Parenting quality and childhood antisocial behaviour and underachievement Mental and Behavioural Disorders Antisocial behaviour in children
Conditions
Interventions
Randomisation was at classroom level, rather than by individuals within it, so that all members of the class could be offered the new programme.
It was a two stage study, with:
1. Screening of all rec
Sponsors
King's College London (UK)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: First, in each school, each year, an intervention and a control class was randomly selected; children were in reception class or year one, thus aged 4-5 years old. Second, letters went out to all parents and coffee mornings were held; the intervention programme was offered to everyone in the intervention class regardless of the child's problem behaviour. Third, parents who expressed an interest were then contacted to assess further eligibility criteria: 1. Ability to understand English 2. Index child free of clinically apparent marked general global developmental delay or disorder All parents of high risk children were offered places, and parents of 4 low risk children were randomly selected to form each group.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Opposite of inclusion criteria above, hence parents who expressed no interest were not contacted to assess further eligibility criteria; parents were excluded if they were interested, but lacked: 1. Ability to understand English 2. Index child free of clinically apparent marked general global developmental delay or disorder
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Direct observation of attachment promoting parenting style. The observation procedure of the Conduct Problems Research Group (1999) was used, with videotaping of parent-child interaction at home across three tasks: 1. Child directed play (ten minutes) 2. Parent directed task - child attempts a difficult construction with Lego toy bricks (ten minutes) 3. Parents gets child to tidy away the toys (three minutes) A recently devised coding scheme (Matias 2005) was used that measures sensitive responding, the core construct in attachment theory. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Parenting: 1. Child centred and child directive parental behaviours: Here, rather than make global ratings of parental style, each individual vocalisation by the parent was rated using a scheme based on social learning principles. 2. Semi-structured interview of parenting practices: This was a modified form of the interview devised by Quinton and Rutter (1985). Topics covered include: a. Positive parenting practices such as giving praise and rewards b. Non-physical discipline including withdrawal of privileges, use of short periods of time out from positive reinforcement c. Coercive discipline, including how often parents got angry and critical of their child etc. Child behaviour: 1. Direct observation: The procedures described above under direct observation of parenting were used. The main scale was the child's attentiveness. 2. Semi-structured interview: The Parent Account of Child Symptoms (PACS: Taylor et al 1986). This is an investigator-based interview similar in format and scoring to the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment, but is shorter. It has been used in many large scale surveys of thousands of children (Taylor and Sandberg 1984), and covers: a. Attentiveness/ADHD symptoms b. Antisocial behaviour: eight antisocial behaviours are covered, such as lying and stealing, disobedience and tantrums, destructiveness and physical aggression c. Emotional symptoms. These included fears, worries, and sleep disturbances. Child literacy: British Ability Scale Single Word Reading (BAS II: Elliot, Smith and McCullough 1997). | — |
Countries
United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed