Advertisement

The Journal of Primary Prevention

, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp 389–401 | Cite as

Coping Power Adapted as Universal Prevention Program: Mid Term Effects on Children’s Behavioral Difficulties and Academic Grades

  • Pietro Muratori
  • Iacopo Bertacchi
  • Consuelo Giuli
  • Annalaura Nocentini
  • Laura Ruglioni
  • John E. Lochman
Brief Report

Abstract

Aggressive behaviors in schools have the potential to cause serious harm to students’ emotional and social well-being and to limit their ability to achieve their full academic potential. Prevention programs developed to reduce children’s aggressive behaviors in school settings can provide interventions at a universal or targeted level. The main aim of our randomized control study was to examine the efficacy of Coping Power, adapted as a universal prevention program, in reducing children’s behavioral problems and improving school grades. Nine classes participated (184 students, mean age 91 months) from two elementary state schools in Tuscany, Italy. Study findings showed a significant reduction in behavioral problems and an improvement in school grades for the intervention classes relative to the control classes. This study suggests the Coping Power program can be delivered in school settings at both universal and targeted prevention levels, and that in this multi-tiered prevention model, teachers, educators and school psychologists can learn a set of intervention skills which can be delivered with flexibility, thus reducing some of the complexity and costs of schools using multiple interventions.

Keywords

Aggressive behavior Hyperactivity Prosocial behavior School 

Notes

Compliance With Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

All authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. August, G. J., Hektner, J. M., Egan, E. A., Realmuto, G. M., & Bloomquist, M. L. (2002). The early risers longitudinal prevention trial: Examination of 3-year outcomes in aggressive children with intent to treat and as intended analyses. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradshaw, C. P., Zmuda, J. H., Kellam, S. G., & Ialongo, N. S. (2009). Longitudinal impact of two universal preventive interventions in first grade on educational outcomes in high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 926–937.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, X., Huang, X., Chang, L., Wang, L., & Li, D. (2010). Aggression, social competence, and academic achievement in Chinese children: A 5-year longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 583–592.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2002). Evaluation of the first three years of the Fast Track prevention trial with children at high risk for adolescent conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2013). School outcomes of aggressive disruptive children: Prediction from kindergarten risk factors and impact of the fast track prevention program. Aggressive Behavior, 39, 114–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dodge, K. A. (2011). Context matters in child and family policy. Child Development, 82, 433–442.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., Malone, P. S., & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2008). Testing an idealized dynamic cascade model of the development of serious violence in adolescence. Child Development, 79, 1907–1927.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta analysis of school based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Flay, B. R., Biglan, A., Boruch, R. F., Castro, F. G., Gottfredson, D., Kellam, S., et al. (2005). Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 6, 151–175.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Forman, S. G., & Barakat, N. M. (2011). Cognitive-behavioral therapy in the schools: Bringing research to practice through effective implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 48, 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., Snell, J. L., Van Schoiack Edstrom, L., MacKenzie, E. P., & Broderick, C. J. (2005). Reducing playground bullying and supporting beliefs: An experimental trial of the steps to respect program. Developmental Psychology, 41, 479–491.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenberg, M. T., Kusche, C. A., Cook, E. T., & Quamma, J. P. (1995). Promoting emotional competence in school-aged children: The effects of the PATHS curriculum. Developmental Psychopathology, 7, 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Poduska, J., Ialongo, N., Wang, W., Toyimbo, P., et al. (2008). Effects of a universal classroom behavior management program in first and second grades on young adult behavioral, psychiatric, and social outcomes. Drug Alcohol Dependendance, 95, 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kokko, K., Tremblay, R. E., Lacourse, E., Nagin, D. S., & Vitaro, F. (2006). Trajectories of prosocial behavior and physical aggression in middle childhood: Links to adolescent school dropout and physical violence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 403–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lamarche, V., Brendgen, M., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., Pérusse, D., & Dionne, G. (2006). Do friendships and sibling relationships provide protection against peer victimization in a similar way? Social Development, 15, 373–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lochman, J. E., Baden, R. E., Boxmeyer, C. L., Powell, N. P., Qu, L., Salekin, K. L., & Windle, M. (2014). Does a booster intervention augment the preventive effects of an abbreviated version of the Coping Power program for aggressive children? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 42, 367–381.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Lochman, J. E., Boxmeyer, C. L., Powell, N. P., Qu, L., Wells, K., & Windle, M. (2012). Coping Power dissemination study: Intervention and special education effects on academic outcomes. Behavioral Disorders, 37, 192–205.Google Scholar
  19. Lochman, J. E., & Lenhart, L. A. (1993). Anger coping intervention for aggressive children: Conceptual models and outcome effects. Clinical Psychology Review, 13, 785–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2002). The Coping Power program at the middle-school transition: Universal and indicated prevention effects. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lochman, J. E., & Wells, K. C. (2004). The Coping Power program for preadolescent aggressive boys and their parents: Outcome effects at the 1-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 571–578.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Malecki, C., & Elliot, S. N. (2002). Children’s social behaviors as predictors of academic achievement: A longitudinal analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Muratori, P., Bertacchi, I., Giuli, C., Lombardi, L., Bonetti, S., Nocentini, A., et al. (2015a). First adaptation of Coping Power program as a classroom-based prevention intervention on aggressive behaviors among elementary school children. Prevention Science, 16, 432–439.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Muratori, P., Milone, A., Manfredi, A., Polidori, L., Ruglioni, L., Lambruschi, F., et al. (2015b). Evaluation of improvement in externalizing behaviors and callous-unemotional traits in children with disruptive behavior disorder: A 1-year follow up clinic-based study. Administration and Policy In Mental Health. doi: 10.1007/s10488-015-0660-y.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  26. Mytton, J. A., DiGuiseppi, C., Gough, D., Taylor, R. S., & Logan, S. (2006). School-based secondary prevention programmes for preventing violence. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004606.pub2.Google Scholar
  27. Menesini E., & Nocentini, A. (2015). Effects of the KiVa antibullying program in Italy: Results from the first randomized control trial. In 17th European conference on developmental psychology, 8–12 September, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.Google Scholar
  28. Reddy, L. A., Newman, E., De Thomas, C. A., & Chun, V. (2009). Effectiveness of school-based prevention and intervention programs for children and adolescents with emotional disturbance: A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 77–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Riggs, N. R., Greenberg, M. T., Kusché, C. A., & Pentz, M. A. (2006). The mediational role of neurocognition in the behavioral outcomes of a social-emotional prevention program in elementary school students: Effects of the PATHS curriculum. Prevention Science, 7, 91–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, S., Daunic, A., Barber, B., Aydin, B., Van Loan, C., & Taylor, G. (2014). Preventing risk for significant behavior problems through a cognitive-behavioral intervention: Effects of the tools for getting along curriculum at one-year follow-up. Journal of Primary Prevention, 10, 371–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssen, J. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-years-olds: A review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13, 254–274.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Sundell, K., Ferrer-Wreder, L., & Fraser, M. W. (2014). Going global: A model for evaluating empirically supported family-based interventions in new contexts. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 37, 203–230.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Swaim, R. C., Henry, K. L., & Kelly, K. (2006). Predictor of aggressive behaviour among rural middle school youth. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 27, 229–243.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Tilly, W. D. (2008). The evolution of school psychology to science-based practice: Problem solving and the three-tiered model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 17–36). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.Google Scholar
  35. Tobia, V., Gabriele, M. A., & Marzocchi, G. M. (2011). Norme italiane dello Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Il comportamento dei bambini italiani valutato dai loro insegnanti. Disturbi di Attenzione e Iperattività, 6, 167–174.Google Scholar
  36. Winther, J., Carlsson, A., & Vance, A. (2014). A pilot study of a school-based prevention and early intervention program to reduce oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 8, 181–189.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pietro Muratori
    • 1
  • Iacopo Bertacchi
    • 2
  • Consuelo Giuli
    • 2
  • Annalaura Nocentini
    • 3
  • Laura Ruglioni
    • 1
  • John E. Lochman
    • 4
  1. 1.IRCCS Stella Maris FoundationCalambroneItaly
  2. 2.Associazione Mente CognitivaLuccaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Sciences of Education and PsychologyUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly
  4. 4.The University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations