Wirkungsnachweis aus der Literatur

Mittelfristig (1 bis 5 Jahre)
Mikro (Individuum)
Psychisch & Physiologisch

decreased internalising risks such as depression as a result of participating in positive youth development services


Risks decreased over time for all three groups and the pattern seen at Time 1 of the positive group having significantly lower risk than the inconsistent and negative groups was retained. Post hoc (Bonferroni) analyses of the univariate outcomes (adjusted for the three proximal relational resource measures) indicated that young people in the positive service experience group retained the advantages in terms of wellbeing and resilience over time that were seen in the MANOVA, but that the quality of the service experience at Time 1 did not appear to have any long term impact on risk levels when the impact of the covariates was taken into account.

Beschreibung der Aktivität

services using positive youth development practices
services such as child welfare, juvenile corrections, educational services, mainstream classroom programing using positive youth development practices (PYD)
aged 13 to 17 years, mean 15,35 years
teilnehmende Kinder und Jugendliche

Evaluierung der Aktivität

Quantitative Fragebogenerhebung (schriftlich/offline)
The data upon which this paper is based forms part of a larger, longitudinal study, the Successful Youth Transitions Programme. It is part of a five-country (Canada, China, Colombia, South Africa, and New Zealand), mixed-methods study of patterns of resilience, risk and service use of more than 7000 young people. The research was approved by the University Ethical Review Board prior to the commencement of interviews. This analysis concerns a sub-set of the New Zealand sample (n = 506). These youth completed a survey instrument three times at approximately annual intervals between 2009 and 2013. For purposes of baseline comparison, a second group of youth was also surveyed at Time 1. This group, the comparison group (n= 506), was recruited from the same communities as the vulnerable group and selected on the basis of similar demographic characteristics (i.e. age, gender and race/ethnicity). To be allocated to the comparison group youth were required to not be currently involved in services even though they came from the same neighbourhoods as youth in the vulnerable group.
Individual risk: Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-12-NLSCY)
The 12-item version of the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-12-NLSCY; ? = .85; Poulin, Hand, & Boudreau, 2005; Note: This is a secondary source. For more information, please check the bibliography of Sanders Munford 2014.) measured risk of depression among participants.
4-point scale from 0 = rarely or none of the time to 3 = all of the time
1014 youth (506=intervention group; 506=control group)