Implementing Coping Power Adapted as a Universal Prevention Program in Italian Primary Schools: a Randomized Control Trial
Behavioral problems in schools can cause serious harm to the emotional and social well-being of students and limit their ability to achieve their full academic potential. A prior pilot study on the universal application of Coping Power showed a significant decrease in the hyperactivity behaviors of five classes. The next step was to test whether Coping Power Universal could be successfully implemented by teachers in a variety of Italian schools. The sample involved 40 third- and fourth-grade classes (901 students) from public schools located in three Italian cities. Twenty classes were randomly assigned to Coping Power Universal, and 20 classes were randomly assigned to the control group, which received the strictly standard academic curriculum of Italian elementary schools. At each assessment period, the teachers completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. The findings showed a significant reduction in hyperactive and inattention behaviors and conduct problems and emotional symptoms in the intervention classes compared with the control classes. This study suggests that Coping Power model can be delivered in school settings at both universal and targeted prevention levels and that in this multi-tiered prevention model, teachers 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.
KeywordsAggressive behavior Hyperactivity Emotional symptoms Implementation
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
John Lochman is the co-developer of the Coping Power program and receives royalties from the Oxford University Press for the Coping Power Implementation Guides for the Child Group Program and the Parent Group Program. He is also the PI on grants from NICHD and NIDA which provide funding for intervention research on the Coping Power program. All the other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Bertacchi, I., Giuli, C., & Muratori, P. (2016). Coping Power nella scuola primaria. Gestire i comportamenti problematici e promuovere le abilità relazionali in classe. Trento: Erickson.Google Scholar
- Ehrenreich-May, J., & Chu, B. C. (2014). Transdiagnostic treatments for children and adolescents: Principles and practice. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Genta, M. L., Menesini, E., Fonzi, A., & Costabile, A. (1996). Le prepotenze tra bambini a scuola. I risultati di una ricerca condotta in due città italiane: Firenze e Cosenza. Età Evolutiva, 53, 73–80.Google Scholar
- Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Poduska, J., Ialongo, N., Wang, W., Toyimbo, P., Petras, H., Ford, C., Windham, A., & Wilcox, H. C. (2008). Effects of a universal classroom behavior management program in first and second grades on young adult behavioral, psychiatric, and social outcomes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95, 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Larson, J., & Lochman, J. E. (2011). Helping school children cope with anger: A cognitive-behavioral intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- Muratori, P., Bertacchi, I., Giuli, C., Lombardi, L., Bonetti, S., Nocentini, A., Manfredi, A., Polidori, L., Ruglioni, L., Milone, A., & Lochman, J. E. (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
- Muratori, P., Milone, A., Manfredi, A., Polidori, L., Ruglioni, L., Lambruschi, F., Masi, G., & Lochman, J. E. (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.Google Scholar
- Muratori, P., Bertacchi, I., Giuli, C., Lombardi, L., Nocentini, A., Polidori, L., Ruglioni, L., Milone, A., & Lochman, J. E. (2016a). Coping Power adapted as universal prevention program: Mid term effects on children’s behavioral difficulties and academic grades. Journal of Primary Prevention, 37, 389–401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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
- 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