Violence Prevention and Intervention
Programs
Violence prevention and intervention efforts for
youth have been developed to target different groups
and needs. Primary prevention programs are gener-
ally population-based, involving youth, peers, teach-
ers, schools, and families, and are designed to
promote prosocial behavior. Many of these programs
target elementary school-age children. Secondary
prevention and treatment programs target youth who
are at high risk for exposure to violence or becoming
violent. Tertiary intervention targets youth who are
already perpetrators or victims. The most promising
components of intervention programs appear to tar-
get social-cognitive skills such as perspective taking,
generating alternative solutions, building peer nego-
tiation skills, avoiding violence, and improving self-
esteem. Such programs are generally considered
most effective at the primary and secondary preven-
tion levels.
Violence among youth and affecting youth is not
an isolated phenomenon. Patterns of violent crime
among youth follow larger societal patterns. Al-
though the courts in the late twentieth century and
into the new century tended toward punishment of ju-
venile offenders, research shows that programs favor-
ing rehabilitation are better. For children exposed to
multiple risk factors and levels of violence, single
types of intervention, such as a school curriculum, are
insufficient. Societal approaches to reducing violence
must include a broad array of both governmental and
private initiatives. Because the use of firearms ac-
counts for a sustained high level of juvenile homicide
rates, governmental regulations targeted toward de-
creasing access to weapons is necessary. And because
more and more children are without parent supervi-
sion in the after-school hours when children are most
likely to be victims of violence, increasing funding for
after-school programs is another key factor in reduc-
ing violence and its effects on children.
See also: CHILD ABUSE; DOMESTIC VIOLENCE;
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; SUICIDE; VIDEO
GAMES
Bibliography
Eron, Leonard, Jacquelyn H. Gentry, and Peggy Schlegel, eds. Rea-
son to Hope: A Psychosocial Perspective on Violence and Youth.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1994.
Garbarino, James, Nancy Dubrow, Kathleen Kostelny, and Carole
Pardo, eds. Children in Danger: Coping with the Consequences of
Community Violence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992.
Goldstein, Arnold P., and Jane Close Conoley, eds. School Violence
Intervention: A Practical Handbook. New York: Guilford Press,
1997.
Holden, George W., Robert Geffer, and Ernest N. Jouriles, eds.
Children Exposed to Marital Violence: Theory, Research, and Ap-
plied Issues. Washington, DC: American Psychological Associa-
tion, 1998.
Holinger, Paul C., Daniel Offer, James T. Barter, and Carl C. Bell.
Suicide and Homicide among Adolescents. New York: Guilford
Press, 1994.
Osofsky, Joy D., ed. Children in a Violent Society. New York: Guilford
Press, 1997.
Snyder, Howard N., and Melissa Sickmund. Juvenile Offenders and
Victims: A National Report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1999.
Trickett, Penelope K., and Cynthia J. Schellenbach, eds. Violence
against Children in the Family and in the Community. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association, 1998.
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook
of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1998, edited by Kathleen Maguire
and Ann L. Pastore. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1999.
Tanya F. StockhammerVYGOTSKY, LEV (1896–1934)
Lev Semenovich Vygotsky was a developmental psy-
chologist known for his sociocultural perspective.
Born into a middle-class Jewish family in Orsha, Rus-
sia, Vygotsky’s faith and social standing shaped many
of his choices and views. Academically successful, Vy-
gotsky entered Moscow University in 1913, where he
studied law, being one of the few professions that al-
lowed Jews to live outside restricted areas. He simul-
taneously attended Shaniavsky University to study
social sciences. After an impressive presentation of his
doctoral dissertation on William Shakespeare’s play
Hamlet, entitled Psychology of Art, Vygotsky was invited
to join the research staff at the Psychological Institute
in Moscow, where he met Alexander Luria, who was
to become his colleague and collaborator.
Vygotsky posited two types of psychological func-
tioning: ‘‘natural,’’ consisting of biological growth,
both physical and cognitive development; and ‘‘cul-
tural,’’ consisting of learning to use psychological and
cultural tools, including signs, symbols, and language.
Both natural and cultural functioning act in a mutual-
ly facilitative integrated process. Whereas Jean Piaget
(1896–1980), Vygotsky’s Swiss contemporary, pro-
posed that instruction should follow development,
Vygotsky saw development and learning as acting to-
gether to create higher psychological functioning. He
suggested that learning and development are facili-
tated in a hypothetical region called the zone of prox-
imal development (ZPD). This region represents the
distance between the child’s independent cognitive
ability and the child’s potential with the help of an
adult or more competent peer. Thus, the child’s natu-
ral ability is expanded upon through learning and
does not fully mature without instruction. For exam-
ple, in Thought and Language, Vygotsky examined lan-428 VYGOTSKY, LEV