American journal of preventive medicine
-
This article discusses conceptual issues and reviews knowledge about direct and buffering protective factors in the development of youth violence. Direct protective factors predict a low probability of violence, whereas buffering protective factors predict a low probability of violence in the presence of risk (and often interact with risk factors). Individual, family, school, peer, and neighborhood factors are reviewed. ⋯ However, there were various evidence-based candidates for having a direct protective or buffering protective effect such as above-average intelligence, low impulsivity/easy temperament, enhanced anxiety, prosocial attitudes, high heart rate, close relationship to at least one parent, intensive parental supervision, medium SES of the family, sound academic achievement, strong school bonding, a positive school/class climate, nondeviant peers, and living in a nondeprived and nonviolent neighborhood. The probability of violence decreases as the number of protective factors increases (a dose-response relationship). Implications for future research and practice concern adequate research designs to detect nonlinear relationships; conceptually and methodologically homogeneous studies; differentiated analyses with regard to age, gender, and other characteristics; and greater integration of longitudinal correlational research with (quasi-)experimental intervention studies.