https://aub.ie/MilitaryREACH-PeerAggression

Frye-Cox, N., Farnsworth, M., O’Neal, C. W., Lucier-Greer, M. (2020). Peer aggression among children and youth: Defining constructs and identifying programming. Auburn, AL: Military REACH

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Family Advocacy Program (FAP) requested a comprehensive literature review to be conducted on peer aggression with specific emphasis placed on clearly defining the topic while also identifying contemporary research on primary and secondary prevention strategies, as well as clinical interventions that are promising at mitigating peer aggression. Peer aggression can be defined as any behavior that is intended to harm another person (e.g., David-Ferdon et al., 2016; DeWall et al., 2012; Dodge et al., 2006). To help distinguish peer aggression from other constructs, specific attention is paid to differentiating between motives, modes, and types of peer aggression. In addition, peer aggression is distinguished from similar constructs of peer control, juvenile delinquency, and child abuse and neglect. The substantial efforts to clarify the construct of peer aggression have been matched by researchers attempting to prevent and reduce peer aggression and to mitigate immediate and long-term consequences stemming from peer aggression. Many of these efforts utilize either primary prevention strategies, secondary prevention strategies, or clinical interventions. Primary prevention programs may help change general attitudes about peer aggression and promote positive relationships within a given community. Secondary strategies may be most effective at managing peer aggression when parents, teachers, and others in a community are supported in their efforts to identify students at-risk for peer aggression and peer victimization. Clinical interventions are directed specifically at youth who have engaged in peer aggression with attention devoted toward improving relationships with parents and enhancing youth’s cognitive and socioemotional skills. Although each level of intervention can yield positive outcomes (e.g., reduction in aggressive behaviors, improved relationships with peers and adults), the best outcomes typically result from a coordinated effort between all three strategies (e.g., David-Ferdon et al., 2016; Espelage & Swearer, 2008). Importantly, it is necessary to match the strategy employed with the needs of the situation, as consideration must be given to age of youth, the level of implementation (i.e., prevention or intervention), as well as the organizational resources available.

Children
Youth
Programming
Mental health

Active Duty
Guard
Reserve

Military families
Civilian
Child of a service member or veteran
Military non-medical service providers

Childhood (birth - 12 yrs)
Preschool age (2 -5 yrs)
School age (6 - 12 yrs)
Adolescence (13 - 17 yrs)

Review of Literature

Frye-Cox, Nick, Farnsworth, Meredith, O'Neal, Catherine, Lucier-Greer, Mallory

Military REACH

REACH Publication

Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Auburn University, NFC
Department of Human Development and Family Science, University of Georgia, MF
Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Auburn University, MLG
Department of Human Development and Family Science, University of Georgia, CWO