Citation
The Effect of neighborhood violence on child-parent conflict

Material Information

Title:
The Effect of neighborhood violence on child-parent conflict
Creator:
Best, Matthew Paul
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of arts)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
School of Public Affairs, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Criminal justice
Committee Chair:
Rennison, Callie Marie
Committee Members:
Huss, Sheila
Leeuwen, Jamie Van

Notes

Abstract:
By employing multiple data sources (e.g., youth survey data, spatially detailed crime data, Statistics Netherlands data), this paper investigates the spatial effects of violence on intra-family conflict. An extensive body of theoretical and empirical research has documented the deleterious effects of community violence on adolescents within urban areas, however, few studies have considered the relationship between community violence and child-parent conflict through a spatially refined lens. By utilizing five waves of longitudinal panel data (n=763, observations=3,361) combined with police records of violent crime in Utrecht, Netherlands, we use a hybrid tobit regression to distinguish spatial effects of violence at the neighborhood level (unit mean=17 homes). We assess and address effects of exposure to violence at local and extralocal levels, and highlight the necessity to control for intra-family violence. Results indicate that youth experiencing high levels of neighborhood violence report higher levels of conflict with parents than youth with low exposure to neighborhood violence. Implications of intra-family conflict within high-risk, urban environments are discussed from a policy/practice standpoint.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright Matthew Paul Best. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
THE EFFECT OF NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE ON CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
By
MATTHEW PAUL BEST B.A., Metropolitan State University of Denver 2015
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado Denver in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Criminal Justice School of Public Affairs
2019


©2019
MATTHEW PAUL BEST ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Matthew Paul Best has been approved for the Criminal Justice Program by
Callie Marie Rennison, Chair Sheila Huss
Jamie Van Leeuwen


Best, Matthew Paul (MCJ, Criminal Justice Program)
The Effect of Neighborhood Violence and Poverty on Child-parent Conflict Thesis directed by Professor Callie Rennison
ABSTRACT
By employing multiple data sources (e.g., youth survey data, spatially detailed crime data, Statistics Netherlands data), this paper investigates the spatial effects of violence on intra-family conflict. An extensive body of theoretical and empirical research has documented the deleterious effects of community violence on adolescents within urban areas, however, few studies have considered the relationship between community violence and child-parent conflict through a spatially refined lens. By utilizing five waves of longitudinal panel data (n=763, observations=3,361) combined with police records of violent crime in Utrecht, Netherlands, we use a hybrid tobit regression to distinguish spatial effects of violence at the neighborhood level (unit mean=17 homes). We assess and address effects of exposure to violence at local and extralocal levels, and highlight the necessity to control for intra-family violence. Results indicate that youth experiencing high levels of neighborhood violence report higher levels of conflict with parents than youth with low exposure to neighborhood violence. Implications of intra-family conflict within high-risk, urban environments are discussed from a policy/practice standpoint.
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Callie Marie Rennison


V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION.........................................................1
Research Contributions .................................................2
Violence and Conflict...................................................2
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE................................................4
Defining Existing Problems .............................................4
Measurement.......................................................4
Exposure Type.....................................................6
Neighborhood Context..............................................6
Longitudinal Effects ...................................................8
Spatial Effects ........................................................9
Extralocal Effects ....................................................11
Poverty, Race, and Exposure to Violence ...............................12
Stress and Neighborhood Context....................................... 13
Stress and Child-Parent Conflict.......................................14
Child-Parent Conflict and Neighborhood Context........................ 15
The Role of Intra-Family Relationships in High Risk Communities .16
Responses to Neighborhood Violence.....................................17
III. CURRENT STUDY.....................................................19
Research Questions ....................................................19
IV. DATA, MEASURES, AND METHODS..............................................20
Data...................................................................20
Measures ..............................................................21
Dependent Variable...............................................21
Independent Variables — Individual Level.........................21


vi
Independent Variables — Neighborhood Level......................22
Control Variable................................................23
Analytical Method......................................................23
V. RESULTS...................................................................21
Univariate Frequencies ................................................21
Hybrid Tobit Regression: RQ 1 .........................................22
Within-Individual...............................................26
Between-Individual..............................................27
Hybrid Tobit Regression: RQ 2..........................................27
Within-Individual...............................................28
Between-Individual..............................................28
VI. DISCUSSION...............................................................29
Implications for Practice and Policy...................................31
Implications for Research..............................................33
Strengths and Limitations .............................................33
REFERENCES...........................................................................35


vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES
1. Descriptive Statistics .......................................................25
2. Hybrid Tobit Regression.......................................................26


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Approximately 60% of children and adolescents in the United States are either directly or indirectly exposed to interpersonal violence, and 10.2% report being exposed to a form of maltreatment by a significant adult in their life (Finkelhor et al., 2009). A study in the Netherlands found that 46% of persons had been victims of violence (Wilsem, Witterbrood, & De Graaf, 2006). A large body of empirical literature has documented the effects of exposure to community violence on adolescents (for an overview see Margolin & Gordis, 2000; Lynch, 2003), and exposure to violence within the home, school, and community contexts have been found to have strong independent effects on both internalizing and externalizing problems, including depression, substance abuse, delinquency, and conduct disorder (Mrug, Loosier & Windle, 2008, Kersten et al; 2017). To our knowledge, however, no current studies consider relationships between local and extralocal violence and child-parent conflict and include the important control variable of violence occurring within the home. As adolescents age, their sphere of interactions within the community expand, thereby exposing them to potential acts of violence immediately outside of their residential neighborhoods. While exposure to community violence increases as children advance beyond primary school (Overstreet, 2000), relatively few studies have considered how broad community features influence youth development and family conflict. A deeper understanding of both spatial and longitudinal implications of violence exposure for adolescent aged youth is therefore necessary. The present study examines how exposure to neighborhood violence affects child-parent conflict within a sample of Dutch adolescents in Utrecht, the Netherlands.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
2
Research Contributions
Effects of neighborhood violence on child-parent conflicts are of special importance given the role that interfamilial relationships play in reducing a multitude of negative outcomes for youth in high-risk environments. Contributions of this study are two-fold.
First, prior studies have explored effects of violence on intra-family relationships dynamics, however, less understood are spatial effects of violence on child-parent conflict. Using data on small spatial scales allows us to better map and understand interactions between violent crime that occurs within (1) an individual’s immediate proximity (mean=17 homes) and (2) an individual’s surrounding proximity (radius=2 miles).
A second contribution we add includes considering proper methodological controls within spatial violence research intending to examine effects of indirect exposure to violence. By controlling for violence that occurs between children and parents, we highlight the necessitation of considering in-home violence when seeking effects of indirect violence exposure.
To address this important topic, the thesis is structured as follows. We begin by reviewing recent, relevant research on neighborhood violence. Drawing from this literature, we next develop several hypotheses regarding the associations between neighborhood violence and child-parent conflict. We empirically assess our research questions by applying a hybrid tobit model to our respective data. Finally, we present findings, and a discussion of the findings.
Violence and Conflict
We consider child-parent conflict to be non-physical, negative interactions between children and their caregivers which involves anger, tension, and arguments. In attempts to address the prevalent use of less than ideal measures of community violence (e.g., self-report within undefined spatial regions), our study utilizes objectively reported violence (via police records) geocoded to postcodes; and we consider neighborhood violence to be synonymous with both indirect and direct exposure to violence occurring within clearly defined spatial areas.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
3
Further, we define child-parent violence as physical violence that takes place between a child and their caregiver1.
1 Despite the distinctions noted between our dependent variable ‘conflict with parents’ and control variable ‘child-parent violence’, m order to avoid any potential overlap, a bivariate correlation was performed. Respective coefficients between conflict with parents and child-parent violence are 0.24 (mom), and 0.28 (dad).


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
4
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE Defining Existing Problems
Negative implications of exposure to violence for youth are well-documented, however, less clear is the approach by which to conceptualize the community/neighborhood, forms of violence experienced within communities (direct/indirect exposure), and their respective effects. While a number of studies have linked violence exposure to detrimental outcomes, inconsistencies remain as to how to conceptualize, operationalize, and measure exposure. Generally, there is a lack of consensus on what defines and operationalizes neighborhood violence, and overall, there is a lack of consistency in measurement and analysis, including assessment of proximity and time frame of exposure, victimization, and witnessing of community violence (for a full review, see McDonald & Richmond 2008).
Measurement
In many studies, measures of neighborhood violence are based on children’s or adult’s self-reports of violence - either through something that happened to another person or being personally victimized. In this type of operationalization, exposure to community violence is tied directly to the respondent’s personal experience. As with other neighborhood characteristics, the merits and drawbacks of using subjective versus objective measures of community violence have been heavily debated (Hill & Maimon 2013; McCoy 2013; Turner et al., 2013). Often, the definition of neighborhood or community violence is self-reported through survey questions intended to gauge the perceived levels of violence in one’s community (Covey, Menard, & Franzese, 2013; Martinez et al., 2013). In many studies, measures of neighborhood violence are based on childrens’ or adults’ self-reports of violence - either through something that happened to another person or being personally victimized. Using this type of operationalization, exposure to community violence is tied directly to the respondent’s individual experience. While such


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
5
experiences do provide an approximation of the true rate of violence occurring in the community, they are prone to the well-documented issue of recall bias commonplace in self-report survey methodology. Police records of violent crime, for example, provide an objective measure of how much violence may be occurring within a community (even though the violence may not be directed at or witnessed by a child), however, many crimes go unreported to police. Thus, many researchers have found it relevant to assess both the individual’s direct experience of violence as well as officially reported instances of violence (McCoy, Raver, & Sharkey, 2015; Sharkey & Sampson 2010; Sharkey et al., 2012). It is argued that regardless of whether the violence is experienced firsthand, that violence can still exert influences on children’s development by affecting the availability and adequacy of resources and supports as well as impacting the emotional well-being and approach to daily life for families (Fowler et al., 2009).
Exposure Type
In order to create a framework for measuring community violence exposure, exposure is generally delineated into two broad categories: (1) being a victim of violence and (2) witnessing violence (Zimmerman & Posick, 2016). Various researchers have gone into detail by operationalizing exposure to violence as personal experience (victimization), seeing violence happen to others, exposure to media violence, and also indirect or vicarious instances of exposure (hearing about violence in one’s community, knowing someone who experienced violence) (Cooley, Turner, & Beidel, 1995; Finkelhor, 2011). The majority of extant literature on violence, however - both in neighborhood and non-neighborhood contexts - does not differentiate between indirect and direct exposure to violence and generally includes multiple forms of exposure. Disentangling the nature of exposure as either direct or indirect is important to correctly conceptualize and measure effects of exposure to violence, as individual responses tend to be contingent upon type and duration of exposure (Ainsberg & Ell, 2005); youths will typically exhibit internalizing behaviors (e.g., depression, anxiety, suicidality), externalizing behaviors (e.g.,


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
6
subsequent violence/delinquency, aggression, conflict with parents, conflict with peers), ora combination of both (Fowler et al., 2009; Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler, 2003).
It is, therefore, necessary to consider the contexts of violence in order to (1) parse effects of context and exposure type, (2) better understand interactions between direct and indirect exposure, (3) understand the role that indirect violence exposure has on familial relationships, and (4) be responsive to needs of adolescents experiencing and/or witnessing various forms of local violence. Correlates, consequences, and influencing mechanisms related to being a victim of violent crime can significantly differ from those that are related to indirect exposures of violence (Schwartz & Proctor, 2000).
Generally, when considering indirect effects of neighborhood violence, approaches to measuring violence fail to consider direct experiences of violence and victimization within the home. When working with spatially detailed data to analyze effects of neighborhood violence (e.g., via indirect exposure), this approach can be problematic, prone to model misspecification, and ultimately to erroneously contributing direct experiences of violence/victimization within the home to effects of indirect violence exposure.
Neighborhood Context
Despite the resurge of in interest in studying characteristics of small unit areas (e.g., neighborhoods) and the salient benefits of identifying policy initiatives relevant within community contexts, defining and measuring ‘neighborhoods’ remains a daunting challenge. Generally speaking, two neighborhood frameworks -ecological and social - have been identified (Gauvin et al., 2007).
Ecological definitions of neighborhoods tend to focus on the built environment, e.g., geographically defined spaces such as census blocks, census tracts, or street segments, (Burdick-Will, 2018, Hipp, 2013; Sampson & Raudenbush, 1999; Shankardass et al., 2011; Wilson-Genderson & Pruchno, 2013). Alternate approaches can vary depending upon country but


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
7
typically utilize some form of geographically refined data (Damm & Dustman, 2014; Shareck & Ellaway, 2011). Research further suggests that varying aggregations of ‘neighborhood’ effects based on the modifiability of areal units allows arbitrarily defined boundaries to be used (Vogel, 2016), and there is a growing recognition that potential biases may result from arbitrarily defined spatial regions and neighborhood borders (Hipp & Boessen, 2013). The variation of ways in which to conceptualize neighborhoods and communities not only contributes to largely varied estimates of effects of local violence but additionally makes it extremely difficult to generalize findings across studies (Aisan & Ell, 2005; Overstreet, 2000). Further, little empirical research gives appropriate consideration to the interrelated social contexts characteristic of neighborhoods (e.g., communal ties, social interaction patterns, peer relations), and even less uses data appropriate for multilevel analyses of neighborhood effects (Rankin & Quane, 2002; Sampson et al., 1997).
Social definitions of neighborhoods emphasize individual’s social networks and daily activity patterns and consider work location, shopping areas, local hangouts, and places in walking distance for a particular sample demographic which (1) generally do not fall within traditionally defined territories (e.g., postcodes, census blocks) and (2) rely upon self-reported measures of ‘neighborhood’. This angle is especially relevant to crime and violent activity, as research has shown offenders to have higher likelihoods of committing crimes at locations close/convenient to them (Bernasco & Block, 2009; Block, Galary, & Brice, 2007),
Recent research calls for integrating a socioecological approach by which neighborhoods are conceptualized via considering individual perceptions of neighborhood/community and geographically defined neighborhoods/communities, as the two are not synonymous and tend to overlap (Hipp & Boessen, 2013).
For the purpose of discussing literature relevant to our study, first, we will identify longitudinal effects (direct and indirect), spatial effects (indirect), and extralocal effects (direct and indirect) of community violence. Second, given that impacts on individuals are central to studies


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
of community violence exposure, empirical relationships between residential characteristics (e.g., poverty and race), socio-emotional implications of violence exposure (e.g., stress, conflict), and responses to community violence are considered.
Longitudinal Effects
Researchers often contend that children’s threatening community experiences affect their well-being by increasing their psychological stress, disrupting their processing of social information, and altering ways in which they selectively engage with—or disengage from— their environments (Aneshensel & Sucoff 1996; Massey 2004; Ross & Mirowsky 2009). Studies from clinical psychology, sociology, and medicine have also drawn robust relationships between early exposure to community violence in disadvantaged communities and increases in self-reported symptoms of aggression, posttraumatic stress, and social cognition (Fowler et al., 2009; Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler 2003, Margolin & Gordis 2000). Studies in which the reporting method was not via self-report (e.g., reports of childhood behavior by mothers and school teachers) have yielded similar results, and suggest that childhood exposure to community violence is related to acute symptoms of distress and aggression (Farver et al., 2005).
In addition to immediate negative consequences, exposure to violence affects the behavioral trajectories of individuals over the life course. People who have been exposed to violence early in life typically report higher levels of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, antisocial behavior, school disengagement, academic failure, impaired social relationships, and criminal justice involvement (Burdick-Will, 2016; Cooley-Quille, Turner, & Beidel, 1995; Cooley-Strickland et al., 2009; McGee & Baker, 2002; Pynoos et al., 1987; Schwab-Stone et al., 1995; Schwab-Stone et al., 1995; Singer et al., 1995; Wilson et al., 2009). For example, in a study of juvenile justice involved youth, those who had been exposed to neighborhood violence were four times more likely to have committed serious criminal acts (Shelton & Preski, 2001). Several longitudinal studies (Brookmeyer, Henrich, & Schwab-Stone, 2005; Farrell & Bruce, 1997;


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
9
Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998; Miller, Wasserman, Neugebauer, Gorman-Smith, &
Kamboukos, 1999; Schwab-Stone et al., 1999) have demonstrated increased levels of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology in relation to community violence exposure, even after controlling for prior levels of these problems. Other consequences of community violence exposure include high levels of hopelessness, a diminished sense of purpose (Durant et al., 1994), suicide ideation (Mazza & Reynolds 1999) and suicidality (Lambert, Copeland-Linder, & Ialongo, 2008).
Spatial Effects
Using neighborhood fixed effects, Sharkey and Sampson (2010) measured the impact of recent, local homicides on children by comparing scores on cognitive assessments among students living within the same neighborhood at different times (some were assessed in the days following a local homicide, whereas others were assessed months later or earlier). In each case, the estimated effects of recent local homicides were substantial, suggesting that local homicides have an acute effect on children's test performance that fades as the window of time between the homicide and the assessment widens. The magnitude of the cognitive effect also varied strongly depending on the proximity of the homicide to the child's residence. In the sample overall, effects of a homicide appear strongest when occurring close to a child's home (within the block group of residence), and are smaller for homicides occurring within the census tract or neighborhood cluster. The identification strategy used in this study addresses the “selection bias problem” by exploiting variations in recency of local homicides arising from the relative timing of interview assessments and local homicides among children in families residing in the same neighborhood. Importantly, this method is designed to capture only the acute impact of homicides. Although by design it does not provide any information on permanent impacts of local violence (e.g., heightened interpersonal conflict, well-being), these findings point to the broader impact that


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
10
extreme acts of violence can have on children across a neighborhood, regardless of whether violence is witnessed directly.
In a similar vein, Sharkey et al. (2012) tested via a randomized control trial whether exposure to homicides occurring within close geographic proximity (e.g., radius) to children's homes affected children's cognitive ability. This study found that children who were assessed within one week of a homicide occurring within 2500 ft. of their home exhibited lower levels of attention, impulse control, and academic skills. The magnitude of observed effects increased as homicide exposures were closer to a child’s residence (e.g., 1000 ft.). These results suggest that local violence does, in fact, have direct implications for children’s cognitive functioning in ways which may place them at significant risk of longer-term psychological difficulties. The analysis additionally showed strong positive effects of local violence on parental distress, providing suggestive evidence that familial stress may be a likely pathway by which local violence impacts young children. In addition to highlighting how exposure to homicide generates acute psychological distress among caregivers and impairs children’s self-regulatory behavior and cognitive functioning, their findings suggest that lack of safety represents a significant form of socio-spatial inequality for families and children living in economically and racially stratified urban communities. Links between social stratification and stress highlight ways which violence, a strong correlate of socioeconomic disadvantage, may be linked to cognitive processing and family functioning. Simply, the immediate costs of living near violence, even if episodic, are high.
Seeking to merge sociological and neurobiological literatures, McCoy, Raver, and Sharkey (2015) explored the spatial connections between violent crime and children’s cognitive performance. In contrast to previous studies that measured perceived/self-reported crime exposure, they used objective police reports of recent community violence to estimate effects of individual crimes on the immediate outcomes of children (who may or may not be aware of their occurrence). Specifically, with a radial distance fixed-effects approach, individual violent crimes were geocoded and served as a proxy for each child’s neighborhood exposure. Of the residential


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
11
communities examined, children living close to a recent violent crime showed significantly worse patterns of cognitive performance and selective attention relative to their peers from the same communities who were assessed before or well after a violent crime occurred. Although this approach does not permit nuanced understanding of specific mechanisms linking violent crime and outcomes for children, it does take into account the ways that violence indirectly affects children—consciously or unconsciously—through more subtle but temporally linked changes in the environment (e.g., peers’ emotional reactions, changes in parenting practices, increased police presence), even when the child is not directly victimized or even aware that the violence has taken place. In fact, these results build on previous studies that similarly find that even hearing secondhand about community violence affects child wellbeing, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (Fowler et al., 2009).
Extralocal Effects
Well-documented concentrations of crime within urban areas serve as a sort of spatially organized social fact supporting a ‘block tile’ perspective of neighborhoods, with rates of crime organized by geographic boundaries across maps of neighborhoods. Spatial studies of neighborhoods, however, underscore the fact that neighborhood borders do not function as clear cut boundaries but, rather, are porous. Violence in neighborhoods has spillover effects which influence not only the immediate area but surrounding areas (Peterson & Krivo, 2009); impacts of violence which span across neighboring boundaries have been observed in numerous studies (Browning, Dietz, & Feinberg, 2004; Morenoff, Sampson, & Raudenbush, 2001, Tita & Greenbaum, 2009; Papachristos & Batomski, 2018). A recent study examining homicides in New Jersey observed a spatiotemporal diffusion process by which homicide concentration spread, over 20 years, from the center of Newark to southward, and then westward, directions (Zeoli et al., 2014). Relatively elevated levels of violence regularly occur between spatially contiguous


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
12
neighborhoods — in other words, violent crime in nearby neighborhoods increases violent crime in a focal neighborhood (Sampson, Morenoff, & Gannon-Rowley, 2002).
It is hypothesized that the diffusion of neighborhood effects across boundaries are transmitted via (1) concentrations of specific neighborhood characteristics — poverty/disadvantage, residential instability, immigration trends, community investments, racial makeup, (2) types of criminal behavior such as gang activity, drug markets, and sex work, and (3) through co-offender relationships (Papachristos & Batomski, 2018, Peterson & Krivo, 2009; Sampson, 2012; Vogel & South, 2016). The presence of criminogenic ties across neighboring areas can contribute to the transmission of delinquency, and opportunities for criminal offending within a neighborhood (Haynie, 2001; Schaefer, 2012). Simply put, the character of extralocal regions are directly tied to not only crime and violence within a focal neighborhood, but to aforementioned effects associated with exposure to violence.
Poverty, Race, and Exposure to Violence
Researchers have demonstrated how increased and prolonged exposure to violence is often a function of socio-economic status (Cooley-Quille et al., 2001; Schwab-Stone et al., 1995) which disproportionately effects minority (particularly African American) children’s development into adolescence and beyond (Fitzpatrick, 1993; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar 1993; Attar & Guerra 1994). Drawing from a sample of African-American and Latino boys and their caregivers from economically disadvantaged inner-city neighborhoods in Chicago, Gorman-Smith and Tolan (1998) evaluated the relationship between exposure to violence, aggression, and depression symptoms. Even when accounting for family relationship, parenting characteristics and previous status, they found that exposure to community violence was related to increases in aggressive behavior and depression over a 1-year period. Additionally, when considering roles which individual, family, and racial/ethnic characteristic factors play within violence exposure for youth, Zimmerman and Messner (2013) reported that Black and Hispanic youth were disproportionately


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
13
subjected to higher levels of violence exposure, and, further, that neighborhood disadvantage compounds this effect.
Unfortunately, relationships between social disadvantage and violence exposure can seem circular in nature. In a longitudinal national probability sample of Americans, neighborhood violence experienced by youth was found to predict lower odds of employment in adulthood (Covey, Menard, & Franzese, 2013). Similarly, lower familial socioeconomic status has been shown to be related to higher levels of violence occurring within the home; further, victims of child abuse/neglect may be socioeconomically affected themselves, as they have been found more likely to have incomes below the poverty line (Zielinski, 2009) and have lower earnings and assets (Currie & Widom, 2010).
Economic resources within communities can serve to act as a protective factor against neighborhood violence and exposure to violence in multiple ways, namely by providing alternatives to engaging in ‘street culture’(e.g., after school programs/summer programs), means for community-based programs which foster social control and prosocial community networks, parenting programs for inexperienced parents, higher quality educational programs, and economically viable options to attaining income. Race and indicators of socioeconomic status/disadvantage are therefore imperative to include and control for within multilevel neighborhood analyses.
Stress and Neighborhood Context
Multiple studies have shown that aggression, delinquency, and conduct problems vary systematically with the quality of children’s neighborhoods, specifically in that neighborhoods which are characterized by high rates of crime, poverty, single-parent households, residential mobility, and unemployment tend to have higher levels of adolescent conduct problems (Greenberg, Lengua, Coie, & Pinderhughes, 1999; Sampson, 1997). Persons residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods indexed by social status (e.g., lower socioeconomic status) and


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
14
ecological contexts (e.g., concentrated poverty) have higher general levels of stress exposure (Ross & Mirowsky, 2009; Pearlin, 1989; Turner et al., 1995). Therefore, when community conditions worsen, adolescents are likely to experience stress via a variety of sources. To reiterate, children exposed to chronic community violence are at a higher risk of stress related disorders (PTSD, posttraumatic symptomology) (Kliewer, Lepore, Oskin, & Johnson, 1998; Saltzman et al., 2001).
Stress and Child-Parent Conflict
Family conflict has been reported at higher levels in high-risk areas, and child-parent conflict may be a function of stress release for adolescents (Duncan, Strycker, Duncan, & Okut; 2002). High levels of life stress are associated with weakened child-parent attachment (Stem & Smith, 1995), and further, parental distress (e.g., PTSD and depression) has been found to be a significant mediator of behavior problems and symptoms of distress in children (Aisenberg & Ell, 2005, Linares et al., 2001). Therefore, in communities saturated by crime and economic disadvantage, not only are both parents and children exposed to higher levels of stress but, as a result of their own stress, parents are less equipped to steer their children away from problematic behavior. In a review of studies considering stress-based responses to violence, McMahon et al. (2003) considered outcomes of both community and domestic violence, specifically depression, PTSD, general anxiety, aggression symptoms, and a range of internalizing and externalizing factors. Their findings suggest consistency in research results in regard to the relationship between neighborhood crime/poverty and youths’ externalizing behaviour (specifically aggression, delinquency, and oppositionality). For children who reside in areas characterized by high levels of neighborhood disorder/disadvantage (e.g., violence, poverty), stress has been found to act as a mechanism to predict aggression and conflict (Attar, Guerra, & Tolan, 1994, Ross & Mirowsky, 2009). To expand upon this notion, Lewis and Riger (1986) found that higher crime rates associated with high-risk neighborhoods contributed to residents’ perceptions of stress


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
15
regardless of whether they have been victims of crime of whether they have only heard about experiences of victims.
Generally speaking, youth conduct problems occur at higher rates for those residing within distressed neighborhoods, however, the identification of processes by which neighborhood contexts influence child behavior and adjustment is a relatively new focus being explored (Roosa, Jones, Tein, & Cree, 2003). It is thus necessary to identify processes which help to explain the relationships between neighborhood contexts (crime/poverty) and family conflict; particularly in relation to understanding individual differences in exposure type (e.g., duration, indirect/direct exposure).
Child-Parent Conflict and Neighborhood Context
According to Finkelhor et al. (2013), 58.9% of youth had witnessed a community assault in their lifetime, and 9.6% of youth had experienced physical abuse by a known adult. Intrafamily violence, therefore, is an important measure to control for when aiming to better understand effects of indirect neighborhood violence exposure.
Poverty, economic instability, and violence in the immediate vicinity of one’s residence immeasurably add to difficulties associated with parenting. Residents in high-crime areas tend to express feelings of helplessness and frustration in their inability to protect their children from violence (Lorion & Saltzman, 1993, Osofsky, 2003). Parents’ ability to manage their own stress, trauma, and grief related to violence exposure within impoverished environments greatly affect outcomes of children who are exposed to violence (Osofsky, 1995). For some families, stresses associated with chronic community violence affect the ability of mothers and children to form prosocial attachment relationships (Osofsky & Fenichel, 1994). The role of family-child relations appears to play a more prevalent position in moderating the effects of community violence rather than predicting which youth will experience exposure to violence within the community.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
16
Numerous studies have found significant relationships highlighting the associations between children’s reported exposure to community violence and intra-family conflict (Richters & Martinez, 1993; Osofsky et al; 1993). Additionally, youth tend to report experiencing higher levels of violence within the home around the age of ten (Richters & Martinez, 1993). These reports emphasize the understated importance of considering measures of intra-family violence in studies of neighborhood context violence in order to understand combined effects and variation in exposure type effects for adolescents (e.g., impacts for adolescents living with high levels of in-home and community violence, impacts of varying levels of in-home and community violence).
The Role of Intra-Family Relationships in High Risk Communities
The family is considered to be the most persistent, prominent, and proximal developmental influence for children (Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993; Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Gorman -Smith, Henry, and Tolan (2004) found that for families residing in impoverished, high crime communities, strong parental and family relationship characteristics act as influencers deterring youth from violence perpetration. Family structure has been found to moderate relation of both aggression/anxiety and depression for persons exposed to community violence (Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998), and research, furthermore, indicates that a strong relationship with a caring, competent, positive adult (typically a parent) is the most important resource protecting youth from negative effects of violence exposure (Katz & Gottman, 1997; Osofsky, 1999; Wemer, 1995).
Conflict that occurs between children and their caregivers is of exceptional importance as it acts as an indicator to the fragmentation of supportive bonds which serve as a buffer towards a multitude of negative outcomes adolescents. Therefore, understanding whether and how community violence contributes to adolescent-parent conflict is critical to address. Effects of violence on child-parent conflict have been documented by prior studies, however, few have


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
17
examined effects of contextual violence for youth on parental conflict through a spatially refined lens.
Responses to Neighborhood Violence
It is important to differentiate between acute and cumulative effects of violence, as outcomes tend to vary based on exposure type. For the purpose of our longitudinal study, we focus on cumulative effects.
A number of related studies have reported little or no relationship between cumulative violence exposure and emotional distress, instead positing that desensitization to violence is a more common response (Farrell & Bruce, 1997; White et al 1998). Lorion and Saltzman (1993) found that children living in a poor, high-crime community who had witnessed shootings, police raids, or even a dead body considered the events to be "nothing special". Children who have been exposed to chronic levels of community violence may have lower than expected mental health symptoms, and may respond by acting uncaring or emotionally desensitized, as they have pathologically adapted to deal with sustained loss (Cooley-Quille, Boyd, Frantz, & Walsh, 2001; Osofsky, Wewers, Della, & Fick, 1993). Additionally, adolescents who have become desensitized to violence have been found to exhibit higher likelihoods of engaging in violent behavior without becoming emotionally distressed by it, therefore perpetuating cycles of urban violence (Gaylord-Harden, Dickson, & Pierre, 2016).
Conversely, others have observed strong associations between chronic violence exposure and psychological distress for youth (Buka, Stichick, Birdthistle, & Earls, 2001; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Mazza & Reynolds, 1999). Wilson et al. (2002) maintain that children who were either victims of violence or had witnessed violence were less likely to exhibit signs of desensitization, and instead, showed signs of hyper arousal as a response to violence. Dissociation as a response to violence, characterized as distinct alterations in states of consciousness, is more prevalent within adolescents who have directly experienced more traumatic forms of violence


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
18
(Carrion & Steiner, 2000; Singer, Anglin, Song, & Lunghofer, 1995). When exploring variations in responses of urban youth to contextual violence versus direct violence exposure (via family violence and sexual assault), McCart et al.’s (2007) work further challenges the desensitization hypothesis by arguing that community violence exposure (more so than direct forms of violence) is more closely associated with PTSD and subsequent delinquency. Adolescents’ responses to cumulative neighborhood violence continue to be regularly debated.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
19
CHAPTER III CURRENT STUDY Research Questions
This research is guided by two research questions aimed at better understanding the spatial effects of violence on child-parent conflict. They are:
. RQ 1: To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child-parent conflict?
. RQ 2: To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child-parent conflict when controlling for child-parent violence within the home?
In terms of research question one, we hypothesize that local and extralocal violence are related to intra-family conflict. Regarding research question two, we hypothesize that when controlling for violence within the home, that local and extralocal violence will fail to be significantly related to conflict within the home.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
20
CHAPTER IV
DATA, MEASURES, AND METHODS Data
Data for this study are drawn from two sources. The first is the Conflict and Management of Relationships (Conamore) panel dataset (n=763), a longitudinal study of Dutch adolescents which examines personality and identity, relationships with parents and peers, and emotional and behavioral states (Meeus et al., 2010). Schools (12) were randomly selected and parents and students both received a letter entailing the focus of the study and information in regard to voluntary participation. Less than 1% of selected respondents chose not to participate (Delsing et al., 2008). Participants, aided by research assistants who provided verbal instruction, completed a series of questionnaires in their classrooms. Students absent on testing days were not assessed.
The original Conamore sample included 1,313 respondents and involved two cohorts: ‘early-to-middle’ adolescents (n=923; 70.3% of total sample; mean age at wave 1= 12.4) and ‘middle-to-late’ adolescents (n=390; 29.7% of total sample; mean age at wave 1= 16.7). The first five annual waves of data were collected between the academic years of 2001-02 and 2005-06.
The sixth wave was collected in 2009-10 and included an additional Life History Calendar (LHC) (Caspi et al., 1999) which captured retrospective questions. In our analyses we used data from the first five waves and only utilize the LHC (wave six) to trace adolescents’ residential histories. The respective number of respondents for waves 1 through 6 were 1,313, 1,313, 1,293, 1,292, 1,275, and 1,026. Sample attrition in the first five waves was low (7%), however, due to the four-year gap between waves five and six, attrition rates were higher for our LHC sample (20%). We used residential information from the LHC to link respondents to their respective postal codes, which we then combined with a second dataset from Statistics Netherlands. The Statistics Netherlands data utilized consist of spatially detailed police records of reported crimes by post code. The mean number of households per post code in the Netherlands was 17. Our analytic sample after


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
21
list wise deletion was 763 adolescents, with an average of 4.4 observations per respondent, or 3,361 person-wave observations.
Measures
Dependent Variable - Individual-Level Time Varying Variable
Our dependent variable ‘conflict with parents’ was measured using a subset of the Network of Relationship Inventory (Furman & Buhrmester, 1985), and has reported adequate validity (Edens, Cavell & Hughes, 1999). Measured at the individual level as a time varying variable, it explicitly captures non-physical conflicts involving anger, tension, and arguments. Adolescents were asked separately about their father and mother. Conflict with parents was measured as a scale and used six items from the NRI: “do you and your mother/father annoy each other and do you become angry with each other?”, “do you and your mother/father get on each other’s nerves?”, “how often do you disagree with your mother/father and are you arguing?”, “are you and your mother/father annoyed with each other’s behavior?”, “how often are you and your mother/father squabbling or arguing?”, and “do you and your mother/father bother each other and behave overcritical towards each other?” The five response categories range from “little or not at all” to “more is not possible”. It is important to recognize that this measure focuses on conflict which is distinct from violence. Across the five waves and separate scales for mother and father, the Cronbach’s alphas range from .87 to .91, expressing strong internal consistency. We combined adolescent’s responses for both father and mother into a single scale to create a measure for ‘conflict with parents’. Descriptive statistics for this and other variables can be found in Table 1.
Independent Variables - Individual-Level Time-Invariant Variables
We use three individual-level time-invariant control variables: sex, cohort, and parents being of foreign origin. Sex, cohort, and parents’ foreign origin were treated as dummy variables:


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
22
male=0, female=l, early-to-middle adolescents=0, middle-to-late adolescents = 1, and both parents bom outside of the Netherlands=0 and both parents being Dutch natives=l (one parent being foreign born=0.5).
Independent Variables - Neighborhood-Level Variables
The Life History Calendar (LHC) in Conamore includes six-digit postcodes where the adolescents lived from the age of twelve until the sixth wave of data collection. These postcodes enabled us to link the survey data (Conamore) to register data available at the postcode level. Sixdigit postcodes average 17 households per postcode, and capture mean socioeconomic measures (housing prices) and crime levels in the proximate surroundings of the adolescents’ homes.
‘Local violent crime’ was based on data from the Dutch National Policy Services Agency and Statistics Netherlands. The variable represents the yearly number of violent crimes per 1000 persons within a six-digit postcode. The variable was available for all of the five years of data collection and the data were group mean centered.
‘Extralocal violent crime’ is constructed by applying a spatially lagged, distance-weighted measure of violent crime occurrences in “extralocal” (two-mile radius) neighborhoods. We first measured the distance from the center of each focal postcode to the center of each nearby postcode within a two-mile radius, then weight the level of crime by the inverse of the distance the postcode from the focal tract, thereby assigning more weight to violence that happens nearby and less to violence that happens further away.
‘Neighborhood wealth’ was measured via a scale of average property values within each respective six-digit postcode as captured by Statistics Netherlands in 2004 (2006). Because longitudinal data was not available, we imputed this information over all five waves, and the variable was standardized. This measure has been assessed to be a good proxy for neighborhood wealth (Visser et al., 2008).


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
23
Control Variable - Individual-Level Time Varying Variable
‘Violence in the home’ was measured separately in regard to each parent, and explicitly captures physical contact/violence occurring between children and their caregivers, with the question “How often in the last seven days did you have conflict with your mother/father, involving hitting or violence?” The five answering categories range from “never” to “often”. We created two separate dummy variables for both parents, where 0 = ‘no violence in the home’ and 1 = ‘violence in the home’.2
Analytical Method
To test our research questions, we employed hybrid random-effects tobit models. We refer to the model as hybrid because it includes estimators for both within-subject and between-subject effects, therefore all time-varying variables have two estimators (Allison, 2009). The first estimator is calculated as the deviation from person-specific means for each time-varying variable, which creates an estimator equal to those in fixed-effects models (within-individual effect). This model controls for observed and unobserved time-invariant characteristics, as the sum of their change is always zero. This removes any potential bias arising from omitted time-invariant characteristics. The second estimator is calculated as the person-specific mean for each time-varying variable (between-individual effect). The lower and upper limit for the tobit estimator were 0 and 4, respectively, which correspond to the potential extremes on our outcome variable ‘conflict with parents’.
Because residential mobility would introduce confounding in our models, in order to avoid conflating effects, we only used those adolescents in the sample who did not move between waves 1 and 5 of the Conamore survey. Additionally, residential mobility could potentially be related to child-parent relationship quality, as life conflicts (e.g., divorce or loss of employment) which may affect at home conflicts may be a motivating factor in a residential move.
2 Variables are explained m further detail m Appendix.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
24
CHAPTER V RESULTS
Univariate Frequencies
Before addressing the research questions of interest, we first describe our data. Table 1 reports univariate frequencies and summarizes the variables included in our sample. A larger proportion of Conamore survey respondents (all five waves) were female (55% female, and 45% male); and mean ages of respondents at wave one were 12.4 years (early-to-middle adolescents) and 16.7 (middle —to-late adolescents). Nine percent of our sample had two parents which were born outside of the Netherlands. For our dependent variable, conflict with parents, the mean response is 0.49, suggesting that on average, respondents reported experiencing little to no conflict with either of their parents. No respondents in our sample reported the highest level of conflict for all six conflict indicators (max=3.83). Thirteen percent of respondents reported experiencing violence within the home with either one of their parents. Instances of reported local violence occurred, on average, at a rate of 0.22 times per 1000 persons; and the maximum rate was 10.3 instances per 1000 persons. Extralocal violence occurred, on average, at a rate of 0.23 per 1000 persons, and the maximum amount of extralocal violence was 1.09 instances per 1000 persons. The mean property value within our sample region is 213,810 euro, with the respective minimum and maximum being 55,000 and 952,000 euro.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
25
Table 1. Descriptive statistics. Conamore, 2001-2010; Statistics Netherlands.
Variables N Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum
Time Varvine
Conflict with parents 3,361 .49 .48 0 3.83
Local violence 3,361 .22 .69 0 10.30
Extralocal violence 3,361 .23 .15 0 1.09
Violence in the home (mom) 3,361 .13 .34 0 1
Violence in the home (dad) 3,361 .13 .33 0 1
Time Invariant
Neighborhood wealth (10k euro) 763 213.81 121.99 55 952
Parents foreign 763 .09 .29 0 1
Female 763 .55 .50 0 1
Cohort 763 .20 .40 0 1
Hybrid Tobit Regression: Research Question One
As a reminder, our first research question is: to what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child-parent conflict? Our results indicate, consistent with our hypothesis, that both local and extralocal violence are significantly related to child-parent conflict. Beta values can be interpreted as the change in conflict with parents divided by the expected probability of having conflict with parents. The first model in our stepwise regression (Table 2) presents effects of variables of interest prior to controlling for
violence within the home.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
26
Table 2. Hybrid tobit regression predicting conflict with parents
Variables Model 1 Beta (S.E.) Model 2 Beta (S.E.)
Within-Individual Estimators
Local violence .04 (.02)* .04 (.02)*
Extralocal violence .47 (.16)** .47 (.15)**
Local extralocal interaction -.04 (.08) -.04 (.08)
Violence in the home (mom) .17(.03)***
Violence in the home (dad) .16(.03)***
Between-Individual Estimators
Local violence .05 (.04) .06 (.04)
Extralocal violence .10 (.13) .10 (.12)
Local extralocal interaction -.03 (.12) -.03 (.11)
Violence in the home (mom) .40 (.09)***
Violence in the home (dad) .60 (.08)***
Neighborhood wealth -.03 (.02) -.02 (.02)
Female .05 (.03) 10 (.03)***
Cohort .10 (.04)* .15 (.04)***
Parents foreign -.13 (.06)* -.12 (.05)*
Intercept .41 (.03)*** .24 (.03)***
Wald chi2 . 31.58 (10)*** 300.18 (14) ***
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 N=3,361
Within-Individual
Prior to including violence in the home as a control variable, local violence (B=0.04, p<0.01) and extralocal violence (B=0.47, p<0.01) are both significantly positively related to child-parent conflict. For every 1 crime per 100,000 persons in a postcode there is an expected 0.04 increase in the level of conflict with parents experienced (e.g., scores of 0 become 0.4). The substantially higher beta value observed for extralocal suggests that for each violent crime (occurring within a 2-mile radius) per 100,000 persons, individuals are expected to experience a 0.47 increase in conflict with their parents, and a 0.43 increase relative to local violence.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
27
Between-Individual
When considering variation between participants, local and extralocal violence are not significantly related to conflict with parents. Neighborhood wealth, serving as a proxy for poverty, is not a significant predictor of conflict within the home. Although insignificant, the direction of this relationship is negative, and therefore consistent with the majority of neighborhood literature maintaining that poverty/neighborhood disadvantage is positively associated with conflict within the home (Gutman, McLoyd, and Tokoyawa, 2005; Wadsworth and Compas, 2002). Violence in the home, for both parents, was significantly positively related to conflict (B [mom] = 0.40, p<0.001, B [dad] = 0.60, p<0.01).
Cohort is significantly positively related (B=0.15, p<0.001) to conflict with parents. Consistent with other’s findings, this illustrates that older youths are expected to experience higher levels of conflict with their parents than younger youths (Arnett, 1999; Montemayor, 1983). Parents being foreign born is significantly negatively related (B= -0.12, p<0.05) to conflict within the home, suggesting that youth with non-Dutch native parents experience less frequent and lower levels of conflict with their parents.
Hybrid Tobit Regression: Research Question Two
As a reminder, our second research question is: To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child-parent conflict when controlling for child-parent violence within the home? The second model in our step-wise regression introduces the control variables ‘violence in the home: mom’ and ‘violence in the home: dad’, and, in contrast to our hypothesis, results show significant positive relationships between both local and extralocal crime and conflict with parents.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
28
Within-Individual
When controlling for violence within the home occurring between children and their parents, local (B=0.04, p<0.05) and extralocal (B=0.47, p<0.01) violence both remain statistically significant. This suggests that regardless of individuals’ age, sex, ethnic origin, level of neighborhood wealth, or violence occurring between parents and children, that local and extralocal violent crimes increase the levels and frequency of conflict individual youth experience with their parents over time. As is to be expected, violence in the home is significantly positively related to conflict with parents (B[mom]=0.17, p<0.001, B[dad]=0.16, p<0.01).
Between-Individual
When introducing controls for violence, the relationship between female and conflict with parents becomes significant (B=0.10, p<0.01). Neighborhood wealth remains an insignificant predictor of conflict with parents, and cohort remains positively significant related to conflict with parents (B=0.15, p<0.001). Parents foreign bom remains significantly, negatively related to our dependent variable (B= -0.12, p<0.05), and violence in the home remains significantly related to conflict with parents (B[mom]=0.40, p<0.001, B[dad]=0,60, p<0.01).


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
29
CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION
This research began with the question of how local and extralocal violence effect child-parent conflict, and addressed the methodological discrepancy of not considering violence within the home. Results demonstrate that instances of violence within one’s immediate proximity (local) and surrounding proximities (extralocal) significantly impact conflicts occurring within families for individuals over time. This is an important identification, as family relationship quality acts as a significant mediating factor for subsequent violence as well as an array of deleterious internalizing and externalizing behaviors for youth (Gorman-Smith, Henry, & Tolan, 2004). Although effects of local/extralocal violence at the between-individual level were not observed, repeated measures models yield strong internal validity as data are prone to less noise, therefore, effects observed at the within-individual level are less likely a result of undetected differences (Charness, Gneezy, & Kuhn, 2011).
The variation in our outcome variable did not change following the introduction of violence within the home as control, however, we are now able to confidently posit that effects observed are a result of neighborhood violence rather than interpersonal violence occurring between children and parents. The significant relationship between violence in the home and conflict with parents illustrates the necessity of controlling for intra-familial violence when examining effects of neighborhood violence on child-parent conflict. We maintain that the parsing out effects of interfamilial violence and community violence are therefore necessary to (a) avoid model mis-specification and spurious relationships and, (b) better understand effects of indirect exposure to violence.
Higher magnitude was observed for extralocal violence both prior to and after controlling for violence within the home. One potential explanation for this is that studies have found youth who experience chronic or high exposure to violence may become desensitized to acts of violence (Gaylord-Harden Dickson, & Pierre, 2016; Lorion & Saltzman, 1993) and exhibit fewer


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
30
externalizing behaviors which may lead to conflict. A second potential justification is spillover effects violence has been observed to transmit between neighboring communities. Hipp found when exploring relationships between reported crime and residents’ perception of crime that actual crime is the strongest predictor of perceived crime (2013). Being aware of violence in one’s surrounding community can increase externalizing behaviors for youth, regardless of whether they are directly exposed to it (Youngstrom, Weist, & Albus; 2003), which may increase conflict within families. Given (1) the refinement of our spatial unit of analysis (M=17 homes), and (2) the mean amount of violent crimes in our sample is 0.22 per 100,000 persons, diffusion of the effects of neighborhood violence is a far more probable explanation than chronic exposure to violence and desensitization as a result. The important takeaway is that although violence in both immediate and surrounding areas contribute to conflict between youths and parents, contiguous neighborhoods must not be ignored.
The negative relationship between non-Dutch native parents and family conflict suggests youth with foreign born parents experience less conflict with their parents. A similar study examining child-parent relationships between caregivers and adolescents in the Netherlands found non-native Dutch parents to be unrelated to higher levels of child-parent conflict and antagonism (Eichelsheim et al., 2009). A potential explanation for our observed relationship is the notion of the embeddedness of alternative value structures within ethnic minority/immigrant families, specifically in the parent/parents’ ability to promote positive socialization goals within their families which benefit family cohesiveness and lessen conflicts (Harrison et al., 1990). Immigrant families emphasizing family cohesion may be more adept at avoiding conflicts, and in comparison to non-immigrant families, may have higher motivation to set aside disagreements and acknowledge sacrifices parents have made and contributions adolescents make within the family (Kwak, 2003).
It is worth noting that when introducing violence within the home as a control variable the relationship between female and conflict with parents becomes significant. Therefore, when


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
31
violence occurring between parents and children is held constant, neighborhood violence and conflict with parents for female youth is positively related. Male youths exposed to community violence can exert externalization and aggression behaviors (e.g., subsequent violence, aggression) at higher levels than their female counterparts (O’Keefe, 1997), which may lead to heightened levels of violence within the home. Therefore, when holding violence between children and parents constant, arguments may be more frequent between females and their parents
Many researchers have called for interventions designed to provide counseling/treatment for adolescents directly exposed to violence. Our current findings conclude that a broader recognition of the effects of community violence are necessary, and that efforts to curb effects of exposure should be expanded to include children living close to areas with high saturations of violence.
Implications for Practice and Policy
Parents residing in urban areas with high levels of violence are typically subject to additional burdens, as traditional social structures which protect children (schools, churches, and community organizations) tend to be overwhelmed. Support systems outside of the family are beneficial to parents in creating an arena to discuss their experiences, emotions, and trauma, which can in turn leave caregivers feeling more prepared to support their own children and explore further supportive resources (e.g., extended family, programs for youth). Having a network of people that care (e.g., community supports) can help adolescents and families feel less overwhelmed and more prepared to cope with violence (Osofsky, 1999). Therefore, ensuring that parents have access to community services focused on professional needs (e.g., job skills training, college preparation courses, resource navigation services) which alleviate monetary stressors could stand to reduce criminal behaviors and stress within the family. Additionally, allocating resources towards programs aimed at socio-emotional needs (e.g., victims of violence support groups, affordable therapeutic sessions) of parents in high crime urban environments has


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
32
conceivable benefits. A family’s supportive function (e.g., emotional closeness and dependability) may not be able to deter adolescents from exposure to violence, however, high functioning families are better prepared to handle conflicts arising as a result of exposure and protect against risk behaviors associated with exposure. However, it may take more than families to protect adolescents from exposure to violence, and may be more worthwhile to focus on creating neighborhood social processes which mitigate violence and exposure to violence itself.
This study acknowledges that crime across neighborhoods may be linked through cooffender networks. Focusing on policies aimed at bolstering positive community networks (e.g., social and economic networks) may mitigate the effects of co-offender networks and related community violence. Our research suggests the need for antiviolence policies which provide both city-wide solutions as well as extra support for especially vulnerable areas. Strategies to reduce violence occurring both extralocally and within the home would likely yield significant reductions in conflicts experienced within families, and, in theory, reduce subsequent consequences of conflict (e.g., cycles of violence). Prevention efforts focusing on reducing direct exposure to violence should target attention towards peer relationships and be cognizant of neighborhood contexts in which youth live. Efforts to introduce and encourage participation in youth neighborhood organizations providing programs and activities outside of regular school hours that create positive, prosocial outlets in safe environments have potential to greatly reduce an adolescent’s chances of witnessing or being a victim of violence.
Awareness of the impacts of violence exposure, regardless of whether it is directly experienced, have additional implications for professionals working with juveniles in high risk urban areas. It is necessary for persons engaged in therapeutic work to assess youths’ overall individual-environmental conditions, regardless of whether or not personal victimization is experienced, to develop strategies — such as parent and guardianship skills courses — that address and combat effects of living within close proximity to violence. Cross-sector efforts (child welfare agencies, schools, community outreach organizations, juvenile correctional treatment facilities and


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
33
providers) to provide risk assessment screening and prevention tools to gauge and respond to violence exposure (direct and indirect) should be implemented in a standardized, communicable form and dispersed across and within agencies.
Implications for Research
Further epidemiological studies which examine outcomes based on exposure type (victimization, acute exposure, chronic exposure) are needed, and future research on effects of indirect exposure to violence should control for any potential direct experiences of violence captured in the data (e.g., family violence, violence at school). Spatial studies examining stress as mechanism between community violence and adolescent-parent conflict are additionally necessary, as this link has not been quantitatively established. Identifying factors that provide protection against exposure to violence and related behavioral and emotional outcomes; especially within family contexts are needed as well. It is probable that professionals working in court systems with youth are knowledgeable in processes leading to violence exposure via the nature of their work and qualitative assessments involved. Ground up approaches to research which incorporate practitioner knowledge and assessment tools may shine more light on causes and realistic prevention of exposure to violence.
Strengths and Limitations
This research contributes to growing literatures on the community violence and family conflict by drawing connections between spatial dynamics of violence and resulting implications for interpersonal family dynamics. To our knowledge, no other studies address this relationship from a spatially refined perspective. Our approach shows the benefits of examining spatial effects in a direct, substantive manner, and we can now say that violence in one area is not only related to violence in a neighboring area, but to conflicts experienced within families. Linkages uncovered not only create a deeper understanding of (1) relationships between community


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
34
violence and adolescent-parent conflict and (2) the necessity to consider in-home violence, but additionally reinforce the findings of others, namely that neighborhood effects approaches must consider spatially contiguous regions.
It is important to acknowledge several limitations of this study. Our research faces the constraint of using criminal justice data, which is prone to undercounting the true volume of crime, as many crimes go unreported. We were unfortunately unable to identify a more ideal measure for poverty within the available data. Neighborhood wealth and parents’ foreign origin were thus used in aims to control for differences in socioeconomic status within our sample, however, we acknowledge that this methodological approach could have been more robust by having more valid measures to capture poverty (such as parents’ income, education level, or single parent status). Although limitations in Conamore survey data do not allow our model a measure for stress, we maintain that extant literature draws reasonable connections to suggest that stress acts as a mechanism between local and extralocal violence and higher levels of criticism, disagreements, and arguments between adolescents and parents. Additionally, housing price data were not available during all five waves of youth survey data collection and values were thus imputed. Lastly, we were unable to include measures for self-reported exposure to violence (e.g., various forms of victimization such as violence experienced outside of the home or at school). It is additionally worth considering the possibility that conflict may be the driving factor to neighborhood crime. This, however, elicits additional research.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
35
References
Aisenberg, E., & Ell, K. (2005). Contextualizing community violence and its effects: An
ecological model of child-parent interdependent coping. Journal of Interpersonal l Tiolence, 20(f), 855-871.
Allison, P. D. (2009). Fixed Effects Regression Models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Aneshensel, C. S., & Sucoff, C. A. (1996). The neighborhood context of adolescent mental
health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 293-310.
Arnett, J. J. (1999). Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered. American Psychologist, 54(f), 317.
Attar, B. K., Guerra, N. G., & Tolan, P. H. (1994). Neighborhood disadvantage, stressful life events and adjustments in urban elementary-school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23(4), 391-400.
Bemasco, W., & Block, R. (2009). Where offenders choose to attack: A discrete choice model of robberies in Chicago. Criminology, 77(1), 93-130.
Block, R., Galary, A., & Brice, D. (2007). The journey to crime: Victims and offenders converge in violent index offences in Chicago. Security Journal, 20(2), 123-137.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. DevelopmentalPsychology, 22(6), 723.
Brookmeyer, K. A., Henrich, C. C., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2005). Adolescents who witness
community violence: Can parent support and prosocial cognitions protect them from committing violence?. Child Development, 76(4), 917-929.
Browning, C. R., Dietz, R. D., & Feinberg, S. L. (2004). The paradox of social organization: Networks, collective efficacy, and violent crime in urban neighborhoods. Social Forces, 83(2), 503-534.
Burdick-Will, J. (2018). Neighborhood violence, peer effects, and academic achievement in Chicago. Sociology of Education, 91(3), 205-223.
Carrion, V. G., & Steiner, H. (2000). Trauma and dissociation in delinquent adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(3), 353-359.
Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., Thornton, A., Freedman, D., Amell, J.W., Harrington, H., et al., (1996). The life history calendar: A research and clinical assessment method for collecting retrospective event-history data. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 6, 101— 114.
Chamess, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior A Organisation, 81(4), 1-8.
Cicchetti, D., & Lynch, M. (1993). Toward an ecological/transactional model of community violence and child maltreatment: Consequences for children’s development. Psychiatry, 56(4), 96-118.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
36
Cooley-Quille, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Emotional impact of children's
exposure to community violence: A preliminary study. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(10), 1362-1368.
Cooley, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Assessing community violence: The children's report of exposure to violence. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(2), 201-208.
Cooley-Quille, M., Boyd, R. C., Frantz, E., & Walsh, J. (2001). Emotional and behavioral impact of exposure to community violence in inner-city adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30(2), 199-206.
Cooley-Strickland, M., Quille, T. J., Griffin, R. S., Stuart, E. A., Bradshaw, C. P., & Furr-Holden, D. (2009). Community violence and youth: Affect, behavior, substance use, and academics. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Kerieip, 12(2), 127-156.
Copeland-Linder, N., Lambert, S. F., & Ialongo, N. H. (2010). Community violence, protective factors and adolescent mental health: A profile analysis. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 39, 176-186.
Covey, H. C., Menard, S., & Franzese, R. J. (2013). Effects of adolescent physical abuse, exposure to neighborhood violence, and witnessing parental violence on adult socioeconomic status. Child Maltreatment, 18(2), 85-97.
Currie, J., & Spatz Widom, C. (2010). Long-term consequences of child abuse and neglect on adult economic well-being. Child Maltreatment, 13(2), 111-120.
Damm, A. P., & Dustmann, C. (2014). Does growing up in a high crime neighborhood affect youth criminal behavior?. American Economic Rerieip, 104(6), 1806-32.
Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., Okut, H., Strycker, L. A., & Hix-Small, H. (2003). A multilevel contextual model of neighborhood collective efficacy. American Journal of Community Psychology, 72(3-4), 245-252.
DuRant, R. H., Cadenhead, C., Pendergrast, R. A., Slavens, G., & Linder, C. W. (1994). Factors associated with the use of violence among urban black adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 84(4), 612-617.
Eichelsheim, V. I., Buist, K. L., Dekovic, M., Wissink, I. B., Frijns, T., Van Lier, P. A., ... &
Meeus, W. H. (2010). Associations among the parent—adolescent relationship, aggression and delinquency in different ethnic groups: a replication across two Dutch samples. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric epidemiology, 45(f), 293-300.
Edens, J. F., Cavell, T. A. & Hughes, J. N. (1999). The self-systems of aggressive children: a cluster-analytic investigation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 441-453.
Farrell, A. D., & Bruce, S. E. (1997). Impact of exposure to community violence on violent behavior and emotional distress among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26(f), 2-14.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
37
Farver, J. A. M., Xu, Y., Eppe, S., Fernandez, A., & Schwartz, D. (2005). Community violence, family conflict, and preschoolers' socioemotional functioning. Developmental Psychology, 7/(1), 160.
Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Ormrod, R., & Hamby, S. L. (2009). Violence, abuse, and crime exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics, 124(5), 1411-1423.
Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Hamby, S. L., & Ormrod, R. (2011). Polyvictimization: Children's
Exposure to Multiple Types of Violence, Crime, and Abuse. National Survey of Children’s Exposure to l Tiolence.
Finkelhor, D., Turner, H. A., Shattuck, A., & Hamby, S. L. (2013). Violence, crime, and abuse exposure in a national sample of children and youth: an update. JAdSlA Pediatrics, 167(7), 614-621.
Fitzpatrick, K. M. (1993). Exposure to violence and presence of depression among low-income, African-American youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61(5), 528.
Fitzpatrick, K. M., & Boldizar, J. P. (1993). The prevalence and consequences of exposure to violence among African-American youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 72(2), 424-430.
Fowler, P. J., Tompsett, C. J., Braciszewski, J. M., Jacques-Tiura, A. J., & Baltes, B. B. (2009). Community violence: A meta-analysis on the effect of exposure and mental health outcomes of children and adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 21(1), 227-259.
Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1985). Children’s perceptions of the personal relationship in their social networks. Developmental Psychology, 21(6), 1016-1024.
Gauvin, L., Robitaille, E., Riva, M., McLaren, L., Dassa, C., & Potvin, L. (2007). Conceptualizing and operationalizing neighbourhoods. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 98(1), S18-S26.
Gaylord-Harden, N. K., Dickson, D., & Pierre, C. (2016). Profiles of community violence
exposure among African American youth: An examination of desensitization to violence using latent class analysis. Journal of Interpersonal l Tiolence, 31(11), 2077-2101.
Gorman-Smith, D., Henry, D. B., & Tolan, P. H. (2004). Exposure to community violence and violence perpetration: The protective effects of family functioning. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(5), 439-449.
Gorman—Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and
developmental problems among inner-city youth. Development and Psychopathology, 10(1), 101-116.
Greenberg, M. T., Lengua, L. J., Coie, J. D., Pinderhughes, E. E., Bierman, K., Dodge, K. A., ... & McMahon, R. J. (1999). Predicting developmental outcomes at school entry using a multiple-risk model: Four American communities. DevelopmentalPsychology, 35(2), 403.
Guerra, N. G., Rowell Huesmann, L., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development, 74(5), 1561-1576.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
38
Harrison, A. O., Wilson, M. N., Pine, C. J., Chan, S. Q., & Buriel, R. (1990). Family ecologies of ethnic minority children. Child Development., 61(2), 347-362.
Hill, T. D., & Maimon, D. (2013). Neighborhood context and mental health. In Handbook of the Sociology of Mental Health (pp. 479-501). Springer, Dordrecht.
Hipp, J. R., & Boessen, A. (2013). Egohoods as waves washing across the city: A new measure of “neighborhoods”. Criminology, 61(2), 287-327.
Katz, L. F., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Buffering children from marital conflict and dissolution.
Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26(2), 157-171.
Kersten, L., Vriends, N., Steppan, M., Raschle, N. M., Praetzlich, M., Oldenhof, H., ... &
Martinelli, A. (2017). Community violence exposure and conduct problems in children and adolescents with conduct disorder and healthy controls. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 11, 219.
Kliewer, W., Lepore, S. J., Oskin, D., & Johnson, P. D. (1998). The role of social and cognitive processes in children's adjustment to community violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(1), 199.
Kwak, K. (2003). Adolescents and their parents: A review of intergenerational family relations for immigrant and non-immigrant families. Human Development, 46(2-3), 115-136.
Lewis, D. A., & Riger, S. (1986). Crime as Stress. In Predefining SocialProblems (pp. 185-200). Springer, Boston, MA.
Linares, L. O., Heeren, T., Bronfman, E., Zuckerman, B., Augustyn, M., & Tronick, E. (2001). A mediational model for the impact of exposure to community violence on early child behavior problems. Child Development, 72(2), 639-652.
Lynch, M. (2003). Consequences of children's exposure to community violence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Preview, 6(f), 265-274.
Lorion, R. P., & Saltzman, W. (1993). Children’s exposure to community violence: Following a path from concern to research to action. Psychiatry, 66(1), 55-65.
Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and community violence on children.
Annual Review of Psychology, 61(1), 445-479.
Martinez, S. M., Blanco, E., Delva, J., Burrows, R., Reyes, M., Lozoff, B., & Gahagan, S. (2014). Perception of neighborhood crime and drugs increases cardiometabolic risk in Chilean adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 64(6), 718-723.
Mazza, J. J., & Reynolds, W. M. (1999). Exposure to violence in young inner-city adolescents: Relationships with suicidal ideation, depression, and PTSD symptomatology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27(3), 203-213.
McCart, M. R., Smith, D. W., Saunders, B. E., Kilpatrick, D. G., Resnick, H., & Ruggiero, K. J.
(2007). Do urban adolescents become desensitized to community violence? Data from a national survey. American Journal of Orthopsychiatiy, 77(3), 434-442.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
39
McCoy, D. C. (2013). Early violence exposure and self-regulatory development: A bioecological systems perspective. Human Development., 56(4), 254-273.
McCoy, D. C., Raver, C. C., & Sharkey, P. (2015). Children’s cognitive performance and selective attention following recent community violence. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 56(f), 19-36.
McDonald, C. C., & Richmond, T. R. (2008). The relationship between community violence
exposure and mental health symptoms in urban adolescents. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 15(H)), 833-849.
McGee, Z. T., & Baker, S. R. (2002). Impact of violence on problem behavior among
adolescents: Risk factors among an urban sample. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 18(1), 74-93.
McMahon, S. D., Grant, K. E., Compas, B. E., Thurm, A. E., & Ey, S. (2003). Stress and
psychopathology in children and adolescents: is there evidence of specificity?. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44(1), 107-133.
Meeus, W.H.J., Akse, J., Branje, S.J.T., ter Bogt, T.F.M., Crommelin, P.M., Delsing, M.J.M.H., et al., (2010). Codebook of the research project CONflict And Management Of Relationships (CONASAORE). Unpublished manuscript, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.
Miller, L. S., Wasserman, G. A., Neugebauer, R., Gorman-Smith, D., & Kamboukos, D. (1999).
Witnessed community violence and antisocial behavior in high-risk, urban boys. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 28(1), 2-11.
Montemayor, R. (1983). Parents and adolescents in conflict: All families some of the time and some families most of the time. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 3(1-2), 83-103.
Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality,
collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 59(3), 517-558.
Morrison-Gutman, L., McLoyd, V.C., & Tokoyawa, T. (2005). Financial strain, neighbourhood stress, parenting behaviors, and adolescent adjustment in urban African American families. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 15(4), 425-499.
Mrug, S., Loosier, P. S., & Windle, M. (2008). Violence exposure across multiple contexts:
Individual and joint effects on adjustment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78(1), 70-84.
O'Keefe, M. (1997). Adolescents' exposure to community and school violence: Prevalence and behavioral correlates. Journal of Adolescent Health, 20(5), 368-376.
Osofsky, J. D. (1999). The impact of violence on children. The Future of Children, 33-49.
Osofsky, J. D., Wewers, S., Hann, D. M., & Fick, A. C. (1993). Chronic community violence: What is happening to our children?. Psychiatry, 56(1), 36-45.
Osofsky, J. D., & Fenichel, E. (1994). Caring for infants and toddlers in violent environments: Hurt, healing, and hope. Zero to Three, 13 (3), 1-44).


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
40
Osofsky, J. D. (2003). Prevalence of children's exposure to domestic violence and child
maltreatment: Implications for prevention and intervention. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 6(3), 161-170.
Papachristos, A. V., & Bastomski, S. (2018). Connected in crime: The enduring effect of neighborhood networks on the spatial patterning of violence. American Journal of Sociology, 124(2), 517-568.
Pearlin, L. I. (1989). The sociological study of stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 241-256.
Peterson, R. D., & Krivo, L. J. (2009). Segregated spatial locations, race-ethnic composition, and neighborhood violent crime. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 623(1), 93-107.
Pynoos, R. S., Frederick, C., Nader, K., Arroyo, W., Steinberg, A., Eth, S., ... & Fairbanks, L. (1987). Life threat and posttraumatic stress in school-age children. Archives of General Psychiatry, 77(12), 1057-1063.
Rankin, B. H., & Quane, J. M. (2002). Social contexts and urban adolescent outcomes: The
interrelated effects of neighborhoods, families, and peers on African-American youth.
Social Problems, 49(f), 79-100.
Richters, J. E., & Martinez, P. (1993). The NIMH community violence project: I. Children as victims of and witnesses to violence. Psychiatry, 36(f), 7-21.
Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (2009). Neighborhood disorder, subjective alienation, and distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30(1), 49-64.
Saltzman, W. R., Pynoos, R. S., Layne, C. M., Steinberg, A. M., & Aisenberg, E. (2001). Trauma-and grief-focused intervention for adolescents exposed to community violence: Results of a school-based screening and group treatment protocol. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3(f), 291.
Sampson, R. J. (1997). Collective regulation of adolescent misbehavior: Validation results from eighty Chicago neighborhoods. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(2), 227-244.
Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing “neighborhood
effects”: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 443-478.
Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A
new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 103(f), 603-651.
Schwab-Stone, M. E., Ayers, T. S., Kasprow, W., Voyce, C., Barone, C., Shriver, T., & Weissberg, R. P. (1995). No safe haven: A study of violence exposure in an urban community. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(10), 1343-1352.
Schwab-Stone, M., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Silver, D., Lichtman, J., & Voyce, C. (1999). No safe haven II: The effects of violence exposure on urban youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child A Adolescent Psychiatry, 38(4), 359-367.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
41
Schwartz, D., & Proctor, L. J. (2000). Community violence exposure and children's social
adjustment in the school peer group: The mediating roles of emotion regulation and social cognition. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(4), 670.
Shankardass, K., Jerrett, M., Milam, J., Richardson, J., Berhane, K., & McConnell, R. (2011). Social environment and asthma: associations with crime and No Child Left Behind programmes. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 65(10), 859-865.
Shareck, M., & Ellaway, A. (2011). Neighbourhood crime and smoking: the role of objective and perceived crime measures. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 930.
Sharkey, P. T., Tirado-Strayer, N., Papachristos, A. V., & Raver, C. C. (2012). The effect of local violence on children’s attention and impulse control. American Journal of Public Health, 102(17), 2287-2293.
Sharkey, P. (2010). The acute effect of local homicides on children's cognitive performance.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(26), 11733-11738.
Singer, M. I., Anglin, T. M., Yu Song, L., & Lunghofer, L. (1995). Adolescents' exposure to violence and associated symptoms of psychological trauma. Jama, 273(6), 477-482.
Statistics Netherlands (2006). Kerncijfers Postcodegebieden, 2004 [Key figures for postcode areas, 2004]. The Hague: Statistics Netherlands.
Tillyer, M. S., Fisher, B. S., & Wilcox, P. (2011). The effects of school crime prevention on students’ violent victimization, risk perception, and fear of crime: A multilevel opportunity perspective. Justice Quarterly, 28(2), 249-277.
Tita, G. E., & Radii, S. M. (2010). Spatial regression models in criminology: Modeling social processes in the spatial weights matrix. In Handbook of Quantitative Criminology (pp. 101 -121). Springer, New York, NY.
Tita, G. E., & Greenbaum, R. T. (2009). Crime, neighborhoods, and units of analysis: putting space in its place. In Putting Crime in its Place (pp. 145-170). Springer, New York, NY.
Turner, H. A., Shattuck, A., Hamby, S., & Finkelhor, D. (2013). Community disorder,
victimization exposure, and mental health in a national sample of youth. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 54(f), 258-275.
Turner, R. J., Wheaton, B., & Lloyd, D. A. (1995). The epidemiology of social stress. American S ociological Review, 104-125.
Visser, P., van Dam, F., & Hooimeijer, P. (2008). Residential environment and spatial variation in house prices in the Netherlands. Tijdschrft voorEconomische en Sociale Geografie, 99, 348-360.
Vogel, M. (2016). The modifiable areal unit problem in person—context research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 53(1), 112-135.
Vogel, M., & South, S. J. (2016). Spatial dimensions of the effect of neighborhood disadvantage on delinquency. Criminology, 54(f), 434-458.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
42
Wadsworth, M. E., & Compas, B. E. (2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain:
The adolescent perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12(2), 243-274.Wemer, E. E. (1995). Resilience in development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(3), 81-84.
Van Wilsem, J., Wittebrood, K., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). Socioeconomic dynamics of
neighborhoods and the risk of crime victimization: A multilevel study of improving, declining, and stable areas in the Netherlands. Social Problems, 53(2), 226-247.
Wilson, H. W., Stover, C. S., & Berkowitz, S. J. (2009). Research Review: The relationship
between childhood violence exposure and juvenile antisocial behavior: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50(f), 769-779.
Wilson, D. K., Kliewer, W., Teasley, N., Plybon, L., & Sica, D. A. (2002). Violence exposure,
catecholamine excretion, and blood pressure nondipping status in African American male versus female adolescents. Psychosomatic Medicine, 64(6), 906-915.
Wilson-Genderson, M., & Pruchno, R. (2013). Effects of neighborhood violence and perceptions of neighborhood safety on depressive symptoms of older adults. Social Science e>’
Medicine, 85, 43 49.
Zeoli, A. M., Pizarro, J. M., Grady, S. C., & Melde, C. (2014). Homicide as infectious disease: Using public health methods to investigate the diffusion of homicide. Justice Quarterly, 31(3), 609-632.Zielinski, D. S. (2009). Child maltreatment and adult socioeconomic well-being. Child abuse e>’ neglect, 33(10), 666-678.
Zimmerman, G. M., & Posick, C. (2016). Risk factors for and behavioral consequences of direct versus indirect exposure to violence. American Journal of Public Health, 106(1), 178-188.
Zimmerman, G. M., & Messner, S. F. (2013). Individual, family background, and contextual explanations of racial and ethnic disparities in youths’ exposure to violence. American Journal of Public Health, 103(3), 435-442.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
43
APPENDIX: The Effect of Neighborhood Violence on Child-Parent Conflict
Variables Description
Conflict with parents (DV) - Time variant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) as a scale (0-4) and involves six questions from the Network of Relationships Inventory including: “do you and your mother/father annoy each other and do you become angry with each other?”, “do you and your mother/father get on each other’s nerves?”, “how often do you disagree with your mother/father and are you arguing?”, “are you and your mother/father annoyed with each other’s behavior?”, “how often are you and your mother/father squabbling or arguing?”, and “do you and your mother/father bother each other and behave overcritical towards each other?”. The five response categories range from ‘little or not at all’ (0) to ‘more is not possible’ (4). Scales were combined for both parents to obtain an overall, time-varying measure of conflicts with parents.
Violence in the home - Time variant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) separately in regard to responses for each parent. Operationalized as “how often in the last seven days did you have a conflict with your mother/father involving hitting or violence”. Responses were treated as a dummy variable (0=no reported violence in the home, l=reported violence in the home)
Sex - Time invariant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) using binary gender response categories, treated as a dummy variable (female=0, male=l)
Cohort - Time invariant, individual level Categories (CONAMORE) include ‘early to middle’ adolescents (mean age at wave 1 = 12.4) and ‘middle-to-late’ adolescents (mean age at wave 1= 16.7). Treated as a dummy variable (early-to-middle=0, middle-to-late =1).
Parents’ foreign origin - Time invariant, individual level Operationalized (Statistics Netherlands) as both parents being born outside the Netherlands/both parents being Dutch natives. Treated as a dummy variable (at least one parent born in the Netherlands=0, both parents born outside the Netherlands=l).
Local violent crime - variant, neighborhood level Represents the yearly number of violent crimes registered with the Dutch National Police Services per 1000 persons within a six-digit postcode (Statistics Netherlands). Violent crimes are operationalized by Statistics Netherlands as “an attack or abuse involving punching/kicking, or use of a gun, knife, or using a physical weapon against someone (or threatening to do so). It can involve physical abuse, violence with sexual intentions, or threatening.


NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD-PARENT CONFLICT
44
Extralocal violent crime -
Time invariant, neighborhood level
Neighborhood wealth -
Time invariant, neighborhood level
Applies a spatially lagged, distance-weighted measure of violent crime occurrences within “extralocal” (two-mile radius) neighborhoods. This variable is created by, first, measuring the distance from the center of each focal postcode to the center of each nearby postcode within a two-mile radius, and then by weighing the level of crime by the inverse of the distance the postcode from the focal tract, thereby assigning more weight to violence that happens nearby and less to violence that happens further away.
Measured via a scale of average property values within each respective six-digit postcode (Statistics Netherlands, 2004).


Full Text

PAGE 1

THE EFFECT OF NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE ON CHILD PARENT CONFLICT By MATTHEW PAUL BEST B. A ., Metropolitan State University of Denver 2015 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado Denver in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Criminal Justice School of Public Affairs 2019

PAGE 2

! ii ©2019 MATTHEW PAUL BEST ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

! iii This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Matthew Paul Best h as been approved for the Criminal Justice Program by Callie Marie Rennison, Chair Sheila Huss Jamie Van Leeuwen Date: April 19, 2019

PAGE 4

! iv Best, Matthew Paul (MCJ, Criminal Justice Program ) The Effect of Neighborhood Violence and Poverty on Child parent Conflict Thesis directed by Professor Callie Rennison ABSTRACT By employing multiple data sources (e.g., youth survey data, spatially detailed crime data, Statistics Netherlands data), this paper investigates the spatial effects of violence on intra family conflict. An extensive body of theoretical and empirical research has documented the deleterious effects of community violence on adolescents within urban areas, however, few studies have considered the relationship between community violence and child parent conflict through a spatially refined lens. By utilizing five waves of longitudinal panel data (n=763, observation s=3,361) combined with police records of violent crime in Utrecht, Netherlands, we use a hybrid tobit regression to distinguish spatial effects of violence at the neighborhood level (unit mean=17 homes). We assess and address effects of exposure to violenc e at local and extralocal levels, and highlight the necessity to control for intra family violence. Results indicate that youth experiencing high levels of neighborhood violence report higher levels of conflict with parents than youth with low exposure to neighborhood violence. Implications of intra family conflict within high risk, urban environments are discussed from a policy/practice standpoint. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Callie Marie Renniso n

PAGE 5

! v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 1 Research Contributions ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ .. 2 Violence and Conflict ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ . 2 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ .... 4 Defining Existing Problems ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ É 4 Measurement ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ .. 4 Exposure Type ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ ... 6 Neighborhood Context ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ .. 6 Longitudinal Effects ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ ... 8 Spatial Effe cts ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 9 Extralocal Ef fects ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 1 1 Poverty, Race, and Exposu re to Violence ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 1 2 Stress and Neighbo rhood Context ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 1 3 Stress and Child Parent Conflict ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 1 4 Child Parent Conflict and Neighborhood Contex t ÉÉÉÉÉÉ ÉÉÉÉÉ 1 5 The Role of Intra Family Relationship s in High Risk Communities É.. 1 6 Responses to Neighborh ood Violence ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 1 7 III. CURR ENT STUDY ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 1 9 Research Quest ions ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 1 9 IV. DATA, MEASURES, AND METHODS ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 20 Data ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 20 Measu res ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.... 21 Dependent Variable ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 21 Independent Variables Ð Individual Level ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 21

PAGE 6

! vi Independent Variables Ð Neighborhood Level ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 22 Control Variable ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 23 Analytical M ethod ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 23 V. RESULT S ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 21 Univariate Frequencies ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 21 Hybrid Tobit Regres sion: RQ 1 ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 22 Within Individual ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 26 Between Individual ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 27 Hybrid Tobit Regres sion: RQ 2 ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 2 7 Within Individual ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 28 Between Individual ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 28 VI. DISCUSS ION ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ 2 9 Implications for Practice and Policy ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.. 31 Implications for Resear ch ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 33 Strengths and Lim itations ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 33 REFERENCES ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 35

PAGE 7

! vii LIST OF TABLES TABLES 1. Descriptive Statistics ÉÉ ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 2 5 2. Hybrid Tobit Regression ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ... 2 6

PAGE 8

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 1 CHAPTER I I NTRODUCTION Approximately 60% of children and adolescents in the United States are either directly or indirectly exposed to interpersonal violence, and 10.2% report being exposed to a form of maltreatment by a significant adult in their life (Finkelhor et al., 2009). A study in the Netherlands found that 46% of persons had been victims of violence (Wilsem, Witterbrood, & De Graaf, 2006). A large body of empirical literature has documented the effects of exposure to community violence on adolescents (for an overview see Margolin & Gordis, 2000; Lynch, 2003), and exposure to violence within the home, school, and community contexts have been found to have strong independent effects on both internalizing and externalizing problems, including depression, substance abuse, del inquency, and conduct disorder (Mrug, Loosier & Windle, 2008, Kersten et al; 2017). To our knowledge, however, no current studies consider relationships between local and extralocal violence and child parent conflict and include the important control varia ble of violence occurring within the home. As adolescents age, their sphere of interactions within the community expand, thereby exposing them to potential acts of violence immediately outside of their residential neighborhoods. While exposure to community violence increases as children advance beyond primary school (Overstreet, 2000), relatively few studies have considered how broad community features influence youth development and family conflict. A deeper understanding of both spatial and longitudinal i mplications of violence exposure for adolescent aged youth is therefore necessary. The present study examines how exposure to neighborhood violence affects child parent conflict within a sample of Dutch adolescents in Utrecht, the Netherlands.

PAGE 9

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 2 Researc h Contributions Effects of neighborhood violence on child parent conflicts are of special importance given the role that interfamilial relationships play in reducing a multitude of negative outcomes for youth in high risk environments . Contributions of thi s study are two fold. First, prior studies ha ve explored effects of violence on intra family relationships dynamics, however, less understood are spatial effects of violence on child parent conflict. Using data on small spatial scales allows us to better map and understand interactions between violent crime that occurs within (1) an individual's immediate proximity (mean=17 homes) and (2) an individual's surrounding proximity (radius=2 miles). A second contribution we add includ es considering proper methodological controls within spatial violence research intend ing to examine effects of indirect exposure to violence . By controlling for violence that occurs between children and parents, we highlight th e necessitation of consider ing in home violence when seeking effects of indirect violence exposure. To address this important topic, the thesis is structured as follows. We begin by reviewing recent, relevant research on neighborhood violence. Drawing from this literature, we next develop several hypotheses regarding the associations between neighborhood violence and child parent conflict. We empirically assess our research questions by applying a hybrid tobit model to our respective data. Finally, we present findings, and a discussion of the findings . Violence and Conflict We consider child parent confl ict to be non physical, negative interactions between children and their caregivers which involv es anger, tension, and arguments. In attempts to address the prevalent use of less than ideal measures of community violence (e.g., self report within undefined spatial regions), our study utilizes objectively reported violence (via police records) geocoded to postcodes; and we consider neighborhood violence to be synonymous with both indirect and direct exposure to violence occurring within clearly defined spati al areas.

PAGE 10

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 3 Further, w e define child parent violence as physical violence that takes place between a child and their caregiver 1 . 1 Despite the distinctions noted between our dependent variable Ôconflict with parents' and control variable Ôchild parent violence', in order to avoid any potential overlap, a bivariate correlation was performed. Respective coefficients between conflict wi th parents and child parent violence are 0.24 (mom), and 0.28 (dad).

PAGE 11

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 4 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Defining Existing Problems Negative implications of exposure to violence for youth are well documented, however, less clear is the approach by which to conceptualize the community/neighborhood, forms of violence experienced within communities (direct/indirect exposure), and their re spective effects. While a number of studies have linked violence exposure to detrimental outcomes, inconsistencies remain as to how to conceptualize, operationalize, and measure exposure. Generally, there is a lack of consensus on what defines and operatio nalizes neighborhood violence, and overall, there is a lack of consistency in measurement and analysis, including assessment of proximity and time frame of exposure, victimization, and witnessing of community violence (for a full review, see McDonald & Ric hmond 2008). Measurement I n many studies, measures of neighborhood violence are based on children' s or adult 's self reports of violence either through something that happened to another person or being personally victimized. In this type of operationalization, exposure to community violence is tied directly to the respondent's personal experience. As with other neighborhood characteristics, the merits and drawbacks of using subjective versus objective measures of community violence have been heavily debated (Hill & Maimon 2013; McCoy 2013; Turner et al. , 2013). Often, the definition of neighborhood or community v iolence is self reported through survey questions intended to gauge the perceived levels of violence in one's community (Covey, Menard, & Franzese, 2013; Martinez et al . , 2013). In many studies, measures of neighborhood violence are based on childrens' or adults' self reports of violence either through something that happened to another person or being personally victimized. Using this type of operationalization, exposure to community violence is tied directly to the respondent's individual experience. Wh ile such

PAGE 12

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 5 experiences do provide an approximation of the true rate of violence occurring in the community, they are prone to the well documented issue of recall bias commonplace in self report survey methodology. Police records of violent crime, for example , provide an objective measure of how much violence may be occurring within a community (even though the violence may not be directed at or witnessed by a child), however, many crimes go unreported to police. Thus, many researchers have found it relevant t o assess both the individual's direct experience of violence as well as officially reported instances of violence (McCoy, Raver, & Sharkey, 2015; Sharkey & Sampson 2010; Sharkey et al. , 2012). It is argued that regardless of whether the violence is experie nced firsthand, that violence can still exert influences on children's development by affecting the availability and adequacy of resources and supports as well as impacting the emotional well being and approach to daily life for families (Fowler et al. , 20 09). Exposure T ype In order to create a framework for measuring community violence exposure, exposure is generally delineated into two broad categories: (1) being a victim of violence and (2) witnessing violence (Zimmerman & Posick, 2016). Various resea rchers have gone into detail by operationalizing exposure to violence as personal experience (victimization), seeing violence happen to others, exposure to media violence, and also indirect or vicarious instances of exposure (hearing about violence in one' s community, knowing someone who experienced violence) (Cooley, Turner, & Beidel, 1995; Finkelhor, 2011). The majority of extant literature on violence, however both in neighborhood and non neighborhood contexts does not differentiate between indirect and direct exposure to violence and generally includes multiple forms of exposure. Disentangling the nature of exposure as either direct or indirect is important to correctly conceptualize and measure effects of exposure to violence, as individual response s tend to be contingent upon type and duration of exposure (Ainsberg & Ell, 2005); youths will typically exhibit internalizing behaviors (e.g., depression, anxiety, suicidality), externalizing behaviors (e.g.,

PAGE 13

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 6 subsequent violence/delinquency, aggression, c onflict with parents, conflict with peers), or a combination of both (Fowler et al., 2009; Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler, 2003). It is, therefore, necessary to consider the contexts of violence in order to (1) parse effects of context and exposure type, (2 ) better understand interactions between direct and indirect exposure, (3) understand the role that indirect violence exposure has on familial relationships, and (4) be responsive to needs of adolescents experiencing and/or witnessing various forms of loca l violence. Correlates, consequences, and influencing mechanisms related to being a victim of violent crime can significantly differ from those that are related to indirect exposures of violence (Schwartz & Proctor, 2000). Generally, when considering indi rect effects of neighborhood violence, approaches to measuring violence fail to consider direct experiences of violence and victimization within the home. When working with spatially detailed data to analyze effects of neighborhood violence (e.g., via indi rect exposure), this approach can be problematic, prone to model misspecification, and ultimately to erroneously contributing direct experiences of violence/victimization within the home to effects of indirect violence exposure. Neighborhood C ontext Despite the resurge of in interest in studying characteristics of small unit areas (e.g., neighborhoods) and the salient benefits of identifying policy initiatives relevant within community contexts, defining and measuring Ôneighborhoods' remains a dauntin g challenge. Generally speaking, two neighborhood frameworks ecological and social have been identified (Gauvin et al., 2007). Ecological definitions of neighborhoods tend to focus on the built environment, e.g., geographically defined spaces such as c ensus blocks, census tracts, or street segments, (Burdick Will, 2018, Hipp, 2013; Sampson & Raudenbush, 1999; Shankardass et al., 2011; Wilson Genderson & Pruchno, 2013). Alternate approaches can vary depending upon country but

PAGE 14

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 7 typically utilize some form of geographically refined data (Damm & Dustman, 2014; Shareck & Ellaway, 2011). Research further suggests that varying aggregations of Ôneighborhood' effects based on the modifiability of areal units allows arbitrarily defined boundaries to be used (Vogel, 2016), and there is a growing recognition that potential biases may result from arbitrarily defined spatial regions and neighborhood borders (Hipp & Boessen, 2013). The variation of ways in which to conceptualize neighborhoods and communities not only con tributes to largely varied estimates of effects of local violence but additionally makes it extremely difficult to generalize findings across studies (Aisan & Ell, 2005; Overstreet, 2000). Further, little empirical research gives appropriate consideration to the interrelated social contexts characteristic of neighborhoods (e.g., communal ties, social interaction patterns, peer relations), and even less uses data appropriate for multilevel analyses of neighborhood effects (Rankin & Quane, 2002; Sampson et al ., 1997). Social definitions of neighborhoods emphasize individual's social networks and daily activity patterns and consider work location, shopping areas, local hangouts, and places in walking distance for a particular sample demographic which (1) genera lly do not fall within traditionally defined territories (e.g., postcodes, census blocks) and (2) rely upon self reported measures of Ôneighborhood'. This angle is especially relevant to crime and violent activity, as research has shown offenders to have h igher likelihoods of committing crimes at locations close/convenient to them (Bernasco & Block, 2009; Block, Galary, & Brice, 2007), Recent research calls for integrating a socioecological approach by which neighborhoods are conceptualized via considering individual perceptions of neighborhood/community and geographically defined neighborhoods/communities, as the two are not synonymous and tend to overlap (Hipp & Boessen, 2013). For the purpose of discussing literature relevant to our study, first, we wil l identify longitudinal effects (direct and indirect), spatial effects (indirect), and extralocal effects (direct and indirect) of community violence. Second, given that impacts on individuals are central to studies

PAGE 15

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 8 of community violence exposure, empirica l relationships between residential characteristics (e.g., poverty and race), socio emotional implications of violence exposure (e.g., stress, conflict), and responses to community violence are considered. Longitudinal Effects Researchers often contend t hat children's threatening community experiences affect their well being by increasing their psychological stress, disrupting their processing of social information, and altering ways in which they selectively engage with Ñ or disengage from Ñ their environme nts (Aneshensel & Sucoff 1996; Massey 2004; Ross & Mirowsky 200 9 ). Studies from clinical psychology, sociology, and medicine have also drawn robust relationships between early exposure to community violence in disadvantaged communities and increases in sel f reported symptoms of aggression, posttraumatic stress, and social cognition (Fowler et al., 2009; Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler 2003, Margolin & Gordis 2000). Studies in which the reporting method was not via self report (e.g., reports of childhood behavi or by mothers and school teachers) have yielded similar results, and suggest that childhood exposure to community violence is related to acute symptoms of distress and aggression (Farver et al., 2005). In addition to immediate negative consequences, expos ure to violence affects the behavioral trajectories of individuals over the life course. People who have been exposed to violence early in life typically report higher levels of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, anti social behavior, school disengageme nt, academic failure, impaired social relationships, and criminal justice involvement (Burdick Will, 2016; Cooley Quille, Turner, & Beidel, 1995; Cooley Strickland et al., 2009; McGee & Baker, 2002; Pynoos et al., 1987; Schwab Stone et al., 1995; Schwab Stone et al., 1995; Singer et al., 1995; Wilson et al., 2009). For example, in a study of juvenile justice involved youth, those who had been exposed to neighborhood violence were four times more likely to have committed serious criminal acts (Shelt on & Preski, 2001). Several longitudinal studies (Brookmeyer, Henrich, & Schwab Stone, 2005; Farrell & Bruce, 1997;

PAGE 16

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 9 Gorman Smith & Tolan, 1998; Miller, Wasserman, Neugebauer, Gorman Smith, & Kamboukos, 1999; Schwab Stone et al., 1999) have demonstrated inc reased levels of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology in relation to community violence exposure, even after controlling for prior levels of these problems. Other consequences of community violence exposure include high levels of hopelessness, a diminished sense of purpose (Durant et al., 1994), suicide ideation ( Mazza & Reynolds 1999) and suicidality (Lambert, Copeland Linder, & Ialongo, 2008). Spatial Effects Using neighborhood fixed effects, Sharkey and Sampson (2010) measured the impact of recent, local homicides on children by comparing scores on cognitive assessments among students living within the same neighborhood at different times (some were assessed in the days following a local homicide, whereas others were assessed months later or earlier). In each case, the estimated effects of recent local homicides were substantial, suggesting that local homicides have an acute effect on children's test performance that fades as the window of time between the homicide and the assessment widens. T he magnitude of the cognitive effect also varied strongly depending on the proximity of the homicide to the child's residence. In the sample overall, effects of a homicide appear strongest when occurring close to a child's home (within the block group of r esidence), and are smaller for homicides occurring within the census tract or neighborhood cluster. The identification strategy used in this study addresses the "selection bias problem" by exploiting variations in recency of local homicides arising from th e relative timing of interview assessments and local homicides among children in families residing in the same neighborhood. Importantly, this method is designed to capture only the acute impact of homicides. Although by design it does not provide any info rmation on permanent impacts of local violence (e.g., heightened interpersonal conflict, well being), these findings point to the broader impact that

PAGE 17

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 10 extreme acts of violence can have on children across a neighborhood, regardless of whether violence is wit nessed directly. In a similar vein, Sharkey et al. (2012) tested via a randomized control trial whether exposure to homicides occurring within close geographic proximity (e.g., radius) to children's homes affected children's cognitive ability. This study found that children who were assessed within one week of a homicide occurring within 2500 ft. of their home exhibited lower levels of attention, impulse control, and academic skills. The magnitude of observed effects increased as homicide exposures were cl oser to a child's residence (e.g., 1000 ft.). These results suggest that local violence does, in fact, have direct implications for children's cognitive functioning in ways which may place them at significant risk of longer term psychological difficulties. The analysis additionally showed strong positive effects of local violence on parental distress, providing suggestive evidence that familial stress may be a likely pathway by which local violence impacts young children. In addition to highlighting how exp osure to homicide generates acute psychological distress among caregivers and impairs children's self regulatory behavior and cognitive functioning, their findings suggest that lack of safety represents a significant form of socio spatial inequality for fa milies and children living in economically and racially stratified urban communities. Links between social stratification and stress highlight ways which violence, a strong correlate of socioeconomic disadvantage, may be linked to cognitive processing and family functioning. Simply, the immediate costs of living near violence, even if episodic, are high. Seeking to merge sociological and neurobiological literatures, McCoy, Raver, and Sharkey (2015) explored the spatial connections between violent crime and children's cognitive performance. In contrast to previous studies that measured perceived/self reported crime exposure, they used objective police reports of recent community violence to estimate effects of individual crimes on the immediate outcomes of ch ildren (who may or may not be aware of their occurrence). Specifically, with a radial distance fixed effects approach, individual violent crimes were geocoded and served as a proxy for each child's neighborhood exposure. Of the residential

PAGE 18

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 11 communities exam ined, children living close to a recent violent crime showed significantly worse patterns of cognitive performance and selective attention relative to their peers from the same communities who were assessed before or well after a violent crime occurred. Al though this approach does not permit nuanced understanding of specific mechanisms linking violent crime and outcomes for children, it does take into account the ways that violence indirectly affects children Ñ consciously or unconsciously Ñ through more subtle but temporally linked changes in the environment (e.g., peers' emotional reactions, changes in parenting practices, increased police presence), even when the child is not directly victimized or even aware that the violence has taken place. In fact, these results build on previous studies that similarly find that even hearing secondhand about community violence affects child wellbeing, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (Fowler et al., 2009). Extralocal Effects Well documented concentrations of crime within urban areas serve as a sort of spatially organized social fact supporting a Ôblock tile' perspective of neighborhoods, with rates of crime organized by geographic boundaries across maps of neighborhoods. Spati al studies of neighborhoods, however, underscore the fact that neighborhood borders do not function as clear cut boundaries but, rather, are porous. Violence in neighborhoods has spillover effects which influence not only the immediate area but surrounding areas (Peterson & Krivo, 2009); impacts of violence which span across neighboring boundaries have been observed in numerous studies (Browning, Dietz, & Feinberg, 2004; Morenoff, Sampson, & Raudenbush, 2001, Tita & Greenbaum, 2009; Papachristos & Batomski, 2018). A recent study examining homicides in New Jersey observed a spatiotemporal diffusion process by which homicide concentration spread, over 20 years, from the center of Newark to southward, and then westward, directions (Zeoli et al., 2014). Relative ly elevated levels of violence regularly occur between spatially contiguous

PAGE 19

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 12 neighborhoods Ð in other words, violent crime in nearby neighborhoods increases violent crime in a focal neighborhood (Sampson, Morenoff, & Gannon Rowley, 2002). It is hypothesized that the diffusion of neighborhood effects across boundaries are transmitted via (1) concentrations of specific neighborhood characteristics Ð poverty/disadvantage, residential instability, immigration trends, community investments, racial mak eup, (2) types of criminal behavior such as gang activity, drug markets, and sex work, and (3) through co offender relationships (Papachristos & Batomski, 2018, Peterson & Krivo, 2009 ; Sampson, 2012 ; Vogel & South, 2016). The presence of criminogenic ties across neighboring areas can contribute to the transmission of delinquency, and opportunities for criminal offending within a neighborhood (Haynie, 2001; Schaefer, 2012). Simply put, the character of extralocal regions are directly tied to not only crime a nd violence within a focal neighborhood, but to aforementioned effects associated with exposure to violence. Poverty, Race, and Exposure to Violence Researchers have demonstrated how increased and prolonged exposure to violence is often a function of soci o economic status (Cooley Quille et al., 2001; Schwab Stone et al., 1995) which disproportionately effects minority (particularly African American) children's development into adolescence and beyond (Fitzpatrick, 1993; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar 1993; Attar & Guerra 1994). Drawing from a sample of African American and Latino boys and their caregivers from economically disadvantaged inner city neighborhoods in Chicago, Gorman Smith and Tolan (1998) evaluated the relationship between exposure to violence, aggress ion, and depression symptoms. Even when accounting for family relationship, parenting characteristics and previous status, they found that exposure to community violence was related to increases in aggressive behavior and depression over a 1 year period. A dditionally, when considering roles which individual, family, and racial/ethnic characteristic factors play within violence exposure for youth, Zimmerman and Messner (2013) reported that Black and Hispanic youth were disproportionately

PAGE 20

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 13 subjected to higher levels of violence exposure, and, further, that neighborhood disadvantage compounds this effect. Unfortunately, relationships between social disadvantage and violence exposure can seem circular in nature. In a longitudinal national probability sample of A mericans, neighborhood violence experienced by youth was found to predict lower odds of employment in adulthood (Covey, Menard, & Franzese, 2013). Similarly, lower familial socioeconomic status has been shown to be related to higher levels of violence occu rring within the home; further, victims of child abuse/neglect may be socioeconomically affected themselves, as they have been found more likely to have incomes below the poverty line (Zielinski, 2009) and have lower earnings and assets (Currie & Widom, 20 10). Economic resources within communities can serve to act as a protective factor against neighborhood violence and exposure to violence in multiple ways, namely by providing alternatives to engaging in Ôstreet culture'(e.g., after school programs/summer programs), means for community based programs which foster social control and prosocial community networks, parenting programs for inexperienced parents, higher quality educational programs, and economically viable options to attaining income . Race and in dicators of socioeconomic status/disadvantage are therefore imperative to include and control for within mu ltilevel neighbo rhood analyses. Stress and Neighborhood Context Multiple studies have shown that aggression, delinquency, and conduct problems vary systematically with the quality of children's neighborhoods, specifically in that neighborhoods which are characterized by high rates of crime, poverty, single parent households, residential mobility, and unemployment tend to have higher levels of adolesc ent conduct problems (Greenberg, Lengua, Coie, & Pinderhughes, 1999; Sampson, 1997). Persons residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods indexed by social status (e.g., lower socioeconomic status) and

PAGE 21

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 14 ecological contexts (e.g., concentrated poverty) have highe r general levels of stress exposure (Ross & Mirowsky, 2009; Pearlin, 1989; Turner et al., 1995). Therefore, when community conditions worsen, adolescents are likely to experience stress via a variety of sources. To re iterate, children exposed to chronic c ommunity violence are at a higher risk of stress related disorders (PTSD, posttraumatic symptomology) (Kliewer, Lepore, Oskin, & Johnson, 1998; Saltzman et al., 2001). Stress and Child Parent Conflict Family conflict has been reported at higher levels in high risk areas, and child parent conflict may be a function of stress release for adolescents (Duncan, Strycker, Duncan, & Okut; 2002). High levels of life stress are associated with weakened child parent attachment (Stern & Smith, 1995), and further, pa rental distress (e.g., PTSD and depression) has been found to be a significant mediator of behavior problems and symptoms of distress in children (Aisenberg & Ell, 2005, Linares et al., 2001). Therefore, in communities saturated by crime and economic disad vantage, not only are both parents and children exposed to higher levels of stress but, as a result of their own stress, parents are less equipped to steer their children away from problematic behavior. In a review of studies considering stress based respo nses to violence, McMahon et al. (2003) considered outcomes of both community and domestic violence, specifically depression, PTSD, general anxiety, aggression symptoms, and a range of internalizing and externalizing factors. Their findings suggest consist ency in research results in regard to the relationship between neighborhood crime/poverty and youths' externalizing behaviour (specifically aggression, delinquency, and oppositionality). For children who reside in areas characterized by high levels of neig hborhood disorder/disadvantage (e.g., violence, poverty), stress has been found to act as a mechanism to predict aggression and conflict (Attar, Guerra, & Tolan, 1994, Ross & Mirowsky, 2009). To expand upon this notion, Lewis and Riger (1986) found that hi gher crime rates associated with high risk neighborhoods contributed to residents' perceptions of stress

PAGE 22

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 15 regardless of whether they have been victims of crime of whether they have only heard about experiences of victims. Generally speaking, youth conduct problems occur at higher rates for those residing within distressed neighborhoods, however, the identification of processes by which neighborhood contexts influence child behavior and adjustment is a relatively new focus b eing explored (Roosa, Jones, Tein, & Cree, 2003). It is thus necessary to identify processes which help to explain the relationships between neighborhood contexts (crime/poverty) and family conflict; particularly in relation to understanding individual dif ferences in exposure type (e.g., duration, indirect/direct exposure). Child Parent Conflict and Neighborhood Context According to Finkelhor et al. (2013), 58.9% of youth had witnessed a community assault in their lifetime, and 9.6% of youth had experienc ed physical abuse by a known adult. Intra family violence, therefore, is an important measure to control for when aiming to better understand effects of indirect neighborhood violence exposure. Poverty, economic instability, and violence in the immediate v icinity of one's residence immeasurably add to difficulties associated with parenting. Residents in high crime areas tend to express feelings of helplessness and frustration in their inability to protect their children from violence (Lorion & Saltzman, 199 3, Osofsky, 2003). Parents' ability to manage their own stress, trauma, and grief related to violence exposure within impoverished environments greatly affect outcomes of children who are exposed to violence (Osofsky, 1995). For some families, stresses ass ociated with chronic community violence affect the ability of mothers and children to form prosocial attachment relationships (Osofsky & Fenichel , 1994). The role of family child relations appears to play a more prevalent position in moderating the effects of community violence rather than predicting which youth will experience exposure to violence within the community.

PAGE 23

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 16 Numerous studies have found significant relationships highlighting the associations between children's reported exposure to community violence and intra family conflict (Richters & Martinez, 1993; Osofsk y et al; 1993). Additionally, youth tend to report experiencing higher levels of violence within the home around the age of ten (Richters & Martinez, 1993). These reports emphasize the un derstated importance of considering measures of intra family violence in studies of neighborhood context violence in order to understand combined effects and variation in exposure type effects for adolescents (e.g., impacts for adolescents living with high levels of in home and community violence, impacts of varying levels of in home and community violence). The R ole of I ntra F amily R elationships in H igh R isk C ommunities T he family is considered to be the most persistent, prominent, and proximal developmental influence for children (Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993; Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Gorman Smith, Henry, and Tolan (2004) found that for families residing in impoverished, high crime communities, strong parental and family relationship characteristics ac t as influencers deterring youth from violence perpetration. Family structure has been found to moderate relation of both aggression/anxiety and depression for persons exposed to community violence (Gorman Smith & Tolan, 1998), and research, furthermore, i ndicates that a strong relationship with a caring, competent, positive adult (typically a parent) is the most important resource protecting youth from negative effects of violence exposure (Katz & Gottman, 1997; Osofsky, 1999; Werner, 1995). Conflict that occurs between children and their caregivers is of exceptional importance as it acts as an indicator to the fragmentation of supportive bonds which serve as a buffer towards a multitude of negative outcomes adolescents. Therefore, understanding whether and how community violence contributes to adolescent parent conflict is critical to address. Effects of violence on child parent conflict have been documented by prior studies, however, few have

PAGE 24

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 17 examined effects of contextual violence for youth on parental co nflict through a spatially refined lens. Responses to Neighborhood Violence It is important to differentiate between acute and cumulative effects of violence, as outcomes tend to vary based on exposure type. For the purpose of our longitudinal study, we focus on cumulative effects. A number of related studies have reported little or no relationship between cumulative violence exposure and emotional distress, instead positing that desensitization to violence is a more common response (Farrell & Bruce, 199 7; White et al 1998). Lorion and Saltzman (1993) found that children living in a poor, high crime community who had witnessed shootings, police raids, or even a dead body considered the events to be "nothing special". Children who have been exposed to chro nic levels of community violence may have lower than expected mental health symptoms, and may respond by acting uncaring or emotionally desensitized, as they have pathologically adapted to deal with sustained loss ( Cooley Quille, Boyd, Frantz, & Walsh, 200 1; Osofsky, Wewers, Della, & Fick, 1993). Additionally, a dolescents who have become desensitized to violence have been found to exhibit higher likelihoods of engaging in violent behavior without becoming emotionally distressed by it, therefore perpetuating cycles of urban violence (Gaylord Harden, Dickson, & Pierre, 2016). Conversely, others have observed strong associations between chronic violence exposure and psychological distress for youth (Buka, Stichick, Birdthistle, & Earls, 2001; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Mazza & Reynolds, 1999). Wilson et al. (2002) maintain that children who were either victims of violence or had witnessed violence were less likely to exhibit signs of desensitization, and instead, showed signs of hyper arousal as a respons e to violence. Dissociation as a response to violence, characterized as distinct alterations in states of consciousness, is more prevalent within adolescents who have directly experienced more traumatic forms of violence

PAGE 25

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 18 (Carrion & Steiner, 2000; Singer, A nglin, Song, & Lunghofer, 1995). When exploring variations in responses of urban youth to contextual violence versus direct violence exposure (via family violence and sexual assault), McCart et al.'s (2007) work further challenges the desensitization hypot hesis by arguing that community violence exposure (more so than direct forms of violence) is more closely associated with PTSD and subsequent delinquency. Adolescents' responses to cumulative neighborhood violence continue to be regularly debated.

PAGE 26

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 19 CHAPTER III CURRENT STUDY Research Questions This research is guided by two research questions aimed at better understanding the spatial effects of violence on child parent conflict . They are: • ! RQ 1 : To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child parent conflict? • ! RQ 2: To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child parent conflict wh en controlling for child parent violence within the home? In terms of research question one, w e hypothesize that local and extralocal violence are related to intra family conflict . Regarding research question two, we hypothesize that when controlling for v iolence within the home, that local and extralocal violence will fail to be significantly related to conflict within the home.

PAGE 27

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 2 0 CHAPTER IV DATA, MEASURES, AND METHOD S Data Data for this study are drawn from two sources. The first is the Conflict and Management of Relationships (Conamore) panel dataset (n=763), a longitudinal study of Dutch adolescents which examines personality and identity, relationships with parents and pe ers, and emotional and behavioral states (Meeus et al., 2010). Schools (12) were randomly selected and parents and students both received a letter entailing the focus of the study and information in regard to voluntary participation. Less than 1% of select ed respondents chose not to participate (Delsing et al., 2008). Participants, aided by research assistants who provided verbal instruction, completed a series of questionnaires in their classrooms. Students absent on testing days were not assessed. The or iginal Conamore sample included 1,313 respondents and involved two cohorts: Ôearly to middle' adolescents (n=923; 70.3% of total sample; mean age at wave 1= 12.4) and Ômiddle to late' adolescents (n=390; 29.7% of total sample; mean age at wave 1= 16.7). Th e first five annual waves of data were collected between the academic years of 2001 02 and 2005 06. The sixth wave was collected in 2009 10 and included an additional Life History Calendar (LHC) (Caspi et al., 1999) which captured retrospective questions. In our analyses we used data from the first five waves and only utilize the LHC (wave six) to trace adolescents' residential histories. The respective number of respondents for waves 1 through 6 were 1,313, 1,313, 1,293, 1,292, 1,275, and 1,026. Sample att rition in the first five waves was low (7%), however, due to the four year gap between waves five and six, attrition rates were higher for our LHC sample (20%). We used residential information from the LHC to link respondents to their respective postal cod es, which we then combined with a second dataset from Statistics Netherlands. The Statistics Netherlands data utilized consist of spatially detailed police records of reported crimes by post code. The mean number of households per post code in the Netherla nds was 17. Our analytic sample after

PAGE 28

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 21 list wise deletion was 763 adolescents, with an average of 4.4 observations per respondent, or 3,361 person wave observations. Measures Dependent Variable Individual Level Time Varying Variable Our dependent variab le Ôconflict with parents' was measured using a subset of the Network of Relationship Inventory (Furman & Buhrmester, 1985), and has reported adequate validity (Edens, Cavell & Hughes, 1999). Measured at the individual level as a time varying variable, it explicitly captures non physical conflicts involving anger, tension, and arguments. Adolescents were asked separately about their father and mother. Conflict with parents was measured as a scale and used six items from the NRI: "do you and your mother/fath er annoy each other and do you become angry with each other?", "do you and your mother/father get on each other's nerves?", "how often do you disagree with your mother/father and are you arguing?", "are you and your mother/father annoyed with each other's behavior?", "how often are you and your mother/father squabbling or arguing?", and "do you and your mother/father bother each other and behave overcritical towards each other?" The five response categories range from "little or not at all" to "more is not possible". It is important to recognize that this measure focuses on conflict which is distinct from violence. Across the five waves and separate scales for mother and father, the Cronbach's alphas range from .87 to .91, expressing strong internal consiste ncy. We combined adolescent's responses for both father and mother into a single scale to create a measure for Ôconflict with parents'. Descriptive statistics for this and other variables can be found in Table 1. Independent Variables Individual Level Time Invariant Variables We use three individual level time invariant control variables: sex, cohort, and parents being of foreign origin. Sex, cohort, and parents' foreign origin were treated as dummy variables:

PAGE 29

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 22 male=0, female=1, early to middle adolesce nts=0, middle to late adolescents=1, and both parents born outside of the Netherlands=0 and both parents being Dutch natives=1 (one parent being foreign born=0.5). Independent Variables Neighborhood Level Variables The Life History Calendar (LHC) in Cona more includes six digit postcodes where the adolescents lived from the age of twelve until the sixth wave of data collection. These postcodes enabled us to link the survey data (Conamore) to register data available at the postcode level. Six digit postcode s average 17 households per postcode, and capture mean socioeconomic measures (housing prices) and crime levels in the proximate surroundings of the adolescents' homes. ÔLocal violent crime' was based on data from the Dutch National Policy Services Agency and Statistics Netherlands. The variable represents the yearly number of violent crimes per 1000 persons within a six digit postcode. The variable was available for all of the five years of data collection and the data were group mean centered. ÔExtralocal violent crime' is constructed by applying a spatially lagged, distance weighted measure of violent crime occurrences in "extralocal" (two mile radius) neighborhoods. We first measured the distance from the center of each focal postcode to the c enter of each nearby postcode within a two mile radius, then weight the level of crime by the inverse of the distance the postcode from the focal tract, thereby assigning more weight to violence that happens nearby and less to violence that happens further away. ÔNeighborhood wealth' was measured via a scale of average property values within each respective six digit postcode as captured by Statistics Netherlands in 2004 (2006). Because longitudinal data was not available, we imputed this information over a ll five waves, and the variable was standardized. This measure has been assessed to be a good proxy for neighborhood wealth (Visser et al., 2008).

PAGE 30

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 23 Control Variable Individual Level Time Varying Variable ÔViolence in the home' was measured separately i n regard to each parent, and explicitly captures physical contact/violence occurring between children and their caregivers, with the question "How often in the last seven days did you have conflict with your mother/father, involving hitting or violence?" T he five answering categories range from "never" to "often". We created two separate dummy variables for both parents, where 0 = Ôno violence in the home' and 1 = Ôviolence in the home'. 2 Analytical Method To test our research questions, we employed hybrid random effects tobit models. We refer to the model as hybrid because it includes estimators for both within subject and between subject effects, therefore all time varying variables have two estimators (Allison, 2009). The first estimator is calculated as the deviation from person specific means for each time varying variable, which creates an estimator equal to those in fixed effects models (within individual effect). This model controls for observed and unobserved time invariant characteristics, as the s um of their change is always zero. This removes any potential bias arising from omitted time invariant characteristics. The second estimator is calculated as the person specific mean for each time varying variable (between individual effect). The lower and upper limit for the tobit estimator were 0 and 4, respectively, which correspond to the potential extremes on our outcome variable Ôconflict with parents'. Because residential mobility would introduce confounding in our models, in order to avoid conflating effects, we only used those adolescents in the sample who did not move between waves 1 and 5 of the Conamore survey. Additionally, residential mobility cou ld potentially be related to child parent relationship quality, as life conflicts (e.g., divorce or loss of employment) which may affect at home conflicts may be a motivating factor in a residential move. 2 Variables are explained in further detail in Appendix .

PAGE 31

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 24 CHAPTER V RESULTS Univariate Frequencies Before addressing the research questions of interest, we first describe our data. Table 1 reports univariate frequencies and summariz es the variables included in our sample. A larger proportion of Conamore survey re spondents (all five waves) were female ( 5 5% female , and 45% male ) ; and mean ages of respondents at wave one were 12.4 years (early to middle adolescents) and 16.7 (middle Ð to late adolescents) . Nine percent of our sample had two parents which were born outside of the Netherlands. For our dependen t variable, conflict with parents, the mean response is 0.49, suggesting that on average, respondents reported experiencing little to no conflict with either of their parents. No respondents in our sample reported the highest level of conflict for all six conflict indicators (max=3.83). Thirteen percent of respondents reported experiencing violence within the home with either one of their parents. Instances of reported local violence occurred, on average, at a rate of 0.22 times per 1000 persons; and the ma ximum rate was 10.3 instances per 1000 persons. Extralocal violence occurred, on average, at a rate of 0.23 per 1000 persons, and the maximum amount of extralocal violence was 1.09 instances per 1000 persons. The mean property value within our sample regio n is 213,810 euro, with the respective minimum and maximum being 55,000 and 952,000 euro.

PAGE 32

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 25 Table 1. Descriptive statistics. Conamore, 2001 2010; Statistics Netherlands. Hybrid Tobit Regression : Research Question One As a reminder, our first research question is: to what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child parent conflict? Our results indicate, consistent with our hypothesis, that both local and extralocal violence are signi ficantly related to child parent conflict. Beta values can be interpreted as the change in conflict with parents divided by the expected probability of having conflict with parents. The first model in our stepwise regression (Table 2) presents effects of v ariables of interest prior to controlling for violence within the home. Variables N Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum Time Varying Conflict with parents Local violence Extralocal violence Violence in the home (mom) Violence in the home (dad) 3,361 3,361 3,361 3,361 3,361 .49 .22 .23 .13 .13 .48 .69 .15 .34 .33 0 0 0 0 0 3.83 10.30 1.09 1 1 Time Invariant Neighborhood wealth (10k euro) Parents foreign Fem ale Cohort 763 763 763 763 213.81 .09 .55 .20 121.99 .29 .50 .40 55 0 0 0 952 1 1 1

PAGE 33

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 26 Table 2 . Hybrid tobit regression predicting conflict with parents * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 N=3,361 Within Individual Prior to including violence in the home as a control variable, local violence (B=0.04, p<0.01) and extralocal violence (B=0.47, p<0.01) are both significantly positively related to child parent conflict. For every 1 crime per 100,000 persons in a postcode there is an expected 0.04 increase in the level of conflict with parents experienced (e.g., scores of 0 become 0.4). The substantially higher beta value observed for extralocal suggests that for each viol ent crime (occurring within a 2 mile radius) per 100,000 persons, individuals are expected to experience a 0.47 increase in conflict with their parents, and a 0.43 increase relative to local violence. Variables Model 1 Beta (S.E.) Model 2 Beta (S.E.) Within Individual Estimators Local violence Extralocal violence Local extralocal interaction Violence in the home (mom) Violence in the home (dad) .04 (.02)* .47 (.16)** .04 (.08) .04 (.02)* .47 (.15)** .04 (.08) .17(.03)*** .16(.03)*** Between Individual Estimators Local violence Extralocal violence Local extralocal interaction Violence in the home (mom) Violence in the home (dad) Neighborhood wealth Fem ale Cohort Parents foreign Intercept Wald chi2 .05 (.04) .10 (.13) .03 (.12) .03 (.02) .05 (.03) .10 (.04)* .13 (.06)* .41 (.03)*** . 31.58 (10)*** .06 (.04) .10 (.12) .03 (.11) .40 (.09)*** .60 (.08)*** .02 (.02) 10 (.03)*** .15 (.04)*** .12 (.05)* .24 (.03)*** 300.18 (14) ***

PAGE 34

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 27 Between Individual When considering variation between participants, local and extralocal violence are not significantly related to conflict with parents. Neighborhood wealth, serving as a proxy for poverty, is not a significant predictor of conflict within the home. Although insignificant, the direction of th is relationship is negative, and therefore consistent with the majority of neighborhood literature maintaining that poverty/neighborhood disadvantage is positively associated with conflict within the home (Gutman, McLoyd, and Tokoyawa, 2005; Wadsworth and Compas, 2002). Violence in the home, for both parents, was significantly positively related to conflict (B [mom] = 0.40, p<0.001, B [dad] = 0.60, p<0.01). Cohort is significantly positively related (B=0.15, p<0.001) to conflict with parents . Consistent with other's findings, this illustrates that older youths are expected to experience higher levels of conflict with their parents than younger youths (Arnett, 1999; Montemayor, 1983). Parents being foreign born is significantly negatively relate d (B= 0.12, p<0.05) to conflict within the home, suggesting that youth with non Dutch native parents experience less frequent and lower levels of conflict with their parents. Hybrid Tobit Regression: Research Question Two As a reminder, our second research question is: To what extent is crime in the immediate and spatially proximate neighborhood environment related to child parent conflict when controlling for child parent violence within the home? The second model in our s tep wise regression introduces the control variables Ôviolence in the home: mom' and Ôviolence in the home: dad', and, in contrast to our hypothesis, results show significant positive relationships between both local and extralocal crime and conflict with parents.

PAGE 35

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 28 Within Individual When controlling for violence within the home occurring between children and their parents, local (B=0.04, p<0.05) and extralocal (B=0.47, p<0.01) violence both remain statistically significant. This suggests that regardless of individuals' age, sex, ethnic origin, level of neighborhood wealth, or violence occurring between parents and children, that local and extralocal violent crimes increase the levels and frequency of conflict individual youth experience with their parent s over time. As is to be expected, violence in the home is significantly positively related to conflict with parents (B[mom]=0.17, p<0.001, B[dad]=0.16, p<0.01). Between Individual When introducing controls for violence, the relationship between female a nd conflict with parents becomes significant (B=0.10, p<0.01). Neighborhood wealth remains an insignificant predictor of conflict with parents, and cohort remains positively significant related to conflict with parents (B=0.15, p<0.001). Parents foreign bo rn remains significantly, negatively related to our dependent variable (B= 0.12, p<0.05), and violence in the home remains significantly related to conflict with parents (B[mom]=0.40, p<0.001, B[dad]=0,60, p<0.01).

PAGE 36

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 29 CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION This research began with the question of how local and extralocal violence effect child parent conflict, and addressed the methodological discrepancy of not considering violence within the home. Results demonstrate that instances of violence within one's immedi ate proximity (local) and surrounding proximities (extralocal) significantly impact conflicts occurring within families for individuals over time. This is an important identification, as family relationship quality acts as a significant mediating factor fo r subsequent violence as well as an array of deleterious internalizing and externalizing behaviors for youth (Gorman Smith, Henry, & Tolan, 2004). Although effects of local/extralocal violence at the between individual level were not observed, repeated mea sures models yield strong internal validity as data are prone to less noise, therefore, effects observed at the within individual level are less likely a result of undetected differences (Charness, Gneezy, & Kuhn, 2011). The variation in our outcome varia ble did not change following the introduction of violence within the home as control, however, we are now able to confidently posit that effects observed are a result of neighborhood violence rather than interpersonal violence occurring between children an d parents. The significant relationship between violence in the home and conflict with parents illustrates the necessity of controlling for intra familial violence when examining effects of neighborhood violence on child parent conflict. We maintain that t he parsing out effects of interfamilial violence and community violence are therefore necessary to (a) avoid model mis specification and spurious relationships and, (b) better understand effects of indirect exposure to violence. Higher magnitude was obser ved for extralocal violence both prior to and after controlling for violence within the home. One potential explanation for this is that studies have found youth who experience chronic or high exposure to violence may become desensitized to acts of violenc e (Gaylord Harden Dickson, & Pierre, 2016; Lorion & Saltzman, 1993) and exhibit fewer

PAGE 37

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 30 externalizing behaviors which may lead to conflict. A second potential justification is spillover effects violence has been observed to transmit between neighboring commu nities. Hipp found when exploring relationships between reported crime and residents' perception of crime that actual crime is the strongest predictor of perceived crime (2013). Being aware of violence in one's surrounding community can increase externalizing behaviors for youth, regardless of whether they are directly exposed to it (Young strom, Weist, & Albus; 2003), which may increase conflict within families. Given (1) the refinement of our spatial unit of analysis (M=17 homes), and (2) the mean amount of violent crimes in our sample is 0.22 per 100,000 persons, diffusion of the effects of neighborhood violence is a far more probable explanation than chronic exposure to violence and desensitization as a result. The important takeaway is that although violence in both immediate and surrounding areas contribute to conflict between youths an d parents, contiguous neighborhoods must not be ignored. The negative relationship between non Dutch native parents and family conflict suggests youth with foreign born parents experience less conflict with their parents. A similar study examining child p arent relationships between caregivers and adolescents in the Netherlands found non native Dutch parents to be unrelated to higher levels of child parent conflict and antagonism (Eichelsheim et al., 2009). A potential explanation for our observed relations hip is the notion of the embeddedness of alternative value structures within ethnic minority/immigrant families, specifically in the parent/parents' ability to promote positive socialization goals within their families which benefit family cohesiveness and lessen conflicts (Harrison et al., 1990). Immigrant families emphasizing family cohesion may be more adept at avoiding conflicts, and in comparison to non immigrant families, may have higher motivation to set aside disagreements and acknowledge sacrifices parents have made and contributions adolescents make within the family (Kwak, 2003). It is worth noting that when introducing violence within the home as a control variable the relationship between fe male and conflict with parents becomes significant. The refore, when

PAGE 38

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 31 violence occurring between parents and children is held constant, neighborhood violence and conflict with parents for fe male youth is positively related. M ale youths exposed to community violence can exert externalization and aggression behavi ors (e.g., subsequent violence, aggression ) at higher levels than their female counterparts (O'Keefe, 1997), which may lead to heightened levels of violence within the home . Therefore, when holding violence between children and parents constant, arguments may be more frequent between females and their parents Many researchers have called for interventions designed to provide counseling/treatment for adolescents directly exposed to violence . Our current findings conclude that a broader recognition of the ef fects of community violence are necessary, and that efforts to curb effects of exposure should be expanded to include children living close to areas with high saturations of violence. Implications for Practice and Policy Parents residing in urban areas with high levels of violence are typically subject to additional burdens, as traditional social structures which protect children (schools, churches, and community organizations) tend to be overwhelmed. Support systems outsi de of the family are beneficial to parents in creating an arena to discuss their experiences, emotions, and trauma, which can in turn leave caregivers feeling more prepared to support their own children and explore further supportive resources (e.g., exten ded family, programs for youth). Having a network of people that care (e.g., community supports) can help adolescents and families feel less overwhelmed and more prepared to cope with violence (Osofsky, 1999). Therefore, ensuring that parents have access t o community services focused on professional needs (e.g., job skills training, college preparation courses, resource navigation services) which alleviate monetary stressors could stand to reduce criminal behaviors and stress within the family. Additionally , allocating resources towards programs aimed at socio emotional needs (e.g., victims of violence support groups, affordable t herapeutic sessions) of parents in high crime urban environments has

PAGE 39

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 32 conceivable benefits. A family's supportive function (e.g., e motional closeness and dependability) may not be able to deter adolescents from exposure to violence, however, high functioning families are better prepared to handle conflicts arising as a result of exposure and protect against risk beh aviors associated w ith exposure . However, it may take more than families to protect adolescents from exposure to violence, and may be more worthwhile to focus on creating neighborhood social processes which mitigate violence and exposure to violence itself . This study acknow ledges that crime across neighborhoods may be linked through co offender networks. Focusing on policies aimed at bolstering positive community networks (e.g., social and economic networks) may mitigate the effects of co offender networks and related commun ity violence. Our research suggests the need for antiviolence policies which provide both city wide solutions as well as extra support for especially vulnerable areas. Strategies to reduce violence occurring both extralocally and within the home would like ly yield significant reductions in conflicts experienced within families, and, in theory, reduce subsequent consequences of conflict (e.g., cycles of violence). Prevention efforts focusing on reducing direct exposure to violence should target attention tow ards peer relationships and be cognizant of neighborhood contexts in which youth live. Efforts to introduce and encourage participation in youth neighborhood organizations providing programs and activities outside of regular school hours that create positi ve, prosocial outlets in safe environments have potential to greatly reduce an adolescent ' s chances of witnessing or being a victim of violence. Awareness of the impacts of violence exposure, regardless of whether it is directly experienced, have addition al implications for professionals working with juveniles in high risk urban areas. It is necessary for persons engaged in therapeutic work to assess youths' overall individual environmental conditions, regardless of whether or not personal victimization is experienced, to develop strategies Ð such as parent and guardianship skills courses Ð that address and combat effects of living within close proximity to violence. Cross sector efforts (child welfare agencies, schools, community outreach organizations, ju venile correctional treatment facilities and

PAGE 40

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 33 providers) to provide risk assessment screening and prevention tools to gauge and respond to violence exposure (direct and indirect) should be implemented in a standardized, communicable form and dispersed acros s and within agencies. Implications for Research Further epidemiological studies which examine outcomes based on exposure type (victimization, acute exposure, chronic exposure) are needed, and future research on effects of indirect exposure to violence should control for any potential direct experiences of violence captured in the data (e.g., family violence, violence at school). S patial s tudies examining stress as mechanism between community vi olence and adolescent parent conflict are additionally necessary, as this link has not been quantitatively established . Identifying factors that provide protection against exposure to violence and related behavioral and emotional outcomes; especially withi n family contexts are needed as well. It is probable that professionals working in court systems with youth are knowledgeable in processes leading to violence exposure via the nature of their work and qualitative assessments involved. Ground up approaches to research which incorporate practitioner knowledge and assessment tools may shine more light on causes and realistic prevention of exposure to violence. Strengths and Limitations This research contributes to growing literatures on the community violence and family conflict by drawing connections between spatial dynamics of violence and resulting implications for interpersonal family dynamics. To our knowledge, no other studies addr ess this relationship from a spatially refined perspective. Our approach shows the benefits of examining spatial effects in a direct, substantive manner, and we can now say that violence in one area is not only related to violence in a neighboring area, bu t to conflicts experienced within families. Linkages uncovered not only create a deeper understanding of (1) relationships between community

PAGE 41

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 34 violence and adolescent parent conflict and (2) the necessity to consider in home violence, but additionally reinfo rce the findings of others, namely that neighborhood effects approaches must consider spatially contiguous regions . It is important to acknowledge several limitations of this study. Our research faces the constraint of using criminal justice data, which i s prone to undercounting the true volume of crime, as many crimes go un reported. We were unfortunately unable to identify a more ideal measure for poverty within the available data. Neighborhood wealth and parents' foreign origin were thus used in aims to control for differences in socioeconomic status within our sample, however, we acknowledge that this methodological approach could have been more robust by having more valid measures to capture poverty (such as parents' income, education level, or single p arent status). Although limitations in Conamore survey data do not allow our model a measure for stress, we maintain that extant literature draws reasonable connections to suggest that stress acts as a mechanism between local and extralocal violence and hi gher levels of criticism, disagreements, and arguments between adolescents and parents. Additionally, housing price data were not available during all five waves of youth survey data collection and values were thus imputed. Lastly, we were unable to includ e measures for self reported exposure to violence (e.g., various forms of victimization such as violence experienced outside of the home or at school). It is additionally worth considering the possibility that conflict may be the driving factor to neighbor hood crime. This, however, elicits additional research.

PAGE 42

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 35 References Aisenberg, E., & Ell, K. (2005). Contextualizing community violence and its effects: An ecological model of child parent interdependent coping. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 20 (7), 855 871. Allison, P. D. (2009). Fixed Effects Regression Models . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Aneshensel, C. S., & Sucoff, C. A. (1996). The neighborhood context of adolescent mental health. Journal of H ealth and S ocial B ehavior , 293 310. Arnett, J. J. (1999). Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered. American P sychologist , 54 (5), 317. Attar, B. K., Guerra, N. G., & Tolan, P. H. (1994). Neighborhood disadvantage, stressful life events and adjustments in urban elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 23 (4), 391 400. Bernasco, W., & Block, R. (2009). Where offenders choose to attack: A discrete choice model of robberies in Chicago. Criminology , 47 (1), 93 130. Block, R., Galary, A., & Brice, D. (2007). The journey to crime: Victims and offenders converge in violent index offences in Chicago. Security Journal , 20 (2), 123 137. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology , 22 (6), 723. Brookmeyer, K. A., Henrich, C. C., & Schwab " Stone, M. (2005). Adolescents who witness community violence: Can parent support and prosocial cognitions protect them from committing violence?. Child Development , 76 (4), 917 929. Browning, C. R., Dietz, R. D., & Feinberg, S. L. (2004). The paradox of social organization: Networks, collective efficacy, and violent crime in urban neighborhoods. Social Forces , 83 (2), 503 534. Burdick Will, J. (2018). Neighborhood violence, peer effects, and academic achievement in Chicago. Sociology of Education , 91 (3), 205 223. Carrion, V. G., & Steiner, H. (2000). Trauma and dissociation in delinquent adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 39 (3), 353 359. Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., Thornton, A., Freedman, D., Amell, J.W., Harrington, H., et al., (1996). The life history calendar: A research and clinical assessment method for collecting retrospective event history data. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 6 , 101 Ð 114. Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: Between subject and within subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization , 81 (1), 1 8. Cicchetti, D., & Lynch, M. (1993). Toward an ecological/transactional model of community violence and child maltreatment: Consequences for children's development. Psychiatry , 56 (1), 96 118.

PAGE 43

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 36 Cooley Quille, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Emotional impact of c hildren's exposure to community violence: A preliminary study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 34 (10), 1362 1368. Cooley, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Assessing community violence: The children's report of exposure to violence. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 34 (2), 201 208. Cooley Quille, M., Boyd, R. C., Frantz, E., & Walsh, J. (2001). Emotional and behavioral impact of exposure to community violence in inner city adol escents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 30 (2), 199 206. Cooley Strickland, M., Quille, T. J., Griffin, R. S., Stuart, E. A., Bradshaw, C. P., & Furr Holden, D. (2009). Community violence and youth: Affect, behavior, substance use, and academics. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 12 (2), 127 156. Copeland Linder, N., Lambert, S. F., & Ialongo, N. H. (2010). Community violence, protective factors and adolescent mental health: A profile analysis. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Ps ychology , 39, 176 186. Covey, H. C., Menard, S., & Franzese, R. J. (2013). Effects of adolescent physical abuse, exposure to neighborhood violence, and witnessing parental violence on adult socioeconomic status. Child Maltreatment , 18 (2), 85 97. Currie, J., & Spatz Widom, C. (2010). Long term consequences of child abuse and neglect on adult economic well being. Child Maltreatment , 15 (2), 111 120. Damm, A. P., & Dustmann, C. (2014). Does growing up in a high crime neighborhood affect youth criminal behav ior?. American Economic Review , 104 (6), 1806 32. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., Okut, H., Strycker, L. A., & Hix Small, H. (2003). A multilevel contextual model of neighborhood collective efficacy. American Journal of Community Psychology , 32 (3 4), 245 252. DuRant, R. H., Cadenhead, C., Pendergrast, R. A., Slavens, G., & Linder, C. W. (1994). Factors associated with the use of violence among urban black adolescents. American Journal of Public Health , 84 (4), 612 617. Eichelsheim, V. I., Buist, K. L. , Dekovi!, M., Wissink, I. B., Frijns, T., Van Lier, P. A., ... & Meeus, W. H. (2010). Associations among the parent Ð adolescent relationship, aggression and delinquency in different ethnic groups: a replication across two Dutch samples. Social Psychiatry a nd Psychiatric Epidemiology , 45 (3), 293 300. Edens, J. F., Cavell, T. A. & Hughes, J. N. (1999). The self systems of aggressive children: a cluster analytic investigation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40 , 441 453. Farrell, A. D., & Bruce, S. E. (1997). Impact of exposure to community violence on violent behavior and emotional distress among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 26 (1), 2 14.

PAGE 44

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 37 Farver, J. A. M., Xu, Y., Eppe, S., Fernandez, A., & Schwartz, D. (2005). Community violence, family conflict, and preschoolers' socioemotional functioning. Developmental Psychology , 41 (1), 160. Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Ormrod, R., & Hamby, S. L. (2009). Violence, abuse, and crime exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics , 124 (5), 1411 1423. Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Hamby, S. L., & Ormrod, R. (2011). Polyvictimization: Children's Exposure to Multiple Types of Violence, Crime, and Abuse. National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence . Finkelhor, D., Turner, H. A., Shattuck, A., & Hamby, S. L. (2013). Violence, crime, and abuse exposure in a national sample of children and youth: an update. JAMA Pediatrics , 167 (7), 614 621. Fitzpatrick, K. M. (1993). Exposure to violence and presence of depression among low income, African American youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 61 (3), 528. Fitzpatrick, K. M., & Boldizar, J. P. (1993). The prevalence and consequences o f exposure to violence among African American youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 32 (2), 424 430. Fowler, P. J., Tompsett, C. J., Braciszewski, J. M., Jacques Tiura, A. J., & Baltes, B. B. (2009). Community violence: A meta analysis on the effect of exposure and mental health outcomes of children and adolescents. Development and Psychopathology , 21 (1), 227 259. Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1985). Children's perceptions of the personal relationship in their social netw orks. Developmental Psychology, 21 (6), 1016 1024. Gauvin, L., Robitaille, ƒ., Riva, M., McLaren, L., Dassa, C., & Potvin, L. (2007). Conceptualizing and operationalizing neighbourhoods. Canadian Journal of Public Health , 98 (1), S18 S26. Gaylord Harden, N. K., Dickson, D., & Pierre, C. (2016). Profiles of community violence exposure among African American youth: An examination of desensitization to violence using latent class analysis. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 31 (11), 2077 2101. Gorman Smith, D., Henry, D. B., & Tolan, P. H. (2004). Exposure to community violence and violence perpetration: The protective effects of family functioning. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology , 33 (3), 439 449. Gorman Ð Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and developmental problems among inner city youth. Development and Psychopathology , 10 (1), 101 116. Greenberg, M. T., Lengua, L. J., Coie, J. D., Pinderhughes, E. E., Bierman, K., Dodge, K. A., ... & M cMahon, R. J. (1999). Predicting developmental outcomes at school entry using a multiple risk model: Four American communities. Developmental Psychology , 35 (2), 403. Guerra, N. G., Rowell Huesmann, L., & Spindler, A. (2003). Community violence exposure, s ocial cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development , 74 (5), 1561 1576.

PAGE 45

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 38 Harrison, A. O., Wilson, M. N., Pine, C. J., Chan, S. Q., & Buriel, R. (1990). Family ecologies of ethnic minority children. Child Development , 61 (2), 347 362. Hill, T. D., & Maimon, D. (2013). Neighborhood context and mental health. In Handbook of the Sociology of Mental Health (pp. 479 501). Springer, Dordrecht. Hipp, J. R., & Boessen, A. (2013). Egohoods as waves washing across the city: A new measure of "neighborhoods". Criminology , 51 (2), 287 327. Katz, L. F., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Buffering children from marital conflict and dissolution. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 26 (2), 157 171. Kersten, L., Vriends, N., Steppan, M., Raschle, N. M., Praetzlich, M., Oldenhof, H., ... & Martinelli, A. (2017). Community violence exposure and conduct problems in children and adolescents with conduct disorder and healthy controls. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience , 11 , 219. Kliewer, W., Lepore, S. J., Oskin, D., & Johnson, P. D. (1998). The role of social and cognitive processes in children's adjustment to community violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 66 (1), 199. Kwak, K. (2003). Adolescents and their pa rents: A review of intergenerational family relations for immigrant and non immigrant families. Human Development , 46 (2 3), 115 136. Lewis, D. A., & Riger, S. (1986). Crime as Stress. In Redefining Social Problems (pp. 185 200). Springer, Boston, MA. Linares, L. O., Heeren, T., Bronfman, E., Zuckerman, B., Augustyn, M., & Tronick, E. (2001). A mediational model for the impact of exposure to community violence on early child behavior problems. Child Development , 72 (2), 639 652. Lynch, M. (2003). Conseq uences of children's exposure to community violence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 6 (4), 265 274. Lorion, R. P., & Saltzman, W. (1993). Children's exposure to community violence: Following a path from concern to research to action. Psychiatry , 56 (1), 55 65. Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and community violence on children. Annual Review of Psychology , 51 (1), 445 479. Martinez, S. M., Blanco, E., Delva, J., Burrows, R., Reyes, M., Lozoff, B., & Gahagan, S. (2014). Perception of neighborhood crime and drugs increases cardiometabolic risk in Chilean adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health , 54 (6), 718 723. Mazza, J. J., & Reynolds, W. M. (1999). Exposure to violence in young inner city adolescents: Relati onships with suicidal ideation, depression, and PTSD symptomatology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 27 (3), 203 213. McCart, M. R., Smith, D. W., Saunders, B. E., Kilpatrick, D. G., Resnick, H., & Ruggiero, K. J. (2007). Do urban adolescents become desensitized to community violence? Data from a national survey. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 77 (3), 434 442.

PAGE 46

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 39 McCoy, D. C. (2013). Early violence exposure and self regulatory development: A bioecological systems perspective. Human Development , 56 (4), 254 273. McCoy, D. C., Raver, C. C., & Sharkey, P. (2015). Children's cognitive performance and selective attentio n following recent community violence. Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 56 (1), 19 36. McDonald, C. C., & Richmond, T. R. (2008). The relationship between community violence exposure and mental health symptoms in urban adolescents. Journal of Psychia tric and Mental Health Nursing , 15 (10), 833 849. McGee, Z. T., & Baker, S. R. (2002). Impact of violence on problem behavior among adolescents: Risk factors among an urban sample. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , 18 (1), 74 93. McMahon, S. D., Gr ant, K. E., Compas, B. E., Thurm, A. E., & Ey, S. (2003). Stress and psychopathology in children and adolescents: is there evidence of specificity?. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 44 (1), 107 133. Meeus, W.H.J., Akse, J., Branje, S.J.T., ter B ogt, T.F.M., Crommelin, P.M., Delsing, M.J.M.H., et al., (2010). Codebook of the research project CONflict And Management Of Relationships (CONAMORE) . Unpublished manuscript, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. Miller, L. S., Wasserman, G. A., Neugebauer, R., Gorman Smith, D., & Kamboukos, D. (1999). Witnessed community violence and antisocial behavior in high risk, urban boys. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 28 (1), 2 11. Montemayor, R. (1983). Parents and adolescents in conflict: All families some of the time and some families most of the time. The Journal of Early Adolescence , 3 (1 2), 83 103. Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology , 39 (3), 517 558. Morrison Gutman, L., McLoyd, V.C., & Tokoyawa, T. (2005). Financial strain, neighbourhood stress, parenting behaviors, and adolescent adjustment in urban African American families. Journ al of Research on Adolescence, 15 (4), 425 499. Mrug, S., Loosier, P. S., & Windle, M. (2008). Violence exposure across multiple contexts: Individual and joint effects on adjustment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 78 (1), 70 84. O'Keefe, M. (1997). Adolescents' exposure to community and school violence: Prevalence and behavioral correlates. Journal of Adolescent Health , 20 (5), 368 376. Osofsky, J. D. (1999). The impact of violence on children. The F uture of C hildren , 33 49. Osofsky, J. D., Wewers, S., Hann, D. M., & Fick, A. C. (1993). Chronic community violence: What is happening to our children?. Psychiatry , 56 (1), 36 45. Osofsky, J. D., & Fenichel, E. (1994). Caring for infants and toddlers in violent environments: Hurt, healing, and hope. Zero to Three , 13 (3), 1 44) .

PAGE 47

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 40 Osofsky, J. D. (2003). Prevalence of children's exposure to domestic violence and child maltreatment: Implications for prevention and intervention. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 6 (3), 161 170. Papachristos, A. V., & Bastomski, S. (2018). Connected in crime: The enduring effect of neighborhood networks on the spatial patterning of violence. American Journal of Sociology , 124 (2), 517 568. Pearlin, L. I. (1989). The sociological study of stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 241 256. Peterson, R. D., & Krivo, L. J. (2009). Segregated spatial locations, race ethnic composition, and neighborhood violent crime. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 623 (1), 93 107. Pynoos, R. S., Frederick, C., Nader, K., Arroyo, W., Steinberg, A., Eth, S., ... & Fairbanks, L. (1987). Life threat and posttraumatic stress in school age children. Archives of General Psy chiatry , 44 (12), 1057 1063. Rankin, B. H., & Quane, J. M. (2002). Social contexts and urban adolescent outcomes: The interrelated effects of neighborhoods, families, and peers on African American youth. Social Problems , 49 (1), 79 100. Richters, J. E., & Martinez, P. (1993). The NIMH community violence project: I. Children as victims of and witnesses to violence. Psychiatry , 56 (1), 7 21. Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (2009). Neighborhood disorder, subjective alienation, and distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 50 (1), 49 64. Saltzman, W. R., Pynoos, R. S., Layne, C. M., Steinberg, A. M., & Aisenberg, E. (2001). Trauma and grief focused intervention for adolescents exposed to community violence: Results of a school based screening and group treatment protocol. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice , 5 (4), 291. Sampson, R. J. (1997). Collective regulation of adolescent misbehavior: Validation results from eighty Chicago neighborhoods. Journal of Adolescent Research , 12 (2), 227 244. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing "neighborhood effects": Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology , 28 (1), 443 478. Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology , 105 (3), 603 651. Schwab Stone, M. E., Ayers, T. S., Kasprow, W., Voyce, C., Barone, C., Shriver, T., & Weissberg, R. P. (1995). No safe haven: A study of violence exposure in an urban community. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 34 (10), 1343 1352. Schwab Stone, M., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Silver, D., Lichtman, J., & Voyce, C. (1999). No safe haven II: The effects of violence exposure on urban youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 38 (4), 359 367.

PAGE 48

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 41 Schwartz, D., & Proctor, L. J. (2000). Community violence exposure and children's social adjustment in the school peer group: The mediating roles of emotion regulation and social cognition. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 68 ( 4), 670. Shankardass, K., Jerrett, M., Milam, J., Richardson, J., Berhane, K., & McConnell, R. (2011). Social environment and asthma: associations with crime and No Child Left Behind programmes. J ournal of Epidemiol ogy and Community Health , 65 (10), 859 865. Shareck, M., & Ellaway, A. (2011). Neighbourhood crime and smoking: the role of objective and perceived crime measures. BMC Public Health , 11 (1), 930. Sharkey, P. T., Tirado Strayer, N., Papachristos, A. V., & Raver, C. C. (2012). The eff ect of local violence on children's attention and impulse control. American Journal of Public Health , 102 (12), 2287 2293. Sharkey, P. (2010). The acute effect of local homicides on children's cognitive performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 107 (26), 11733 11738. Singer, M. I., Anglin, T. M., Yu Song, L., & Lunghofer, L. (1995). Adolescents' exposure to violence and associated symptoms of psychological trauma. Jama , 273 (6), 477 482. Statistics Netherlands (2006). Kerncijfers P ostcodegebieden, 2004 [Key figures for postcode areas, 2004] . The Hague: Statistics Netherlands. Tillyer, M. S., Fisher, B. S., & Wilcox, P. (2011). The effects of school crime prevention on students' violent victimization, risk perception, and fear of cr ime: A multilevel opportunity perspective. Justice Quarterly , 28 (2), 249 277. Tita, G. E., & Radil, S. M. (2010). Spatial regression models in criminology: Modeling social processes in the spatial weights matrix. In Handbook of Quantitative Criminology (pp. 101 121). Springer, New York, NY. Tita, G. E., & Greenbaum, R. T. (2009). Crime, neighborhoods, and units of analysis: putting space in its place. In Putting C rime in its P lace (pp. 145 170). Springer, New York, NY. Turner, H. A., Shattuck, A., Hamby, S., & Finkelhor, D. (2013). Community disorder, victimization exposure, and mental health in a national sample of youth. Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 54 (2), 258 275. Turner, R. J., Wheaton, B., & Lloyd, D. A. (1995). The epidemiology of social stress. American S ociological R eview , 104 125. Visser, P., van Dam, F., & Hooimeijer, P. (2008). Residential environment and spatial variation in house prices in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 99 , 348 360. Vogel, M. (2016). The modifiable areal unit problem in person Ð context research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 53 (1), 112 135. Vogel, M., & South, S. J. (2016). Spatial dimensions of the effect of neighborhood disadvantage on delinquency. Criminology , 54 (3), 434 458.

PAGE 49

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 42 Wadsworth, M. E., & Compas, B. E. (2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain: The adolescent perspective. Journal of R esearch on A dolescence , 12 (2), 243 274. Werner, E. E. (1995). Resilience in development. Current D irections in P sychological S cience , 4 (3), 81 84. Van Wilsem, J., Wittebrood, K., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). Socioeconomic dynamics of neighborhoods and the risk of crime victimization: A multilevel study of improving, declining, and stable areas in the Netherlands. Social Problems , 53 (2), 226 247. Wilson, H. W., Stover, C. S., & Berkowitz, S. J. (2009). Research Review: The relationship between childhood violence exposure and juvenile antisocial behavior: a meta " analytic review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 50 (7), 769 779. Wilson, D. K., Kliewer, W., Teasley, N., Plybon, L., & Sica, D. A. (2002). Violence exposure, catecholamine excretion, and blood pressure nondipping status in Af rican American male versus female adolescents. Psychosomatic Medicine , 64 (6), 906 915. Wilson Genderson, M., & Pruchno, R. (2013). Effects of neighborhood violence and perceptions of neighborhood safety on depressive symptoms of older adults. Social S cience & M edicine , 85 , 43 49. Zeoli, A. M., Pizarro, J. M., Grady, S. C., & Melde, C. (2014). Homicide as infectious disease: Using public health methods to investigate the diffusion of homicide. Justice Q uarterly , 31 (3), 609 632. Zielinski, D. S. (2009). Child maltreatment and adult socioeconomic well being. Child abuse & neglect , 33 (10), 666 678. Zimmerman, G. M., & Posick, C. (2016). Risk factors for and behavioral consequences of direct versus indirect exposure to violence. American J ournal of P ublic H ealth , 106 (1), 178 188. Zimmerman, G. M., & Messner, S. F. (2013). Individual, family background, and contextual explanations of racial and ethnic disparities in youths' exposure to violence. American J ournal of P ublic H ealth , 103 (3), 435 442.

PAGE 50

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 43 APPENDIX : The Effect of Neighborhood Violence on Child Parent Conflict Variables Description Conflict with parents (DV) Time variant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) as a scale (0 4) and involves six questions from the Network of Relationships Inventory including: "do you and your mother/father annoy each other and do you become angry with each other?", "do you and your mother/father get on each oth er's nerves?", "how often do you disagree with your mother/father and are you arguing?", "are you and your mother/father annoyed with each other's behavior?", "how often are you and your mother/father squabbling or arguing?", and "do you and your mother/fa ther bother each other and behave overcritical towards each other?". The five response categories range from Ôlittle or not at all' (0) to Ômore is not possible' (4). Scales were combined for both parents to obtain an overall, time varying measure of confl icts with parents. Violence in the home T ime variant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) separately in regard to responses for each parent. Operationalized as "how often in the last seven days did you have a conflict with your mother/father involving hitting or violence". Responses were treated as a dummy variable (0=no reported violence in the home, 1=reported violence in the home) Sex Time invariant, individual level Measured (CONAMORE) using binary gender response categories, treated as a dummy variable (female=0, male=1) Cohort Time invariant, individual level Categories (CONAMORE) include Ôearly to middle' adolescents (mean age at wave 1=12.4) and Ômiddle to late' adolescents (mean age at wave 1= 16.7). Treated as a dummy variable (early to middle=0, middle to late=1). Parents' foreign origin Time invariant, individual level Operationalized (Statistics Netherlands) as both parents being born outside the Netherlands/both parents being Dutch natives. Treated as a dummy variable (at least one parent born in the Netherlands=0, both parents born outside the Netherlands=1). Local violent crime Time variant, neighborhood level Represents the yearly number of violent crimes registered with the Dutch National Police Services per 1000 persons within a six digit postcode ( Statistics Netherlands ). Violent crimes are operationalized by Statistics Netherlands as "an attack or abuse involving punching/kicking, or use of a gun, knife, or using a physical weapon against someone (or threat ening to do so). It can involve physical abuse, violence with sexual intentions, or threatening.

PAGE 51

NEIGHBORHOOD VIOLENCE AND CHILD PARENT CONFLICT ! 44 Extralocal violent crime Time invariant, neighborhood level Applies a spatially lagged, distance weighted measure of violent crime occurrences within "extralocal" (two mile radius) neighborhoods. This variable is created by, first, measuring the distance from the center of each focal postcode to the center of each nearby postcode within a two mile radius, and then by weighing the level of crime by the inverse of the distance the postcode from the focal tract, thereby assigning more weight to violence that happens nearby and less to violence that happens further away. Neighborhood wealth Time in variant, neighborhood level Measured via a scale of average property values within each respective six digit postcode (Statistics Netherlands, 2004).