lemetti F, et al.: Defining and Measuring Anti-Social Behavior. Development and Practice Report, Vol. 26, London, Home Office, 2004.

  2. Moffitt, TE, A Caspi, M Rutter, et al.: Sex Differences in Antisocial Behavior: Conduct Disorder, Delinquency, and Violence in the Dunedin Longitudinal Study, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Odgers, CL, TE Moffitt, JM Broadbent, et al.: Female and male antisocial trajectories: From childhood origins to adult outcomes. Development Psychopathology 20: 673–716, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Odgers CL, Morretti MM: Aggressive and Anti-social girls: Research update and challenges. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 1: 103–119, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bongers IL, Koot HM, van der Ende J, et al.: Predicting young adult social functioning from developmental trajectories of externalizing behaviour. Psychological Medicine 38: 989–999, 2008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Blongien DM, Hicks BM, Krueger RF, et al.: Psychopathic personality traits: Heritability and genetic overlap with internalizing and externalizing psychopathology. Psychological Medicine 35: 637–648, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Frick PJ, Stickle TR, Dandreaux DM, et al.: Callous-unemotional traits in predicting the severity and stability of conduct problems and delinquency. Journal Abnormal Child Psychology 33: 471–87, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Frick PJ, White SF: Research review: The importance of callous-unemotional traits for developmental models of aggressive and antisocial behavior. Journal of Child Psychology Psychiatry 49: 359–75, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Moeller FG, Barratt ES, Dougherty DM, et al.: Psychiatric aspects of impulsivity. American Journal of Psychiatry 158: 1783–93, 2001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Broidy LM, Tremblay RE, Brame B, et al.: Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency: a six site, cross-sectional study. Developmental Psychology 39: 222–245, 2003.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Steffensmeier D, Schwartz J, Zhong H, et al.: An assessment of recent trends in girls’ violence using diverse longitudinal sources: Is the sex gap closing? Criminology 43: 355–406, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zahn MA, Brumbaugh S, Steffensmeier D, et al.: Violence by teenage girls: Trends and context, OoJP Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and and D Prevention, 2008: Washington, DC.

  13. Timmons-Mitchell J, Brown C, Schulz SC, et al.: Comparing the mental health needs of female and male incarcerated juvenile delinquents. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 15: 195–202, 1997.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Goldstein NE, Arnold DH, Weil J, et al.: Comorbid symptom patterns in female juvenile offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 26: 565–82, 2003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Meier MH, Slutske WS, Arndt S, et al.: Impulsive and callous traits are more strongly associated with delinquent behavior in higher risk neighborhoods among boys and girls [miscellaneous article]. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 117: 377–385, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Nicholls TL, Ogloff JR, Douglas KS: Assessing risk for violence among male and female civil psychiatric patients: the HCR-20, PCL: SV, and VSC. Behavioral sciences and the law 22: 127–58, 2004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stickle TR, Marini VA, Thomas JN: Gender differences in psychopathic traits, types, and correlates of aggression among adjudicated youth. Journal of abnormal child psychology 40: 513–25, 2012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Raven JC, Court JH, Raven J: Progressive Matrices Standart (PM38), Oxford, Oxford Psychologists Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Achenbach TM: Manual for the Youth Self-Report and 1991 Profiles Burlington, Burlington, University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Vreugdenhil C, van den Brink W, Ferdinand R, et al.: The ability of YSR scales to predict DSM/DISC-C psychiatric disorders among incarcerated male ad-olescents. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 15: 88–96, 2006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Vermeersch S, Fombonne E: Le Child Behavior Checklist: Résultats préliminaires de la standardisation de la version française. Neuropsychiatrie de l’ Enfance et de l’ Adolescence 45: 615–620, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beck AT, Brown G, Epstein N, et al.: An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety—psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 56: 893–897, 1988.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Beck AT, Steer RA: Relationship between the Beck Anxiety inventory and the Hamil-Ton anxiety rating-scale with anxious outpatients. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 5: 213–223, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Freeston MH, Ladouceur R, Thibodeau N, et al.: L’inventaire d’anxiété de Beck: Propriétés psychométriques d’une traduction française. L’Encéphale 20: 47–55, 1994.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, et al.: Comparison of Beck depression inventories-IA and-II in psychiatric outpatients. Journal of Personality Assessment 67: 588–97, 1996.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Steer RA, AT Beck: The Beck Depression Inventory-II. In: Craighead WE, Nemeroff CB (Eds) The Concise Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science, New York, Wiley, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK: Inventaire de dépression de Beck (version 2 BDI-II), Paris, Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fossati A, Barratt ES, Acquarini E, et al.: Psychometric properties of an adolescent version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 for a sample of Italian high school students. Perceptual and Motor Skills 95: 621–35, 2002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stanford MS, Mathias CW, Dougherty DM, et al.: Fifty years of the Barratt impulsiveness scale: An update and review. Personality and Individual Differences 47: 385–395, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Andershed H, Kerr M, Stattin H, et al.: Psychopathic Traits in Non Referred Youths: A New Assessment Tool. In: Blauuw E, Sheridan L (Eds) Psychopaths: Current International Perspectives, Elsevier, The Hague, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Skeem JL, Cauffman E: Views of the downward extension: comparing the Youth Version of the Psychopathy Checklist with the Youth Psychopathic traits Inventory. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 21: 737–70, 2003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pihet S, Suter M, Meylan N, et al.: Factor Structure of the Youth Psychopathic trats inventory: Using the total score, three scale scores and/or 10 subscale scores. Criminal Justice and Behavior 41: 1214–1231, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Timmons-Mitchell J, Webster SE, Underwood LA, et al.: Comparing the mental health needs of female and male incarcerated juvenile delinquents. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 15: 195–202, 1997.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zahn-Waxler C: Warriors and worriers: Gender and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology 5: 79–89, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Keenan K, Shaw D: Developmental and social influences on young girls’ early problem behavior. Psychological bulletin 121: 95–113, 1997.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Jennings WG, Maldonado-Molina MM, Piquero AR, et al.: Sex differences in trajectories of offending among Puerto Rican youths. Crime and Delinquency 56: 327–357, 2010.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Eme RF: Selective female affliction in the developmental disorders of childhood: A literature review. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 21: 354–364, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Silverthorn P, Frick PJ: Developmental pathways to antisocial behavior: the delayed-onset pathway in girls. Development and Psychopathology 11: 101–26, 1999.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Farrington DP, Jolliffe D, Hawkins JD, et al.: Why are boys more likely to be refferred to juvenile court? Gender differences in official and self-report delinquency. Victims and Offenders 5: 25–44, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Arce R, Seijo L, Fariña F, et al.: Comportamiento antisocial en menores: Riesgo social y trayectoria natural de desarrollo. Revista Mexicana de Psicología 27: 127–142, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bloom B, Covington S.: Gender-speficic programming for female offenders: What is it and why is it important?. In: 50th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology 1998: Washington, DC.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The present study was funded by a grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant No. 100014-130553). The authors would like to thank the adolescents and the staff of the participating institutions for their kind cooperation, as well as Sandie Ackermann, Cybèle Bertoni, Tamara Borovicanin, Marcello Cantarella, Margaux Clément, Nathalie Grégoire, Tatiana Mabillard, Laura Moizeau, Sheila Ramos and Yoann Uehlinger for their help in data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Unit, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Service, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital Center and University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon 25A, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Sébastien Urben, Stéphanie Habersaat, Maya Suter & Philippe Stéphan

  2. School of Nursing, University of Applied Sciences and Art of Western Switzerland, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Sandrine Pihet

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Jill De Ridder

Authors
  1. Sébastien Urben
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stéphanie Habersaat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maya Suter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sandrine Pihet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jill De Ridder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Philippe Stéphan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sébastien Urben.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Urben, S., Habersaat, S., Suter, M. et al. Gender Differences in at Risk Versus Offender Adolescents: A Dimensional Approach of Antisocial Behavior. Psychiatr Q 87, 619–631 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-015-9414-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-015-9414-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation