Family-based risk and protective mechanisms for youth at-risk of gang joining - Page 44 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 44 of 177 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
no effect on certain forms of risks. Protective processes are micro-processes.
Accumulated protective experiences contribute to an overall level of resiliency. So
to characterize resilient individuals, one must identify the processes that reduced the
risk effects.
4) Protection reduces the effect of risk only at higher levels of risk.
Protection will have no effect at low risk where it is not needed; protective
factors are only necessary buffers at higher levels of risk. In other words, protective
factors respond to risk such that in a no-risk sample, the protective factor does not
make a difference in prediction to gang membership. On the other hand, with a high-risk
sub sample, the protective factor occurs in response to the risk experience, and
together, the risk and protective combination protect the youth from joining a gang.
This means that a correctly termed protective factor statistically interacts with risk
with the result that the high risk youth who is ‘protected’ displays an outcome similar
to the lower-risk youth. This relationship is displayed in Figure 1 where gang joining
decreases as protection increases for those at high risk, while gang joining for those
at low risk is unaffected by protection.
29
Object Description
Description
| Title | Family-based risk and protective mechanisms for youth at-risk of gang joining - Page 44 |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | no effect on certain forms of risks. Protective processes are micro-processes. Accumulated protective experiences contribute to an overall level of resiliency. So to characterize resilient individuals, one must identify the processes that reduced the risk effects. 4) Protection reduces the effect of risk only at higher levels of risk. Protection will have no effect at low risk where it is not needed; protective factors are only necessary buffers at higher levels of risk. In other words, protective factors respond to risk such that in a no-risk sample, the protective factor does not make a difference in prediction to gang membership. On the other hand, with a high-risk sub sample, the protective factor occurs in response to the risk experience, and together, the risk and protective combination protect the youth from joining a gang. This means that a correctly termed protective factor statistically interacts with risk with the result that the high risk youth who is ‘protected’ displays an outcome similar to the lower-risk youth. This relationship is displayed in Figure 1 where gang joining decreases as protection increases for those at high risk, while gang joining for those at low risk is unaffected by protection. 29 |
