THERAPEUTIC TOOLS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR IN GENERATION Z YOUTH: A QUALITATIVE STUDY by Natika M.

McNeil

JOAN DURANTE, PhD, Faculty Mentor KIT JOHNSON, PhD, Committee Member MARY BOLD, PhD, Committee Member

Suzanne C. Holmes, PhD, Dean, School of Public Service Leadership

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University March 2012

UMI Number: 3499905

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3499905 Copyright 2012 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

Abstract There is an increase in aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbecek, 2006). The goal of this study was to present the lived experiences of therapists who treat Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. Generic qualitative inquiry was used to guide this study. The findings of this project could bring awareness and decrease the aggressive behavior that exists among Generation Z youth by unveiling therapeutic tools and methods the therapists have found effective. The main research question was: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth?

Dedication I would like to dedicate this project to all of the many youth who have tugged on my heart in one way or another. I know at times it seems as though there is no one who cares, but I assure you this is not always the case. There are many of us who are working hard to make a positive impact on your lives. Please know that this is just the beginning, but I vow to continue to dedicate my time and effort to helping you help yourselves.

iii

Acknowledgments I would like to first acknowledge God who makes all things possible. To my husband Maurice, who stood by my side and sacrificed during this tedious process, to my three sons, Barry, Jalen, and Brandon who inspire me more and more each day to dig deeper and reach higher. I want to acknowledge my parents, Blake and Carolyn Mills who has always believed in me, even when I gave up on myself, and my brother Donte Mills, Esq. who told me You cant make me a liar, because I always say my sister can do anything. With a grateful heart, I want to acknowledge my mentor, Dr. Joan Durante, who is a strong diligent woman. Also, to Dr. Rubye Braye whom God placed in my path at the right time for the right reason. Finally, I want to thank all of the participants who thought it not robbery to take a portion of this journey with me. May you all receive everything you deserve and more for the impartation you have made in m y life. I am ever so grateful.

iv

Table of Contents Acknowledgements List of Tables CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction Background of the Problem Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Significance of the Study Research Design Research Questions Assumptions and Limitations Definition of Terms Expected Findings Organization of the Remainder of the Study CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction of the Literature Theoretical Orientation for the Study Review of Significant Literature Synthesis of Research Findings Critique of Previous Research Summary CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY v 17 18 21 36 38 38 1 1 5 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 iv viii

Purpose of the Study Philosophical Assumptions Research Design Target Population Sampling Design Instruments Data Collection Procedures Data Analysis Validity and Reliability Expected Findings Ethical Considerations Conclusion CHAPTER 4. RESULTS Introduction of the Literature Role of the Researcher Description of the Sample Research Methodology Applied to the Data Analysis Presentation of Data and Results of the Analysis Summary CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Summary of the Results Literature Reviewed vi

40 41 46 49 49 50 51 54 57 57 58 60

61 62 63 65 66 77

79 79 80

Methodology Study Findings Discussion of the Results Discussion of the Conclusions Limitations Recommendations for Further Research Conclusion REFERENCES

81 81 84 84 88 90 91 94

vii

List of Tables Table 1. Participant Demographic Information Table 2. Question 1 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 3. Question 2 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 4. Question 3 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 5. Question 4 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 6. Question 5 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 7. Question 6 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 8. Question 7 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 9. Question 8 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 10. Question 9 Summary of Themes by Participants Table 11. Question 10 Summary of Themes by Participants 64 67 68 69 70 71 72 74 75 76 77

viii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem Aggressive behavior in Generation Z has increased (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbeek, 2006). As explained by Matier (2011), Generation Z is a term used to define the group of people born between 1995 and 2010. Studies have shown that in Generation Z
moderate to severe levels of aggressive behavior is exhibit (Campbell, 1995; Powell, Fixsen, Dunlap, Smith & Fox, 2007). The scope of aggressive behavior effects people other than

the youth themselves. For example, others affected are their parents, siblings, teachers and other family members. Some of the contributing factors include single parent homes, poor structure in the home and environment, and mothers with poor family background (Cross, 2008; Kumpfer & Alvarado, 2003). The purpose of this study was to better understand therapeutic tools and methods used by therapists to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The main research question was: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth?

Background of the Problem

Many behaviors, such as over-activity and demonstration of aggression toward peers can be developmental in nature during the preschool years as children are learning skills to get along in their communities (Division for Early Childhood, 1999; Dunlap et al., 2006). Continuous inappropriate actions from early childhood, especially for children with lack of support from parents or professionals, may indicate the start of a negative cycle that c ould

lead to difficulty in school and potential problems with relationships, and even employment (Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004).

The issue of aggressive behavior increasing in Generation Z is very significant (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbeek, 2006). Examples of aggressive behaviors are violence, shoplifting, vandalism, and truancy are crimes that continue to be committed by young people (Aspy, Oman, Vesely, McLeroy, Rodine, & Marshall, 2004; Perkins, Luster, & Jank, 2002). It has been indicated that aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth has been a focal point of researchers since the term youth was defined (Brendtro, 2006; Brendtro & Larson, 2004; Steinberg & Lerner, 2004). Dubowitz, Zuravin, Starr, Feigelman, and Harrington (1993) indicated that in 1992 there was a 28% increase in the behavior problems in children since 1991, and Crabtree (2004) indicated that violence continued to increase after the 1990s. Aggression occurs in most infants and toddlers, but the continued increase in violence as a youth needs to be addressed (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbeek, 2006; Garbarino, 2007). One example of aggressive behavior among Generation Z occurred in 2008 when two African American students, ages 14 and 17, assaulted a 16-year-old Jewish teenager who was leaving school (Shrifel, Burke & Lemire, 2008). The victim was beaten and his cell phone and money were taken from him. According to the authors of the report, one of the offenders had a prior arrest and lived in a group home. The other perpetrator simply was following the actions of his friends. This behavior is an example of aggressive behavior. Similarly, according to Ahmed, Mack, and Sweeney (2009), in Chicago a school boy was killed while walking home from school. At Fenger, a Chicago public school, the 2

students who lived close to the school viewed those who were bussed in as outsiders, and picked fights with them daily. In the same conflict, another youth who was bussed in was tired of running from bullies and when he tried to fight back, he nearly lost sight in his left eye. Ahmed et al. stated that in the month prior to this incident, five youth lost their lives due to violence. Police are constantly called on to assist the youth of Chicago public schools in getting to and from school safely. The fight sparked national outrage and prompted the White House to dispatch the nation's chief law enforcement official to Chicago later that week to call attention to youth violence across the country (Ahmed et al., 2009). Many Generation Z youth across the United States find themselves in situations where they are the victims or the perpetrators in violent situations both in and out of school (Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010). The lack of discipline has been the most serious cause of aggressive behavior in local schools across America (Crabtree, 2004). Crabtree indicated that as a result of aggressive behavior, a major concern about school funding is the increased lack of staff concern for violence since the late 1990s. Some youth defend their actions stating that they need to fight and protect what little they possess. Many of these youth come from broken homes in poverty areas and state they do not have other options (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke and Lemire 2008; Smalley & Kahn, 2005). Generation Zs aggressive behavior does not discriminate according to sex. Smalley and Kahn (2005) state that girls as well as boys are capable of aggressive behaviors that include hurting others, with knives, box cutters, and guns. Although exact causes for such negative behavior may not be identified, aggressive behavior does have 3

an effect on school attendance and has caused some youth to turn to alcohol or drug addiction (Smalley & Kahn, 2005). When difficulties are identified and addressed early,
there is a better prospect of reducing long-term negative effects (Raver, 2002; Walker et al., 2004).

According to Bandura and Walters (1963), social learning theory of aggression is a combination of environmental (social) and psychological factors that influence behaviors that include aggression. This theory provides a basis for the source of not only current aggressive behaviors, but what can contribute to positive desired behaviors. Social learning theory of aggression explains that people learn from one another and this happens by way of observing, imitating and modeling (Bandura, 1969). Bandura (1973) focused on the notion that the world was the cause of persons behavior, and a persons behavior was the cause of the world. His theory of behaviorism suggests that an individuals environment is the cause of his or her behavior. In his studies on youth aggression, Bandura found that aggressive behavior causes or creates a negative environment. Bandura considers personality as three interacting components consisting of the environment, behavior, and the individuals psychological process (Bandura, 1977). Banduras social learning theory of aggression is used to understand the problem of aggression in youth from the personal perspective. This means comprehending what the issue is from the youths point of view. Cognitive behavior theory as utilized in this project helped to provide an understanding of therapeutic methods among youth with aggressive behaviors. Some basic assumptions are that psychotherapy can be utilized to reeducate, changing a 4

person's thinking in a manner that will change behavior (Ellis, 1980). Cormier and Cormier (1998) state that there are three levels that play a major part in behavioral difficulties, which components are automatic thoughts, underlying assumptions, and cognitive distortions. In order to see change or improvement, these three levels of cognition must change. Cognitive behavior theory and the associated therapy are used for adults, youth, and children who present with many different diagnosis and situations with a great deal of success in relation to youth with aggressive behaviors (Kendall, 2005). However, it can take time before poor behaviors are replaced with good ones (Kendall, 2005). According to Cormier and Cormier (1998), there cannot be a substantial change without cognitive therapy. Cormier and Cormier says the reason for this is because until a person becomes aware of thoughts that come naturally or automatically they can not change. Change requires knowledge of automatic thoughts which provides the ability to alter what a person thinks about which will in turn change the behaviors. The goal is to get the person to realize that the automatic thoughts are contributing to anxiety as well as actions. Without cognitive behavior therapy, there are no new thoughts to replace those that cause aggressive behavior. This explains the lack of substantial change (Cormier & Cormier, 1998).

Statement of the Problem

The problem is a lack of information concerning the understanding of therapeutic methods regarding the reduction of aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. Parenting is

significant in the development of social competence: therefore intervention programs are designed to improve parental skills (Dunst & Kassow, 2004; Gallagher, 2003).

According to Hunt (2006), children born to teenage parents are more likely to have a difficult childhood. Hunt concluded that a difficult childhood is more likely to cause violence and anger in youth. Another issue that is known to increase the violence in youth is witnessing violence as a child. The chances are even greater when the child witnesses as well as experiences abuse and violence (Bourassa, 2007). Regan (2009) stated that violence prevention programs could be very beneficial to adolescents by way of bringing a greater awareness and providing alternative approaches. By conducting a generic qualitative study that looked at the methods that therapists believe work best with Generation Z youth who demonstrate aggressive behaviors, educators, social workers, and other mental health professionals may be able to add to their knowledge base concerning working with this population. As stated by Smalley and Kahn (2005), aggression is repeatedly identified as a type of behavior that negatively impacts a childs education. The negative impact is evident through poor grades due to stress or worrying, excessive absences, and missed class time while being disciplined (Chen, Chang, Liu, & He, 2008; Crick, 1997; Wood, Cowan, & Baker, 2002). According to Crabtree (2004), this violence puts fear in staff and causes them to think twice about disciplining such violent adolescents. In turn, funding becomes limited because the funders are concerned about the violence that is present in the schools. Initially, research almost exclusively explored the impact of blatant aggression, such as physical or verbal abuse while subtle aggression, such as intimidation and 6

exclusion of peers failed to be considered a genuine factor when exploring aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth in the school (Chen, Chang, Liu, & He, 2008; Crick, 1997; Stipek & Miles 2008). What has come to light is that both forms of aggressive behavior have great impacts on the victims and can be seen in students behavior very early in their educational careers (Crick, 1997; Walker et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2008; Stipek & Miles 2008). In fact, students who demonstrate small acts of violence at an early age often demonstrate more severe behavior as they age (Keynes, 2002). This model of behavior can be quite disadvantageous and effect both the sufferer and the performer (Bourassa, 2007; Mounts, 1997). Mounts (1997) as well as Walker et al. (2004) explored the implications of aggressive patterns and noted that when an adolescent is aggressive, his peer group may reject him. Specifically, aggressive adolescents develop a poor reputation with peers. When this reputational bias occurs, peers begin to identify the aggressive adolescent as a trouble maker regardless of the circumstances of their situation. In other words, peers will fail to be open minded and give the adolescent the benefit of the doubt and will instead be very critical of that adolescent in all situations (Mounts 1997; Walker et al., 2004). It is believed that even after new social skills are learned, the child may have considerable difficulty re-entering the peer group because of these preconceived notions (Mounts 1997; Walker et al., 2004). Given this type of situation, based on the social learning theory,
aggressive adolescents tend to befriend other aggressive adolescents to be accepted (Bandura, 1973).

Statistics indicate that all schools in the United States deal with violence and crime at some level (Redding, Dill, Smith, Surette, & Cornell, 2011). A study conducted 7

on aggressive behavior in Generation Z by Alfred Universitys Interdisciplinary Program in Violence Studies (2001) reveals that 10% of students say they have considered shooting another person at school, 20% say they know a student who has made a plan to shoot another student at school, and 37% believe there are students at school capable of shooting another person. Poverty leads to behavior problems for youth because they are in an uncomfortable or rough place in life (Cuthrell, Stapleton & Ledford, 2010).The longer a child lives in poverty, the more likely it will be for that child to experience sadness, anxiety and dependency (Eamon, 2003). Externalizing behaviors, such as aggression, bullying and throwing tantrums also predict poor school performance and delinquency. (Cuthrell, Stapleton& Ledford, 2010) According to Browning (2007), another common factor in youth who become violent is frequent use of video games such as one titled Mortal Combat which involves fictitious characters using various weapons to kill one another. Factors which cause violence in youth are of concern to those who deal with this population. They may even impact the treatment provided, which is something that was explored in this qualitative study.

Purpose of the Study The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand therapeutic tools and methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Finding motivation and effective treatment plans for aggressive youth has been a great challenge for professionals (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney, 2009; Browning, 2007; Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke & Lemire, 2008; Smalley & Kahn, 2005). The findings of the study may 8

be used to help other professionals working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth.

Significance of the Study Youth can be resilient and at times they are able to face lifes circumstances (May, 2005). According to Goldstein (2009), there are three powerful predictors of resilience in youth. Those predictors are a temperament that elicits positive responses from others, family relationships that promote trust and connection, and community support systems. For youth who lack resilience, challenges and changes they face in their everyday life may cause future aggressive behaviors (Goldstein, 2009). Many youth have trouble identifying and coping with the causes of their own aggressive behaviors (Newton, 2001; Watson & Fischer, 2009). While aggressive behavior in youth can be linked to poverty, absent fathers, young mothers, and divorce (Newton, 2001; Watson & Fischer, 2009) there is no one single reason that can explain the aggressive behaviors (Watson & Fischer, 2009). Additionally, researchers such as Coleman, Walker, Lee, Friesen, and Squire (2009) consider substance abuse by the parents as a major cause of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Hearing from therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z was helpful in understanding effective therapeutic methods to decrease the aggressive behaviors in this population (Regan, 2009). Little is known concerning specific therapeutic methods used by therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z. Mandara, Murray, and Joyner (2007) state that youth with absent fathers not only have a higher percentage of aggressive behavior, but also struggle with gender role 9

development. Strohschein (2005) note that youth in highly dysfunctional families often have behavior problems, however, the aggressive behaviors lessen when the marriage is dissolved. Finally, Dahinten, Shapka, and Willms (2007) mention that youth of young mothers tend to develop aggressive behavior as well as produce lower math scores. This type of information may be helpful to therapists approaches when attempting to improve the aggressive behaviors of the Generation Z (Dahinten, Shapka, and Willms, 2007; Mandara, Murray, and Joyner, 2007; Strohschein, 2005). There remains a gap in the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about the effective therapeutic methods of therapists treating aggressive behavior in Generation Z when they become angry. Failures in the effectiveness of teaching and treatment strategies provided by mental health professionals have contributed to increased aggressive behavior in Generation Z (Crabtree, 2004; Morrison & Coiro, 1999). A number of different programs exist that teach anger management skills such as a violence prevention program for youth bring a greater awareness and help reduce the aggression shown by the youth. These programs such as alternative schools, group sessions, and anger management classes focus on the symptoms and causes and not the method of treatment and approach toward aggressive behavior (Knouse, 2009; Regan, 2009). In targeting therapists who are currently providing therapeutic services, this study was envisioned to help professionals understand the most effective therapeutic methods when treating youth who use aggression as a release of anger. Results of this study may guide community service organizations in designing programs for youth receiving services that will decrease their aggression. The results of the study may also bring

10

awareness to the aggressive youth by having them acknowledge the behaviors and what triggers them and encourage alternative therapeutic methods.

Research Design This completed study was guided by a generic qualitative inquiry. According to Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003), generic qualitative inquiry is exploratory research that seeks understanding and discovery and can be appropriate for understanding an experience or event. Merriam (1998) stated that generic qualitative research is designed to detect and understand a process, or the perceptions and views of those who are involved. A generic qualitative inquiry guided this research program because the approach is based on a enabling the voices of all those who participate in the research to be valued (Harding, 1987). Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003) indicated that generic qualitative inquiry does not adhere to one type of qualitative methodology nor is it guided by any specific set of philosophical assumptions. The research project was undertaken to determine what are the best therapeutic tools and methods therapists have found when treating Generation Z youth with aggressive behaviors. Qualitative data was gathered from in-depth interviews conducted among 10 therapists who are licensed professionals. According to Mertens (2005), due to the depth of information needed from each applicant to develop a successful study, a small sample size is necessary. One of the reasons for a smaller sample size when doing qualitative sampling is because in order to be of value, an observable fact does not need to be repeated, it only needs to appear once (Wilmot, 2005). With a large sample size, it could have become very difficult for the researcher to be able to acquire the quality of 11

information needed to increase the validity of the study without increasing the level of complexity (Eisenhart, 1989). The data was used to identify consistencies among interviewed participants. According to Creswell (2009), questions in qualitative research are designed to describe the reality of the matter based on the information obtained from the participants. According to Berg (2007), qualitative research is a great form of research that focuses on the individuals and their so-called life-words. Berg (2007) also states that researchers have depended too much on statistics which may not always be accurate. Results from this study are expected to contribute to the much needed research regarding effective therapeutic tools and methods used by therapist to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth.

Research Questions The completed research was a generic qualitative inquiry looking at understanding the therapeutic methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The research that has been done previously does not fully explain what therapists view as the best therapeutic tools and methods when treating aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth when they are angry (Americas Children, 2005). The main research question designed for the completed study was as follows: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Sub questions to this research question directed toward the therapists were as follows: 1. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? 12

2.

What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display

aggressive behaviors? 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the

effect teachers have on their level of aggression?

Assumptions and Limitations The proposed qualitative research study was based on the following assumptions: 1. Research is required (a) concerning therapeutic methods for treating aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth; (b) the effectiveness of treating aggressive behavior. 2. Participants will be exclusively therapists who treat aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. The study will not compare effects of anger and aggression in children. The experiences of the therapists will not be monitored or assessed. In selecting participants for this research, no specified criteria other than age of population served, behavior problems of population served, and treatment of aggression will be employed. 3. 4. 5. Participants will provide honest responses. There is no conflict of interest. The researcher will follow the IRB approved plan.

The proposed qualitative research study was based on the following limitations: 1. The experiences of the therapists will not be monitored or assessed. In selecting participants for this research, no specified criteria other than age of

13

population served, behaviors problems of population served, and treatment of aggressive behaviors will be employed. 2. The research is limited to therapist. 3. Responses only apply to treatment methods for Generation Z youth. 4. The researcher will minimize bias. 5. The data collection will be completed in three weeks.

Definition of Terms For the purposes of this study, the following terms were defined. Aggression. The term 'aggression' refers to all behavior intended to destroy another persons property or to injure another person, either psychologically or physically (Aggression in Society, 1999). At-Risk Children. At-Risk children is a term used to describe children whose economic, physical, emotional, or academic needs go unmet or serve as barriers and in turn put them in danger of being involved in negative situations (National Association for Gifted Children, 2008). Generation Z. Generation Z is a term used to define the group of people born between 1995 and 2010 (Matier, 2011). Mental Health Professional. Mental health professional is defined as an individual who provides individuals, families or groups counseling regarding situations which may be causing emotional distress for the family or individual. These professionals are individuals who have been trained as counselors, social workers, family therapists, psychologists, and psychiatric nurses. There are different license requirements that must 14

be met according to the state in which the individual is working (Mitcham-Smith & Henry, 2007).

Expected Findings Leedy and Ormrod (2005) indicated that qualitative research involves understanding the findings that present themselves during the study, extracting the actual meaning from the data, and interpreting results as they relate to the study. The researcher projected that this study may have found that there is no commonality in effective therapeutic tools and methods used by therapists for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Instead, they may have believed that each individual is different and no one approach can be labeled as most effective. Additionally, by examining life situations that have caused decrease in aggressive behavior in their clients, therapists have shed some light on reducing aggressive behavior in the lives of youth. The information provided may help guide community service organizations in designing youth programs specifically for Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior angry by pointing out the most effective approaches that need to be included order to increase positive anger management. Completing this study was expected to provide insight on the therapeutic tools and methods that therapists use with clients at risk for aggressive behavior. This may be a great asset to professionals for development and implementation of new programs created to address the specific needs of at risk children who display aggressive behavior.

15

Organization of the Remainder of the Study The remainder of the study includes a literature review of major causes of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Also, there will be a review of literature focusing on Generation Z youth and their way of displaying feelings. Additional review includes research related to different family situations that present problems for youth. Chapter 2 includes an outline of the theoretical framework and the researchers review of the literature concerning aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth and major causes of the increase in aggressive behavior. Chapter 3 provides the methodology and the design of study, the population and sample, the organization of the data collected, data analysis, and ethical considerations. Chapter 4 will provide the results of the study, including data collection and analysis. Chapter 5 will contain a summary of the study and list conclusions as well as recommendations for future research.

16

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction to the Literature Review Studies have shown that 10% to 15% of all youth exhibit moderate to severe levels of aggressive behavior (Campbell, 1995; Powell, Fixsen, Dunlap, Smith & Fox, 2007). Untimely death, teen pregnancy, antisocial behavior, truancy, gambling, depression, and attempted suicide wave red flags in communities across the United States (U.S. CDC, 2007). Due to parenting being identified as a significant influence on the development of social competence, there have been intervention programs to target the entire family (Dunst & Kassow, 2004; Gallagher, 2003). The purpose of the proposed qualitative study was to understand effective therapeutic methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. A generic qualitative inquiry guided this research program because the approach is based on valuing the voices of those who participate in the research (Harding, 1987). The main research question was as follows: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Sub questions to this research question directed toward the therapists were as follows: 1. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? 2. What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display aggressive behaviors?

17

3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the effect teachers have on their level of aggression? During this review of the literature, some of the most common factors of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth are examined. Recent aggressive occurrences by youth are reviewed in order to determine the common types of aggressive behavior. Also, this literature review looks at the effect that aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth has on schools, and if there is a difference in the aggressive behavior in boys and girls. Finally, the researcher looked at social learning theory and will discuss how it relates to the research project. The information in this literature review was obtained only from scholarly sources. These include sources such as journal articles, news paper articles as well as books. The results of this study may guide community service organizations in designing programs providing services that will reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. Study outcomes may also bring awareness to the professionals who work to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth as these therapists provide effective therapeutic methods.

Theoretical Orientation for the Study The theory used as background for this completed study was the social learning theory of aggression as proposed by Bandura and Walters. According to Bandura and Walters (1963), social learning theory of aggression states that a combination of environmental (social) and psychological factors influence behavior. This theory provides a basis for the source of not only current aggressive behaviors, but what can contribute to 18

positive desired behaviors. Social learning theory of aggression explains that people learn from one another and this happens by way of observing, imitating and modeling (Bandura, 1969). Bandura wrote about the notion that the world is a great factor in a persons behavior, and peoples behavior play a huge role in the make up of the world. As indicated by Bandura (1973), behaviorism suggests that an individuals environment is the cause of his or her behavior. Additionally Bandura progressed in his studies on aggressive behavior in youth, he suggested that ones behavior also causes or creates a certain environment. Eventually, Bandura went on to consider personality as three interacting components. These components are the environment, behavior, and the individuals psychological process (Bandura, 1977). Bandura states that social learning theory is known to be the bridge between behaviorist and cognitive learning theories because it encompasses attention, memory and motivation. According to Akers (2009), social learning theory is a theory that favors criminal and aggressive behaviors that include the behaviors that will be highlighted in the research. Social learning theory is one of the most frequently tested theories, and it has the ability to observe aggressive behaviors while including the cognitive variables that impact those behaviors (Akers, 2009). In 2008, Miller, Jennings, Alvarez-Rivera, and Miller completed a study to test the social learning theory. Over a two-week period, data was collected from 305 students between the ages of 14 and 19 who were enrolled in either public or private school. Each student was given a survey to complete containing measures of many different individual 19

and familial factors. The study tested substance use among youth. According to Miller, Jennings, Alvarez-Rivera, and Miller(2008), this study confirmed the validity of social learning theory in the following manner: students who picked up cigarette use due to peer actions (p<.001), those who participated in alcohol use due to peer activity (p<.001), and the youth who engaged in marijuana use was the same (p<.001) (Miller, Jennings, Alvarez-Rivera, & Miller 2008). Enquist and Ghirland (2007) refute the social learning theory indicating that human culture is cumulative. Enquist and Ghirland indicated that individuals have the ability to take their own moral values into consideration when deciding on behaviors to engage in. Although aggressive behaviors may be noted in society, it is not always normal to adapt to those behaviors if they do not agree with the values of the original culture. Social behavior can be adapted as well as discarded based on an individuals culture of origin (Enquist & Ghirland). This theory was extremely relevant in the completed research project because it helped to identify where the youth are when they start treatment with the therapists, and what helps form their choices to be aggressive or to change. Cognitive behavior theory and its related therapy also was a guiding theory for this research project. Corey (2001) states some basic assumptions of this theory are that psychotherapy essentially is based on being reeducated, and that changing a person's thinking will change their behavior. Cormier and Cormier (1998) state that there are three levels that play a major part in aggressive behavior. Those components are automatic thoughts, underlying assumptions, and cognitive distortions. In order to see change or improvement, these three levels of cognition must change. 20

Kendall (2005) indicates that Cognitive behavior theory has been used for adults, youth, and children alike with many different diagnosis and situations. There has been a great deal of success when it comes to adults, youth, and children with aggressive behavior and the Cognitive behavior theory. Kendall (2005) does warn that although the theory is successful, it can take months before the aggressive behaviors are replaced with good ones even after the mindset is changed. According to Cormier and Cormier (1998), there can not be a substantial change without cognitive therapy. Cormier and Cormier says the reason for this is that a person must become aware of thoughts that come naturally or automatically they cannot change. It is important for one to have knowledge of their automatic thoughts so that they can change what they think about which will in turn change the behaviors. The goal is to get the person to realize that the automatic thoughts are contributing to anxiety as well as actions. Without cognitive behavior therapy, there are no new thoughts to replace those that cause poor performance, which explains the lack of substantial change.

Review of Significant Literature Factors of Aggressive Behavior in Generation Z Youth Many behaviors, such as over activity and demonstration of anger toward peers can be developmental in nature during the preschool years as children are learning skills to get along in their communities (Division for Early Childhood (DEC), 1999; Dunlap et al., 2006). Continuous inappropriate actions, especially those demonstrated despite provided support, may indicate the start of a negative cycle that could lead to difficulty in school and potential problems with relationships, and even employment (Walker, 21

Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004). When difficulties are identified early there is a better chance of reducing long-term negative effects through intervention (Raver, 2002; Walker et al., 2004). The issue of increasing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth is very significant. It has been indicated that youth behavior has been a focal point since the concept of youth was defined (Brendtro, 2006; Brendtro & Larson, 2004; Steinberg & Lerner, 2004). Dubowitz, Zuravin, Starr, Feigelman, and Harrington (1993) indicated that in 1992 there was a 28% increase in the aggressive behavior in youth since 1991, and Crabtree (2004) indicated that aggressive behavior continued to increase after the 1990s. From the 1990s to date, aggressive behavior rates have increased with age (Merz & McCall, 2010). Aggressive behavior such as violence, shoplifting, vandalism, and truancy are crimes that continue to be committed by Generation Z youth (Aspy, Oman, Vesely, McLeroy, Rodine, & Marshall, 2004; Perkins, Luster, & Jank, 2002). A qualitative study performed by Varjas, Myers, Bellmoff, Lopp, Birckbichler, and Marshall (2008) was done to investigate bullying from students perspectives. The sample from the study included 30 participants who were recruited from the fourth through the eighth grade and attended schools in an urban school system. All of the students participated in focus groups to gather data. There were five major themes that were focused on in the study and they were; the nature of bullying, the characteristics of victims and bullies, perceived reasons for bullying, reactions to bullying, and preventive measures (Varjas, Myers, Bellmoff, Lopp, Birckbichler, & Marshall 2008). According to Varjas, Myers, Bellmoff, Lopp, Birckbichler, and Marshall (2008), the results from the study indicate that students believe that bullies engage in bullying or 22

aggressive behavior in order to gain respect from their peers. In addition, students do not believe that bullies intend to harm others. Instead, they believe the harm was accidental. Lastly, the students who participated felt that teachers do not provide appropriate interventions (Varjas, Myers, Bellmoff, Lopp, Birckbichler, & Marshall 2008). Varjas, Myers, Bellmoff, Lopp, Birckbichler, and Marshall (2008) indicate that further research is needed to determine effective therapeutic methods. A quantitative study completed by Kim, Leventhal, Koh, Hubbard, and Boyce (2006) included a total of 1655 seventh and eighth grade students. The prospective cohort study was done to determine the causal relation between school bullying and psychopathological behavior. Because school bullying is a known correlate of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth, Kim, et al. (2006) desired to find what the correlation was. In this study, a questionnaire containing 69 questions with 332 options was filled in by the students involved in the study. The results of the quantitative study showed that aggressive behavior in youth was the consequence rather than the cause of bullying. The value of p was < 0.14. Six hundred and fifty-seven (56.5%) students in total were involved in bullying. One hundred and forty-eight (12.7%) of them reported being victims, while 189 (16.3%) of them reported being bullies. In addition, more boys than girls were involved in bullying and more boys than girls were bullies. When comparing distribution by gender among victims, slight significant differences were found (p<.006). Hurd, Zimmerman, and Reischl 2010 completed a study which investigated the possible negative or positive effects role models behavior has on aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. This quantitative study involved 331 seventh and eight graders from low income neighborhoods and used structural equation modeling. Structural equation 23

modeling is a statistical technique that is used to test and estimate causal relations (Wright, 1921). The study used a model developed and tested to assess the relationships between role model prosocial behavior, role model antisocial behavior, youths attitudes toward violence, and aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The findings of the study showed that prosocial behaviors of role models are directly related to reduced aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth, and antisocial behaviors of role models yield more aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth (p<.01). In addition, the antisocial behaviors have a greater effect on youth than prosocial behavior. A longitudinal research project completed by Xue, Zimmerman, and Cunningham, 2009 examined the relationship between alcohol use and aggressive behavior from youth to adulthood. In this study, the sample included 649 youths who were followed for eight years. The data was gathered by asking each participant how often they engaged in alcohol consumption and how often they engaged in aggressive behavior in the preceding 12 months. This was done each year for a total of eight years. In order to identify and follow the developmental paths of the two behaviors and explore the relationships between them, growth curve analyses were conducted (Xue, Zimmerman, & Cunningham, 2009). According to Xue, Zimmerman, and Cunningham (2009), the results show that aggressive behavior peaks during middle to late adolescents after which it declines. However, it was noted that the frequency of alcohol use increases over time. The findings for both males and females showed that early aggressive behavior predicted later alcohol use (p<.001), and also that early alcohol use predicted later aggressive behavior (p<.01) (Xue, Zimmerman, & Cunningham, 2009). Ultimately, the results showed that changes in 24

one behavior were associated with changes in the other (p<.001). Xue, Zimmerman, and Cunningham (2009) state that there is a bidirectional relationship between alcohol use and aggressive behavior, and when creating programs and policies aimed at reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth and alcohol use these findings should be considered. In 2007, Limbos, Chan, Warf, Schneir, Iverson, Shekelle, and Kipke conducted a meta-analysis systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of methods used to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. There were 41 studies included in the review. Tertiary-level methods were more likely to report effectiveness than primary- or secondary-level methods. A method was considered effective if one or more aggressive behavior outcome indicators was reported as significantly different at the p<0.05 level, and ineffective if none of the aggressive outcome indicators was significantly different at the p<0.05 level. Effective methods evaluated by randomized controlled trials included Responding in Peaceful and Positive Ways, Aban Aya Youth Project, Moving to Opportunity, Early Community-Based Intervention Program, Childhavens Therapeutic Child-Care Program, Turning Point: Rethinking Violence, and a multisystemic therapy program. Differences among programs and within subpopulations could not be assessed because of inadequate data. Understanding the motivations for the aggressive behaviors would give professionals a greater insight on how to build intervention programs which would give more positive results in the future. A quantitative study was performed in 2007 by Copeland, Miller-Johnson, Keeler, Angold, and Costello to examine types of psychiatric disorders that precede aggressive behavior. Copeland et al. state that this knowledge would assist in explaining possible 25

aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. To conduct this study, a sample group of 1420 children ages 9 through 13 was selected and followed annually until the age of 16 for psychiatric disorders. After being monitored until age 16, criminal records were reviewed in order to determine criminal status. The results showed that 31% of the sample had one or more adult criminal charges. Overall, 51.4% of male young adult offenders and 43.6% of female offenders had a child psychiatric history. The population-attributable risk of criminality from childhood disorders was 20.6% for young adult female participants and 15.3% for male participants. Copeland et al. (2007) found that youth with specific patterns of psychopathology with and without conduct disorder were at risk of later aggressive behavior (p<.001). Finally, in 2009, Snider and Lee completed a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of secondary methods used to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth in the emergency department. Secondary prevention programs are designed for those youth who have already been effected by aggressive behavior, and take advantage of the teachable moment (Snider & Lee, 2009). This systematic review was to identify the rate of success and the populations most likely to benefit form these interventions. There were eight databases searched in order to obtain this information. According to Snider and Lee (2009), in obtaining significant data, the studies that were selected included an intervention described and evaluated, the intervention was healthcare based, and the studies targeted youth injured in aggressive behaviors. All of the interventions included in the review used emergency department case management (Snider & Lee, 2009). 26

The data showed a significant reduction in reinjure rates (p> 0.05). Although it has become much more difficult to change aggressive behavior in youth, there is great potential for emergency physicians to prevent injury in intimate partner violence and impaired driving (Snider & Lee, 2009). Youth who have been injured by aggressive behavior tend to be in a reflective as well as a receptive state of mind in the emergency department, which makes this setting appropriate for intervention (Johnson, Bradshaw, & Wright, 2007). According to Snider and Lee (2009), the population most likely to benefit showed to be black males. The vast majority (89%) of youth victims of aggressive behavior are discharged directly from emergency departments (Snider & Lee, 2009). Moreover, youth who are injured by aggressive behavior are at risk of repeat injury due to aggressive behavior. Given that the emergency department provides potential for a teachable moment, an opportunity exists for the development of secondary prevention methods for aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth in emergency departments (Johnson, Bradshaw, & Wright, 2007). Many youth across the United States find themselves in situations where they are the victims or the perpetrators in aggressive behavior both in and out of school (Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010). Some youth have been known to defend their actions stating that they need to fight and protect what little they possessed. Many of these youth come from broken homes in poverty areas and state they dont have other options (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke & Lemire 2008, Smalley & Kahn, 2005).

27

Violent Events Shifrel, Burke, and Lemire (2008) reported that two African American students were arrested for assaulting a Jewish student. The victim was riding his bike when the perpetrators attacked him. According to Shifrel et al., the two offenders, ages 14 and 17, beat the 16 year old victim on the way home from school and took his cell phone and money. The victim suffered from a broken jaw bone in the end. The article indicated that one of the offenders had a prior arrest and also lived in a group home, while the others actions were the result of peer pressure. The defendants who were both residents of a group home due to family issues were charged with low-level assault and bike theft (Shifrel, Burke, & Lemire, 2008). The researcher finds this article relevant to the study as the goal is to understand what motivated these youth to partake in such aggressive behaviors. Assault does not only exist in youth who have unfortunate living situations such as group homes, but according to Ahmed, Mack and Sweeney (2009), also those who live in family settings. Ahmed, Mack, and Sweeney (2009) mention a Chicago high school boy was killed while walking home. This scuffle involved 50 youth who were honor roll students, worked after school jobs, played after school sports, and planned for college. However, another common factor among these youth was poverty (Ahmed et al., 2009). In the same conflict, another youth nearly lost sight in his left eye. Punishment for those involved in this melee included anything from suspension to imprisonment. Ahmed et al. state that in the month prior to this incident, five youth in Chicago lost their lives due to aggressive behavior. Police are constantly called on to assist the youth of Chicago public schools in getting to and from school safely. This fight caused national attention to be 28

brought to aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth across the country (Ahmed et al., 2009). Although some bullying occurs physically face to face, it also exists in other ways. According to Dyrli (2005), another common form of aggressive behavior among Generation Z youth is cyber bullying. There was an arrest made consisting of three honor students in a Louisiana school. The students targeted a fellow student using the internet to send violent threats (Dyrli, 2005). At the same school, another girl received 300 anonymous e-mail messages that all included the same vulgar name calling. Dyrli (2005) indicated that not only does this aggressive behavior take place between students, but in addition teachers are cyber bullied. Some of the cyber bullies have turned out to be those who are actually bullied while they are in school (Dyrli, 2005). As stated by Dyrli (2005), cyber bullying can happen by way of e-mail, web sites, chat rooms, online forums, logs, instant messaging, voice mails, and text messages that are sent to cell phones. With all of these options, it has become very challenging for staff to monitor and control cyber bullying the way they would like to (Dyrli, 2005). It is true that there is punishment or consequences for aggressive behavior, but that does not always put an end to it (Byron, 2010). Byron (2010) tells of an incident where a youth was arrested for violation of a personal protection order while charges were pending for domestic violence. This incident involved a 16 year old boy and his 16 year old former girlfriend. The boy initially assaulted his girlfriend at a school sporting event. The assault left the girl with injuries to her eye, face, lip, and upper arm. The charges were pressed by the young girls father. The young boy was rearrested while awaiting trial for his initial offense (Bryon, 2010). The researcher believes that this type 29

of aggressive behavior stems from underlying issues. The goal of this study is to make progress on understanding these aggressive behaviors in order to be effective in treatment. Another type of aggressive behavior that causes harm and brings criminal charges is those that mimic what may be seen on television (Browning, 2007). According to Browning (2007), another common influence on aggressive behavior is the frequent use of video games. Browning reported a story where two youth from Colorado were being held on charges of child abuse which led to death. The two boys stated that they were imitating movements from a game titled Mortal Kombat on a younger sister. The sister died in the hospital later that night. Browning (2007) argued that many times, not only do youth pick up violent behaviors from playing the video games, but parents and guardians place blame on these games instead of making girls and boys become responsible for their actions. When individuals frequently over engage in this type of entertainment, it makes separating reality from fantasy world challenging (Browning, 2007). Gender Differences Smalley and Kahn (2005) noted that the aggressive behavior does not stop at the boys, but teen girls are also raging with aggression. According to Smalley and Kahn, some of the aggressive behaviors girls are involved in include hurting others with knives, box cutters, and even carrying guns. It is emphasized that with girls it is more emotiondriven aggression, and females tend to revert to aggressive behavior over minor things such as dirty looks (Smalley, 2005). Although there are some similar predictors of aggressive behavior in youth, there are also differences that emerged in a study done by Daigle, Cullen, and Wright (2007). 30

According to Daigle, Cullen, and Wright, 2007, the Level of Service Inventory Revised (LSI-R) is a classification instrument used to identify the risks and needs of offenders. Originally validated for use with male offenders, however the instruments suitability for use with female offenders was uncertain. The study conducted by Daigle, Cullen, and Wright (2007) attempted to contribute to the discussion on gender and the predictive validity of the LSI-R. A sample of 2,849 probationers and parolees was administered the LSI-R at two points in time. This design allowed for the analysis of the instruments predictive validity at Time 1 and Time 2, and of the impact that changes in LSI-R scores may have on rates of recidivism. Results from multivariate analyses show that although there are some similarities in the predictors of male and female aggressive behavior, differences also emerged. Variables measuring general strain and involvement are stronger predictors for males, whereas only attachment to school is stronger for females. The results suggested that the LSI-R is a valid instrument for predicting recidivism with male and female offenders and should be viewed as a useful resource for professionals that work in correctional treatment (Daigle, Cullen, & Wright, 2007). Fagan, Van Horn, Hawkins, and Arthur (2007) conducted a quantitative study involving 7,829 10th grade students. Each student was asked to complete the self-report Communities That Care Youth Survey to evaluate the differences of 22 psychosocial risk and protective factors associated with violence. According to Fagan, Van Horn, Hawkins, and Arthur (2007), classroom surveys are the most common method of assessing program outcomes in school-based prevention. Self-report protocols were read aloud to students as they filled out individual answers at their desks. Two time points were used per academic year in the study, one each during fall and spring semesters. The measures assessed risk 31

and protective factors for aggressive behavior and participation in victimization, bullying, and other antisocial conduct. The results showed that overall, girls experience less risk and more protection, and have shown the involvement in aggressive behavior to be less with girls than boys. Of the 22 factors the association of 18 showed greater risks for boys. In this study there were no differences across the experimental conditions for the ethnic group categories or gender (p< .01). According to Bennett, Farrington, and Huesmann (2005), there is a higher rate of aggressive behavior for males than females. Bennett et al. 2005 state that aggressive behavior and crime is directly related to social cognition. Bennett et al. 2005 argued that impairment of social cognition is not the prevalent factor for aggressive behavior and crime in Generation Z youth, but the ability to process social information can protect an individual from aggressive behavior and violence. It is not necessarily suggested that deficiencies in cognitive capabilities cause aggressive behavior, but rather that the ways social information is processed and certain social cognitive memory structures help to protect the individual from personal, social, environmental, or situational pressures towards aggressive behavior. One of the reasons females have lower rates of offending is because they acquire social cognitive skills earlier in life than males do and because they have better prosocial skills. The superior social cognitive skills of females are influenced by many factors, including better communication with authority, fewer frontal lobe deficits, greater verbal ability, and differential socialization by parents and peers. The conclusion was that because social cognition is greater in females, the aggressive behavior and crime in females is less likely to take place (Bennett, Farrington, & Huesmann 2005). 32

One hundred twenty four participants between the age of 14 and 18 were asked to complete a self-report survey to complete a research project done by Hart, OToole, Price-Sharps, and Shaffer (2007). 53.8% of the participants were males, and 46.8 % of the participants were females. This quantitative study unlike those listed previously concluded that girls are at much greater risk for displaying aggressive behavior than boys (p<.05). Female aggressive behavior is more connected to emotional factors, and is increasing continuously (Hart et al., 2007). Effects of Aggressive Behavior in Generation Z Youth on Schools As stated by Smalley and Kahn (2005), aggressive behavior has repeatedly been identified as the type of behavior that would negatively impact a childs education. The negative impact is evident through poor grades due to stress or worrying, excessive absences and missed class time while being disciplined (Crick, 1997; Wood, Cowan, & Baker, 2002). According to Crabtree (2004), aggressive behavior has a very negative effect on the discipline that school staff will provide. Staff becomes very uncomfortable enforcing the necessary discipline. In turn, funding becomes limited because the funders are concerned about the aggressive that is present in the schools. Crabtree (2004) explained that due to the aggressive behavior, funders felt it would be a waste to spend money on property that would not be well taken care of. The fact that sometimes the faculty is limited on what actions they are willing to take does not reassure funders. In 2007, there was a qualitative ethnographic research done by Fenning and Rose. This study interviewed school teachers and reviewed prison entry occurrences. The question asked of these teachers in the study was what are the motivating factors for exclusionary discipline? The results of the study showed that youth who are expelled 33

from school due to aggressive behavior have a greater chance of being imprisoned. The term used to describe the process was noted as the school-to-prison pipeline. The interviews showed that the teachers felt they would lose control of the classroom because of the aggressive behavior in the youth, and they also feared these youth. As a result of these issues, exclusionary discipline of students has increased in teachers (Fenning & Rose, 2007). Another quantitative study that was done was one that examined the causes and characteristics of teachers who bully students or get bullied by students. This study was completed by Twemlow, Fonagy, Sacco, and Brethour (2006). One hundred and sixteen teachers were asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding their own experiences. The findings of the study showed that teachers who bully or get bullied are individuals who were bullied when they were younger (p<.01). Twemlow et al. pointed out that based on these results, the cycle of bullying and aggressive behavior may never end because this is a cause as well as an effect of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Finding and keeping quality teachers in urban schools has become a challenge (Smith & Smith, 2006). Many educators believe that working in an urban school is not worth the possible dangers. When given the choice and or opportunity, teachers often opt not to be employed in the urban setting (Smith & Smith, 2006). Although there are teachers who will take positions in urban schools, Smith and Smith (2006) indicate that many of these positions are not long-term. Smith and Smith (2006) studied teachers who began in urban schools and left within five years due to the aggressive behavior of the students. In-depth, semi-structured interviews with 12 former urban educators were the main source of data. In addition, 34

ethnographic descriptions, document reviews, and observations were used to validate the findings. Overall, these educators felt that inner-city schools had extensive aggressive behavior and chaos, and anything is capable of happening (Smith & Smith). Qualitative Research Creswell (2003) stated that the questions in qualitative research are designed to describe the reality of the situation being examined, based on the information obtained from the participants. Leedy and Omrod (2005) agree stating that qualitative research studies allow peoples lived experiences to guide the study as opposed to adhering to theories or models. Creswell also indicated that qualitative research design as a distinct research approach is fairly new. Creswell continued, stating that qualitative designs require different avenues of inquiry and rely on written, typed, recorded, or photographed data, which must be interpreted. According to Dabbs (1982), qualitative and quantitative designs are not distinct. Dabbs stated that the greatest difference is that quality is the nature of something and quantity is the amount. The advantage of quality is that it gives the what, how, when, and where of a thing and the disadvantage is that it takes more time and requires greater clarity and goals during stages. In addition, with qualitative research, a program can not be run for analyses of data (Berg 2007; Bogdan, 1972; Dabbs, 1982). Generic Qualitative Inquiry According to Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003), a generic qualitative inquiry is designed to detect and understand a process, the views and perceptions of the people involved in the study. Generic qualitative studies show many characteristics of qualitative studies, however rather than using a familiar methodology as the scope of the study, 35

several approaches are combined. There is no claim of a specific methodological viewpoint (Caelli, Ray, and Mill, 2003). Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003) define generic qualitative inquiry overall as a qualitative design which allows many different methods and the voice of those involved to understand a phenomenon. Synthesis of Research Findings Reviewing the literature shows that aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth is very prevalent in America (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Aspy, Oman, Vesely, McLeroy, Rodine, & Marshall, 2004; Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010; Perkins, Luster, & Jank, 2002). There are many different factors that contribute to aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth such as bullying, influence of role models and psychiatric disorders (Copeland, Miller-Johnson, Keeler, Angold, & Costello, 2007; Hurd, Zimmerman, & Reischl 2010; Kim, Leventhal, Koh, Hubbard, & Boyce 2006). Many youth across the United States find themselves in situations where they are the victims or the perpetrators in aggressive situations both in and out of school (Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010). Many of these youth come from broken homes in poverty areas and state they dont have other options (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010, Shifrel, Burke & Lemire 2008, Smalley & Kahn, 2005). Literature also shows that not only does aggressive behavior exist in males, but females as well (Smalley & Kahn 2005). Studies have shown that girls are at a lesser risk for aggressive behavior than boys and the rate of occurring aggressive behavior is higher in males, however it is still present in females (Bennett, Farrington, & Huesmann 2005; Fagan, Van Horn, Hawkins, & Arthur 2007). Female aggression is more often connected

36

to emotional factors and is more controlled due to greater social cognition (Bennett, Hart, OToole, Price-Sharps, & Shaffer 2007). As indicated by Smalley and Kahn (2005), aggressive behavior among Generation Z youth has a great effect on students, staff, and schools. The negative impact is evident through poor grades due to stress or worrying, excessive absences and missed class time while being disciplined (Crick, 1997; Wood, Cowan, & Baker, 2002). Many teachers choose to use exclusionary punishment which also yields a great number of incarcerations among those suspended and expelled (Fenning & Rose, 2007). Surprisingly enough, literature has also shown that the aggressive behavior cycle can originate in the schools (Twemlow, Fonagy, Sacco, & Brethour 2006). While reviewing the literature, the researcher felt confident in the selection of the social learning theory as the basis for the study. Much of the literature shared in this review was directly associated with social learning theory. Social learning theory states that a combination of environmental (social) and psychological factors influence aggressive behavior (Bandura & Walters, 1963). Literature stated that ones behavior causes or creates a certain environment which may involve aggression (Bandura, 1973; Akers, 2009). On the contrary, Enquist and Ghirland, 2007 pointed out the weakness of social learning theory indicating that human culture is cumulative. Social behavior can be adapted as well as discarded based on culture of origin (Enquist & Ghirland). The researcher agrees that to a certain extent, culture may cause individuals to reject social behaviors, but continued with the theory for this study.

37

Critique of Previous Research This literature review points out a lot of the research that has been done on the many different aspects of youth and aggressive behavior. Of the previous studies reviewed, there has been qualitative as well as quantitative research done. In addition, society has been examined to determine its effect on these youth who revert to aggressive behavior (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010, Shifrel, Burke & Lemire 2008, Smalley & Kahn, 2005). Many of these researchers have used interview techniques to interview teachers, officers, and even follow records to determine outcomes of the youth included in the samples. However, research that shows proven effective therapeutic methods used by therapist to reduce the aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth is limited. Majority of the studies reported in this literature review examine the use of external factors to determine the causes and process of aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth (Campbell, 1995; Copeland et al. 2007; Powell, Fixsen, Dunlap, Smith & Fox, 2007). Although teachers, parents, and even authority figures feel they can make accurate assumptions based on observation, these responses may differ from the responses of the youth therapists. Therefore, it was important to look at the perceptions and experiences of the therapists who treat Generation Z youth.

Summary Literature clearly shows that there is an adequate amount of aggressive behavior among Generation Z youth in the United States of America (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbecek, 2006; U.S. CDC, 2007). Literature also makes it clear that there are many 38

social factors that contribute to the aggressive behavior (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010, Shifrel, Burke & Lemire 2008, Smalley & Kahn, 2005). Being able to successfully determine how to decrease the aggression in youth has not fully been determined as of yet. This study has helped reach this goal by addressing the subjects who actually treat the aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The results may provide professionals and community organizations who work with these youth pertinent information on how to reduce aggressive behaviors. By understanding effective therapeutic methods, professionals may be able to propose programs that will actually have an impact on the lives of Generation Z youth. In reviewing the literature, a great need had been uncovered. Reviewing this information showed that while it is very clear that aggressive behavior exists, what the common causes are, and its continued increase, there was a need for the effective therapeutic methods used to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth to be looked at from the prospective of therapists who feel their selected therapeutic method has been effective. A search of the literature found a definite lack of information from that perspective. To be able to have taken this literature and added to it, the completed study may largely impact the social and community services. Overall, the continued research of the topic presented was necessary and overdue.

39

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Purpose of the Study The purpose of this generic qualitative inquiry was to understand therapeutic methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Finding motivation and effective treatment plans for aggressive adolescents has been a great challenge for professionals (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney, 2009; Browning, 2007; Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke & Lemire, 2008; Smalley & Kahn, 2005). The findings of the study may be used to alert professionals of effective therapeutic methods when working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. This study can be very impactful when it comes to the well being and future of youth across America. The main research question was as follows: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Sub questions to this research question directed toward the therapists were as follows: 1. 2. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display

aggressive behaviors? 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the

effect teachers have on their level of aggression?

40

Philosophical Assumptions Ellis (1980) noted three areas of development involved in cognitive behavior theory. The major assumption of the theory is that psychotherapy is essentially reeducation, and that changing a person's thinking will modify his or her behavior. Therefore, since the therapists in this study have gotten positive results from therapeutic methods used when working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth, it is possible that sharing their therapeutic methods for treatment will be effective for other professionals. According to Skinner (1981), there are three areas of development involved in the Cognitive behavior theory. The first of the three is classical conditioning. Classical conditioning is when there are certain respondent behaviors that are brought out in the parts of the body that are passive (i.e. knee jerks, salivation). This could be a connection with therapists who have treated aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth in the past causing them to be conditioned to resort to familiar approaches without thought. The second area of development is operant conditioning. Operant conditioning involves behaviors or actions that work on the environment to bring about some sort of consequences (Skinner, 1981). These behaviors may include reading, writing, and driving a car. Corey (2001) stated that with the behaviors of operant conditioning, if the actions bring about positive or average results, is a greater chance in repeating those behaviors, and if there is a negative response, there is a lesser chance of the behaviors being repeated. Therefore the research findings show that the effective therapeutic methods have been repeated by therapists who have seen positive responses in youth.

41

The final area of development indicated by Skinner (1981) is the cognitive therapy. Cognitive therapy is the process of getting one to view things a different way. This will also include the positive and negative reinforcement. This helps the client to be able to understand the difference in good and bad behaviors and think about the positive outcomes based on the positive behaviors (Corey, 2001). Based on the three areas of development discussed, classical conditioning, cognitive behavior therapy, and operant conditioning would be directly connected to this study. This study determined that cognitive therapy, based on the experience of therapist, causes the Generation Z youth to view aggressive behavior in a different manner. Cormier and Cormier (1998) stated that there are three levels that play a major role in aggressive behavior. Those components are automatic thoughts, underlying assumptions, and cognitive distortions. To see change or improvement, these three levels of cognition must change. Corey (2001) indicated that Ellis was named the grandfather of cognitive behavior theory. According to Ellis (1980), in order for humans to decrease psychological problems, it is important learn to accept who we are in spite of imperfections. Ellis believed what causes emotional disturbance are self defeating beliefs. Temoshock and Dreher (1992) agreed by stating things will go wrong, but it is best to try to remain positive. Ellis declared that individuals place too much blame on themselves. This idea is confirmed by Feinauer and Stuart (1996) who stated that abuse victims must learn not to blame themselves. Corey (2001) emphasized that to minimize psychological issues, people must know and accept who they are. According to Cavanaugh & Blanchard-Fields (2006), self blame could possibly lead to depression. Gardner (2002) stated that the 42

strong belief of a person is who they are. He indicated that beliefs not only show a set of representations, but also shows validation for the cognitive behavior theory. These points were extremely valid in this study when relating to how therapists view their selected therapeutic methods for treatment and the effectiveness as they attempt to help others. There are some major epistemological, ontological, axiological, and methodological assumptions that Corey (2001) specified regarding the Cognitive behavior theory. The first of those assumptions is that the principles and procedures of the scientific method is what Cognitive behavior theory is based on. According to Corey (2001), this assumption believes that the conclusions drawn and the observations made regarding this theory come from experiments and observations, not personal beliefs. In connection with this study, this assumption meant that the effectiveness of the suggested therapeutic methods for professionals working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth are not based on personal beliefs, but has been proven through experiments and observations (Corey, 2001). The next assumption Corey (2001) explains is that current problems the clients deal with and the factors influencing them is the basis of Cognitive Behavior Therapy as opposed to historical determinants. This assumption says that the therapists use therapeutic methods that address the present conditions, which assist in changing the present aggressive behaviors. Therefore in this study, the aggressive behavior in youth is what was approached instead of the past or underlying issues the youth have experienced (Corey, 2001). The next assumption is that the Cognitive behavior theory assumes that clients are expected to engage in specific actions to address their problems. Corey (2001) stated that 43

this means that throughout therapy, the client not only discusses what is going on, but learns and role-plays behaviors to deal with the current issues. The behaviors of the client are monitored in and out of therapy (Corey, 2001). This assumption was directly related to the therapist tracking how effective therapeutic methods really are. Corey (2001) indicated that another assumption is that in the clients natural environment Cognitive Behavior Therapy is carried out as much as possible. What is being said here is that the Cognitive behavior theory is an educational approach. The client is learning in therapy, and will take this newly acquired information and apply it to everyday life (Corey, 2001). There are homework assignments given that help the client practice new real life behaviors. Homework assignments during therapy in this research helped therapists understand what therapeutic methods were effective in treatment. An additional assumption is that Cognitive Behavioral Theory procedures are tailored to fit the unique needs of each client (Corey, 2001). This implies there is careful consideration put into who the client is, what their current problem is, and what would be the most effective therapeutic method at a specific time. This was very necessary in this research with different therapists who have faced different types of aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth for many different reasons (Corey, 2001). The final assumption according to Corey (2001) is that a collaborative partnership between the therapist and the client in two major respects is the basis of the Cognitive behavior theory. This assumption is saying that first the client is made aware about the treatment in detail. Second, the client is taught how to evaluate the situation, and initiate change on their own with the guidance of the therapist (Corey, 2001). This assumption was very helpful in this research and has taught the youth independence long term. 44

Although this theory was extremely helpful for the completed research study, as with any other theory a limitation to this theory does exist. According to Corey (2001), this theory calls for a person to change over time. The results may not appear overnight. Therefore, for those practitioners, professionals, or even clients who are looking for right away results, they will not find that in the Cognitive behavior theory. In the completed research study, the logic of the research-based perspectives of epistemology, ontology, axiology, and methodology was used. The epistemological assumption of phenomenology is that no matter what the researchers expectations are, the individuals or groups view of reality will remain constant (Merten, 2005). With the epistemological assumption, there was a possibility that therapists would not feel there were any therapeutic methods that work better than others although some methods yield a greater number of positive results. Corey (2001) indicated this type of thinking is also called classical conditioning. According to Corey (2001), the ontological assumption of phenomenology is that an individuals or groups way of seeing reality can be altered by becoming more informed. In the completed study, this meant that informing a therapist of the purpose of the study could have caused them to identify effective treatment methods. Corey (2001) suggested this area of development represents cognitive therapy. The axiological assumption would be that an individuals or groups reality would be altered if there is a violation of expectations (Corey, 2001). In the completed study, this applied to therapists who do not see positive results when using certain therapeutic methods with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth.

45

The methodological assumption in the completed study was the decisions that were made based on the conscious awareness of historical facts (Mertens & Ginsberg, 2009). For this research project, the reason for using interviews was that the theory had previously been shown successful.

Research Design The method selected for this research project was a generic qualitative design. Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003) indicated that the key feature of a generic qualitative design is how there is not one specific methodology used, instead there can be a mixture of methods. In generic qualitative research, the researcher does not make any assumptions about reality, rather he or she discovers and understands the information given by those who actually have experiences and take part in the research (Merriam, 1998). For the purpose of this study, qualitative data was gathered from in-depth interviews conducted among 10 therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. According to Mertens (2005), due to the depth of the information needed from each applicant to develop a successful study, a small sample size is necessary. With a larger sample size, it will become very difficult for the researcher to be able to acquire the quality of information needed to increase the validity of the study without increasing the level of complexity (Eisenhart, 1989). In qualitative research, observable facts only need to occur once in order for them to be documented as valuable (Wilmot, 2005). The data was used to identify consistencies among interviewed participants. Questions in qualitative research were designed to describe the reality of the matter based on the information obtained from the participants (Creswell, 2003). 46

According to Berg (2007), qualitative research is a great form of research that focuses on the individuals and their so-called life-words. Berg also states that researchers have depended too much on statistics which may not always be accurate. The researcher solicited participation from at least 10-15 therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. After securing the participants, the researcher proceeded by scheduling interviews with each participant. Finally, at the scheduled time, the interview process continued with the researcher and the therapists using the interview guide provided. Results from this study were expected to contribute to the much needed research regarding what therapists view as the most effective treatment methods when working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The entire study was based on stories told by therapists, which is what phenomenology is (Mertens, 2005). Participants were pooled from the Licensed Professional Counselors Association. The sample population was composed of the first 10 volunteers who met the study criteria. Additional research is suggested to examine the knowledge about aggressive behavior, attitudes, beliefs of the Generation Z youth who actually show aggressive behaviors and struggle with anger (Finkleman, 1995; Goldstein, 2009). The research that has been done does not fully explain what therapeutic methods are most effective when addressing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth (Americas Children, 2005). The main research question was as follows: What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth?

47

Sub questions to this research question directed toward the therapists were as follows: 1. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behaviors? 2. What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display aggressive behaviors? 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the effect teachers have on their level of aggression? This question was based on qualitative research and was designed to describe the participants reality, based on the information obtained from real life experiences. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) explained that the definition of a qualitative study is one that seeks to understand a social or human issue by using a comfortable, natural setting to listen to an individuals views. The research question represented the central point of the methodology, following the design of Creswell (1998) and Giorgi (1997). Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) indicated the qualitative interview approach addresses research questions that have meaning and help the researcher to understand the experiences participants have endured. This type of approach leads to an understanding of decreasing the aggressive and violent behaviors of Generation Z youth. When using interviews for the project, the research study closely adhered to the Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) design, encouraging storytelling, listening, and meaning as opposed to problem solving. These points are reinforced by Berg (2004), who explains that qualitative research is the most suitable method to use when attempting to understand subjective experiences. Allen-Mears and Lane (1990) suggest that the objective of a 48

qualitative study such as this is to discover the relationships in particular experiences and the impact those relationships have on an individuals behavior.

Target Population Mertens (1998) describes a sample as the selection of participants from a large population. Due to the depth of information needed from each applicant to develop a successful study, Mertens (2005) suggests a small sample size is necessary. Being able to cope with the overwhelming amount of data without the research becoming too intricate when using a large sample size is nearly impossible (Eisenhart, 1989). Also, phenomenon does not need to occur more than once to be deemed as valuable (Wilmot, 2005). The completed studys sample consisted of 10 therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The therapists were selected from a professional association.

Sampling Design The sampling method used for the research project was criterion-based. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) describe criterion sampling as a method used when participants are handpicked based on identifiable variables. The criterion sampling method was implemented because of this studys highly selective participant criteria: (a) participants had to be therapists; (b) they had to work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The criterion sampling method simplified selection of participants. The researcher, who is a member of a professional association, had access to a database that shows all therapists who are members of the association as well as their specialty and the

49

population they serve. Along with the names of the therapist, contact information including email addresses was available. The study was reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Capella University for approval. Once accepted by the IRB, information was distributed via email to each therapists listed as serving youth on the contact list of the association, including the topic of research, purpose of research, and request for interviews of interested therapists. After the e-mail invitation, the researcher took the first 10 volunteers to be used as a sample. This technique allowed room for adequate participants after considering those who may change their mind. At the beginning of each interview, each participant was asked to sign an informed consent form and a confidentiality statement. The interviews were conducted with 10 participants, and consistency, along with intensity of the data gathered, strengthened the accuracy. Although there were similarities, there were also individual differences to authenticate the findings. Now that the research project was completed, its findings may be implemented in new and untested programs.

Instruments In order to understand social experiences, the researcher must have the ability to recognize and interpret what is critical to the participant (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). Semistructured interviews represent one of the techniques that will be used for this research project. In these interviews, the researcher became an instrument to measure and interpret data. According to Sprenkle and Piercy (2005), questions do not seek to solve problems. Rather, questions are used as a path to bring understanding to the researcher by 50

conveying participants realities. The interview guide included 10 questions. Each required conversation, and many lead to further participant explanations. During the interviewing process, data was anything obtained through storytelling, behaviors, secrets, diaries, or even pictures: all are reality to the participants (Sprenkle & Piercy, 2005). For the completed project, data was collected by holding face-to-face interviews at familiar locations selected by the therapists. Weiss (1995) stated that participants must feel confident in order to be candid during an interview. Weiss went on to say familiar locations create a sense of security and bring vivid particulars to stories. The duration of each interview was approximately 45 minutes to an hour. Questions were open-ended, with the intent that participants would tell stories, and use any other means of communication to convey meanings of reality. Berg (2006) indicates that it is imperative to develop probing and follow-up questions that may bring out further information from the interviewee. Interviews create a one-on-one relationship between researcher and participant. Interviews open and facilitate interaction to gain understanding of participant perspectives (Adler & Adler, 1994). Using semi-structured interviews in which open and direct questions are asked was an effective way to create personal interaction and obtain important information (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006).

Data Collection Procedures Hoepfl (1997), as well as Merriam (1998), explained that in qualitative research, the researcher is the primary source or instrument for data collection. The value of the data collected is significantly affected by the skills and presence of the researcher. The data collection for the project took place by the researcher. All interviews took place in a 51

private setting. The researcher allowed the participants to provide a date and time for the interview that would be convenient for them. Once a schedule was set at the designated time, each participant met the researcher at the agreed upon location in order to be interviewed. After being offered a drink of water by the researcher, the researcher began asking the questions prepared from the interview guide. During the interview, credible notes were taken by the researcher regarding the participant responses. In addition, a Sony ICD digital voice recorder was used during each entire interview to ensure that no information was missed by the researcher. Dual collection methods assure access to interview data to study and attempt to gain clear understanding of each participants reality (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). At the completion of each interview, once alone, the researcher listened to the recorded interview to begin to transcribe the data. With respect to time, the researcher transcribed and began the analysis process immediately (Berg, 2004).Using an interview guide of 10 questions to collect the data assured that the very same questions were asked of each participant, which may or may not have resulted in the same or similar answers. Creswell (2003) stated that using interview guides with questions that are open-ended and are few in number leads to successfully obtaining participant views and opinions. Patton (1990) agreed, indicating that the interview guide, which is a basic checklist, must be prepared before the interview to be certain that all the relevant topics are covered. To strengthen the studys credibility and transferability, therapists of various backgrounds and social status were sampled.

52

Field Testing Neuman (2006) states that completing field testing may assist the research project by refining the data collection plan as far as the content of the questions and the manner and sequence in which they are asked. To determine the credibility and transferability of the interview guide, it was tested on professional colleagues who are experts in the human services field (Berg, 2004). Although each participant may have completely different senses of reality, it is important to assure the clarity of the questions being asked (Neuman, 2006). Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) agreed stating that reality is very critical during interviewing. Field testing represents a critical necessity to the success of this project. The researcher developed a set of 10 questions falling under two separate categories. After the guide was completed, a survey was developed by the researcher based on a likert scale. Both pieces were given to five different licensed mental health professionals to have the interview guide reviewed. Upon receiving feedback from all of the professionals, the research made minor adjustments as recommended. After the field test was completed, the results showed that the questions on the interview guide are deemed appropriate. The experts noted that the questions were directly related to the research topic, and they could be easily understood by therapists who serve youth. When questioned about the comprehension and content of the questions, all of the experts agreed that the guide was acceptable.

53

Data Analysis Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) indicate that in the qualitative approach, data collection and data analysis are interlinked. The purpose of analyzing the data for this project was not to discover connections. What was important was to be able to comprehend the reading of notes and re-question participants to ensure clarity. According to Creswell (2003), qualitative data analysis simultaneously uses thematic analysis with data collection methods (open-ended questions, observations, diaries, and interview notes) for completeness of analysis. Qualitative research has a tendency to construct raw data that needs to be transferred into meaning units that facilitate analysis (Hoepfl, 1997). Developing a system for coding is a common part of analysis because codes develop along with understanding of the phenomenon by the researcher (Weston, Gandell, Beauchamp, McAlpine, Wiseman, & Beauchamp, 2001). When data are coded, comparative assessments can be made based on the alignment of patterns (Borden & Abbott, 2005). In the completed research study all data was coded as soon as it was acquired, and continued to develop throughout the process. Data analysis was completed by reviewing, categorizing, and evaluating the gathered information. Creswell (2003) suggests the use of software provides the ability to identify and store certain patterns and themes within the information obtained. Using NVivo 9 data analysis software by QSR software guided the analysis of all the collected data. This software allows data to be coded within the system. When it comes to the hand written notes and audio interview notes, the user-friendly system will allow the information to be downloaded easily (Walsh, 2003). After reviewing several software 54

programs that can be used to analyze qualitative data, NVivo 9 appeared to be the most appropriate for the completed research project because of is its ease of data retrieval. Although the software program has many capabilities for classifying data, the judgment of the researcher was not abandoned as the researcher still had to construct meaning from the coded items. Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) note that data interpretation can take place only when the information is understood by the researcher. The research completed in this project was very informative. Being able to interpret the data obtained was essential to the study. Interpretation had to be clear, concise, and representative of the participants. Limitations of Research Design In the area of human sciences, Creswell (2003) notes that qualitative research design as a distinct research approach is fairly new. Creswell states that qualitative designs require different avenues of inquiry and rely on written, typed, recorded, or photographed data, which must be interpreted. The researcher performs interpretation and bias becomes problematic. When conducting research, one must remain free from preconceived notions while being sensitive to contradictory evidence. The researcher must practice effective listening skills to understand the reality of each participant. The researcher must also remain adaptive and flexible during data collection so that any new issues can be viewed as opportunities to enhance rather than threaten the study (Yin, 2003). A limitation of the completed research might have been the limited number of therapeutic methods used overall by therapists which would not leave room for many options of effective therapeutic methods. If participants decided not to participate for any 55

reason, there may not have be a sufficient sample for analysis. Some of the first participants to be interviewed may have unknowingly openly discussed with other participants what took place in the discussion. Although this may not have been the intention of participants, it is considered a limitation of the study. Credibility and Transferability Mertens (2005) said credibility and transferability are determined by the ability to relate study results to the overall population and to transfer results to individual personal situations. The studys analysis yielded results that can be transferred to the general population that the sample reflects and from individual cases within that segment of society by leading to the most effective therapeutic methods. To ensure accuracy in the completed research project, results had to align with reality, and at times, such a situation may require revisiting, reviewing, and reanalyzing the data (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). The completed qualitative study was based on understanding the reality of the individual. However, the researcher believed the focus, being based on one population, may have caused the responses of the participants to be highly similar to each other. When reviewing transferability, Mertens (2005) indicates that it is important to apply study results to situations outside the study. Results of the completed research project results may be applied to other programs and agencies that work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Such results may be instituted through diverse community programs, including school programs, pre-school programs, adult programs, and others.

56

Validity and Reliability According to Sproull (1988), validity determines how accurate the measurement is, and reliability is how consistent the measurement is. In order to strengthen the studys validity and reliability, there were therapists of various backgrounds as well as social status involved in the interviewing process. The questions prepared in the interview guide strengthened the studys validity by asking questions that would get answers directly related to the research question. When it came to strengthening reliability, the questions were open ended allowing each therapist to express his or her own experiences, but yet direct enough to ensure the answers related to the study. Generally, in research, using member checking is another process that strengthens the validity of the study (Polit & Beck, 2003). This was done in writing. What member checking does is have the participants review the interpreted data to ensure the researcher understood what was being communicated during the initial interview (Polit & Beck, 2003). However, not all research studies require member checking (Polit & Beck, 2003). Giorgi (1985) states that asking participants to participate in member checking is beyond the scope of the role of the participants.

Expected Findings Leedy and Ormrod (2005) indicated that qualitative research involves understanding the findings that present themselves during the study, extracting the actual meaning from the data, and interpreting results as they relate to the study. Another outcome may have been that therapists who work with aggressive behaviors in generation Z youth do not realize that there is a pattern or consistency that exists among therapeutic 57

methods. Instead, they may have believed that every individual is different and the circumstances determine the therapeutic method. The study was expected to show that most therapists find a positive response from specific common therapeutic methods. Additionally, by examining life situations that have caused therapists to recognize their effective therapeutic methods when working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth, the researcher gained an understanding of the role those therapists play in decreasing aggressive behavior in the lives of others. It may also guide community service organizations in designing youth programs specifically to work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Completing this study was expected to allow for the learning of effective treatment methods when working with aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth based on the pertinent information received from the participants directly. This may be a great asset to professionals for development and implementation of programs as the mission of such programs is to address the specific needs of Generation Z youth. The benefit of the data and findings is that it will provide insight into the program development and treatment from the view of the therapists. This will take a lot of guess work out of the jobs of helping professionals.

Ethical Considerations It was essential that researchers present an accurate and thorough description of the research performed, the analysis, and the interpretation (MaCaslin and Scott, 2003), assuring that the confidentiality and the identity of the participants are not jeopardized. Greenstein (2001) stated that informed consent involves letting the participants know of 58

the pros and cons of the study. The participants were made aware of the confidentiality statement, provided with a contact person, and given assurance that everything is voluntary. When the study was presented to the participants, the researcher needed to address informed consent for the project by making each one of the participants aware of the above points. It was emphasized that if, for any reason, a participant feels uncomfortable, there is no penalty or stigma for withdrawing. To assure anonymity and confidentiality, all participants must remain anonymous: free from name, address, and all personal references (Greenstein, 2001). Personal information will remain confidential in all reports completed. The researcher must do everything possible to keep all obtained information confidential. In this project, numbers were used. All information was stored electronically and password protected. The researcher is the only individual with access to the password and information. The transcribed data was stored on a compact disc as well as hard copies inserted in a binder that is only for the use of the study. All information will be stored for seven years after publication of the study. Once seven years have elapsed, the hard copies of the information will be shredded and the compact disc will be completely deleted. Disk sanitizing will be conducted to ensure that all data is completely removed from the computer. Participants have a right to knowledge of findings, which requires that the findings of research completed be revealed in a timely fashion (Greenstein, 2001). The findings of the proposed research study were made known to the participants upon completion of the study. Member checking was done in order to allow participants to find closure in their experiences (Poggenpoel & Myburgh, 2003). Greenstein stated that the 59

right to remedial services requires that all participants receive the same services and resources. The researcher has made all services and resources known and available to the participants upon completion of the research project.

Conclusion The purpose of the study was to understand effective therapeutic tools and methods used to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The study was a generic qualitative study. Upon completion of data collection and analysis, the researcher expected to provide findings that may help professionals working with aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. At the same time, the findings could be used to help professional understand and eliminate ineffective therapeutic methods when dealing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Additionally, the findings may lead to the implementation of new interventions in programs treating these youth as a result of this study.

60

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

Introduction There remains a gap in the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about the effective therapeutic methods of therapist treating aggressive behavior in Generation Z when they become angry. Failures in the effectiveness of teaching and treatment strategies provided by mental health professionals have contributed to increased aggressive behavior in Generation Z (Crabtree, 2004; Morrison & Coiro, 1999). The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand therapeutic tools and methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Finding motivation and effective treatment plans for aggressive youth has been a great challenge for professionals (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney, 2009; Browning, 2007; Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke & Lemire, 2008; Smalley & Kahn, 2005). The findings of the study may be used to help other professionals working with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. This chapter describes the results that were found in four sections. The first section in the chapter describes the researcher and the researchers role in the project. The second section of the chapter gives a description of the actual participant sample used to complete the study. The third section discusses how the research methodology was applied to the data analysis. The fourth section presents the data that was collected and the results concluded from the data based on themes. Research Questions The main research question designed for the completed study is as follows:

61

What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Sub questions to this research question will be directed toward the therapists and are as follows: 1. 2. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display

aggressive behaviors? 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the

effect teachers have on their level of aggression?

Role of the Researcher The researcher is a licensed professional counselor who works with children, adolescents, and families including Generation Z youth. The researcher became interested in this topic due to some personal as well as professional experiences over the last four years. Having experienced direct care as well as supervision of programs that target aggressive Generation Z youth and finding a revolving door, the researcher felt this study would bring greater clarity to the understanding of how to be more effective in treatment of this population. Professional ethics that are involved in the research and interview process are very familiar to the researcher who has had more than 10 years experience providing confidential and non-judgmental direct care in a mental health agency. Having this experience, the researcher was responsible for recruiting participants, conducting interviews, transcribing the data, as well as analyzing the data in order to find results. 62

Description of the Sample After this research study, method, and design received approval from the Capella University Institutional Review Board (IRB), the sample selection began. The criterion sampling method was implemented because of this studys highly selective participant criteria: (a) participants had to be therapists and (b) they had to work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The criterion sampling method simplified selection of participants. The participants were contacted via email. The researcher who is a member of a professional association has access to a database that provides contact information, including email addresses, for all therapists who are members. After getting a great immediate response of 18 people from those who were emailed, the researcher chose the first 10 participants who responded to be interviewed. The 10 participants, they ranged from 22 to 58 years of age, the y were both male and female, and the number of years as a therapist ranged from one to 26. Some of these participants had children of their own, and some of them did not. The therapists chosen to participate in the study worked in different environments such as home based, schools, youth detention centers, and mental health agencies. All of the participants expressed how eager they were to participate in this research which confirmed to the researcher the need for effective therapeutic tools and treatment methods for aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. According to Mertens (2005), a small sample size was important due to the depth of information needed from each participant in order to develop a successful study. One of the reasons for a smaller sample size when doing this qualitative sampling is because in order to be of value, an observable fact does not need to be repeated, it only needs to appear once (Wilmot, 2005). With a large sample size, it could have become 63

very difficult for the researcher to be able to acquire the quality of information needed to increase the validity of the study without increasing the level of complexity (Eisenhart, 1989). Of the 10 interviews scheduled, there were no cancellations nor did anyone back out as a participant. After completing each interview, the researcher completed the transcription within seven days, debriefed with the mentor, and sent a copy of the transcription to the participants individually for member checking. Using member checking is another process that strengthens the validity of the study (Polit & Beck, 2003). Of the 10 participants, eight responded ensuring that the interpretation was accurate, and two did not respond at all.

Table 1. Participant Demographic Information Participant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gender F F M F F M F M F Age 27 39 32 34 45 N/A 47 X 58 64 Children Y/N (#) N Y (2) Y (1) Y (2) Y (4) N/A Y (1) Y (4) N Work Environment Agency Agency Agency Home Based Agency N/A Youth Detention Center Agency Agency Years Experienced 1 5 5 5 4 N/A 20 26 22

10 Table 1. Continued

33

Y (3)

Agency

12

Research Methodology Applied to the Data Analysis Sprenkle and Piercy (2005) indicate that in the qualitative approach, data collection and data analysis are interlinked. The purpose of analyzing the data for this project was not to discover connections. What was important was to be able to comprehend the reading of notes and re-question participants to ensure clarity. Creswell (2003) suggests the use of software provides the ability to identify and store certain patterns and themes within the information obtained. Using NVivo 9 data analysis software by QSR software guided the analysis of all the collected data. As explained in the previous chapters, the first step that was taken was to conduct 10 interviews. They were digitally recorded in order to assure that no information was missed and the researcher had the ability to go back and review the information as frequent and as often as needed to ensure accuracy. During the recorded interview, the researcher also took notes that could be connected with the audio during data analysis. During the next step of the analysis process, the researcher transcribed the audio files into written format within seven days of completing the interview. After transcribing the data collected, the researcher sent the transcription as an attachment to the participants via email to ensure accuracy. Once this process was completed, the researcher reviewed all of the transcription again to indicate themes that were present in the data collected. According to Creswell (2003), qualitative data analysis simultaneously uses thematic analysis with data collection methods (open-ended questions, observations, diaries, and 65

interview notes) for completeness of analysis. After the researcher identified the themes that manifested from the data, the information was put into NVivo 9 to be coded for findings. Presentation of Data and Results of the Analysis Explanation of Aggressive Behavior Each participant was asked to explain what aggressive behavior is in his or her own words. Although the responses were similar for many, there were also some very unique responses given to define aggressive behavior. The themes that emerged were physical aggression, verbal aggression and destruction of property. Although each participant used his or her own wording, eight out of the 10 individuals referred to those three themes in their response. The other two participants did at some point make mention of these themes, but also made very unique points in their statements. Participant 1 expressed the following in response to the question Aggressive behavior is physical violence toward others, hitting, punching, and destruction of property. Participant 3 responded to the question in the following manner I would say it is emotional deregulation that the individual is incapable of controlling in an effective and appropriate manner. These behaviors may very well include verbal aggression, physical aggression, harm to self, and or property and animal destruction. Participant 9 gave the following response when asked the question Any behavior that violates the rights of others. Violence may be one but that would be the simplest way to say it. It could also include drug use or neglect.

66

Table 2. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Physical Aggression Verbal Aggression Destruction of Property 1 X 2 X X X 3 X X X X Participant 4 5 X X X 6 X X 7 X X X 8 X X 9 X X X 10 X X X

Characteristics in Generation Z Youth Who Display Aggressive Behavior The next question asked of all of the participants involved identifying the characteristics in Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. All of the participants felt that there were some common characteristics that stand out among this particular population. The themes that emerged from the data characterized these youth as male, self-righteous, immature, sense of entitlement, angry, low self esteem, and lacking supervision from parents. Participant 8, however, expressed the belief there are no common characteristics, stating In some ways, Im thinking of bullying which could be conceived as an aggressive behavior. Bullies take many different shapes so one might say they have low self esteem, but that is not always the case with individuals who are aggressive. That has not been proven through research, so Im going to say no there are no common characteristics because the presenting problems and pictures can be very different. Participant 6 believed there was an unwillingness to empathize as a characteristic of the aggressive youth, explaining I think there is a sense of entitlement. That is what I think of as a sign of immaturity. The unwillingness to accept the experience of the other person. The immaturity has to do with the desire to get what you want supersede what another person may want or feel. Just lacking empathy is what it is. 67

Table 3. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Male Self Righteous Immature Sense of Entitlement Angry Low Self Esteem Lacking Supervision 1 X 2 X X X 3 Participant 4 5 X 6 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7 8 9 10

Tools Used To Measure Level of Aggression Response to the interview question What tools do you use to measure the level of aggressive behavior in the youth you serve? revealed that the common tools or sources are self report, parent report, school report, observation when possible and community report if available. Obtaining information from more than one source that is part of the individuals life in some capacity was said to allow the therapists to get a clearer picture of the level of aggression in Generation Z youth being served. For example, participant9 gave the following response to this question We always need to listen to what the child says, what the parent says, and what the school says has happened. Then there are also the community issues but its harder finding that unless a child is involved in these types of things. Things like an advocate, parole or probation officer, etc., it depends on what resources you can get information from on a child. Of the 10 participants, only one participant suggested providing additional concrete tools. Participant 8 responded 68

There are lots of measures or tools out there to measure, but I have used the child behavior checklist, Ive used the Cotters scales, but definitely years ago when I was doing the projective testing I used the Rorschach or the TAT (Thematic Apperception Test), the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory). I know there are more specific ones that look at aggression or sociopathy or things like that.

Table 4. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Self-Report Parent Report School Report Observation Community Report 1 X 2 X X X X 3 X X X Participant 4 5 X X X X X X X X 6 X X X 7 X X X X 8 X X 9 X X X X 10 X X X

Effect of Teachers on Aggressive Behavior When asked the interview question How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior explain the effect that teachers have on their level of aggression? there were two themes that emerged from the data. All of the therapists interviewed explained that in their opinions, teachers increase the level of aggression in Generation Z youth in different ways. Participant 4 shared the following with the researcher: I mean for the most part a lot of kids feel that teachers increase their aggression. Mostly because they dont take the time to understand where they are coming from individually. They may demand certain behaviors of the kids and not give back so to speak to them. So they kind of have a tendency to be upset with the teachers because of that. Ive got one person who feels her teacher doesnt explain the material to the entire class very well, and he doesnt take cues from the whole class about their inability to be on the same page with him. So thats one particular student that Im working with. Another young man that Im working 69

with, he feels like one teacher he has good rapport with and because he has good rapport with him, he is less aggressive in that class and the teachers he dont have good rapport with instigates him further. It really varies on the type of relationship he has with each adult. Participant 7 gave a similar response stating: I think thats huge. If teachers dont understand the child and what the childs needs are, they can just set each other off. The same for juvenile detention experience, staff set these children off by pushing their buttons. This can be choice of words, setting kids up to fight, setting kids up to go off and be restrained especially if kids have a mental health issue and staff have no idea how to deal with it. Participant 10 felt very passionate about the question responding: Oh my goodness, its horrible. There are way too many teachers who are in the profession for the wrong reasons and obviously do not care about the children they work with. I think their uncaring is picked up by the students and that is how the level of aggression is increased. Often times these youth tell me about how there whole day was ruined because of the way teachers talk to them, mistreat them, and purposely try to get them into trouble. One of my clients shared with me that teachers know they can get kids in trouble and no matter what they do they wont get in trouble. It makes me angry at times to see or hear how these youth are provoked by teachers.

Table 5. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Teachers Increase Aggression Teachers Decrease Aggression 1 X 2 X 3 X Participant 4 5 X X X 6 X 7 X 8 X 9 X X 10 X X

70

Reason for Aggressive Behavior One of the interview questions asked the therapist why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? For this question, there were many themes that stood out to the researcher. The themes that resulted as seen through the eyes of therapists were frustration, needs not being met by caretakers, learned behavior, media, and image to uphold. To the researcher, it was a shock that only one participant pointed out diagnosis for a cause of aggressive behavior. Participant 1 responded Aggressive behavior can be due to diagnosis and some parents are just not willing to accept the diagnosis or be consistent with the medications prescribed to treat the aggression. It can also be due to frustration with academic work or other issues the child has not learned to cope with. Avoidance of work, learned patterns of behavior from parents, and inconsistent boundaries too at home can all play a part in aggressive behavior. Participant 5 also gave the following descriptive response I would say it is a feeling that youre not understood for that population. Its funny that you say that, I just had a session with a client literally focused on that issue and impulsive decision-making and aggression and having no one who understands and who cares. I think sometimes it is about the confusion of who is in charge and if I dont know clearly who is in charge in my home, my life, there is that aggression that comes I am going to keep acting out until somebody steps in and lets me know what I need to do. It seems to fall in line with that theory that people will continue to escalate until somebody steps in and says this isnt ok. Ive got you and Im going to help you. Not all the time do we catch that that is what that underlying message is and Im going to keep pushing and pushing and pushing until somebody lets me know they are going to help me, Im going to be ok.

Table 6. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Frustration Needs Not Being Met 1 X X 2 3 X Participant 4 5 X X X 71 6 X X 7 X X 8 X X 9 X X 10 X X

Learned X Behavior Media Image to Uphold Table 6. Continued

X X X X X X

X X

X X

How Generation Z Youth Respond to Therapy Overall, there was a very mixed opinion on how Generation Z youth view therapy. Some of the therapists felt that the youth are apprehensive while others feel they look forward to it and find it a good outlet. Many participants emphasized the importance of relationship building and how this will determine the outlook that the client has on therapy. Participant 2 responded explaining They feel like its not going to work. They feel like I dont need therapy. I think there is just a negative connotation with therapy for kids that age and they dont want to be looked at like they are crazy. The older these teens are, it can be very tough to change their view too. Participant 5 responded very differently saying I can say in my experience kids that I have had, there has only been one kid that I have had that shut down completely to therapy. Every other teen in that age range once you kind of crack the egg a little bit, they are willing to go along with it. We try not to assume a relationship so soon, not trying to act like you know whats going on in their world. Its more the understanding piece; help me understand what its like to have to deal with this everyday. For the most part kids a re receptive, its helpful that I can also go to the home and they dont have to travel to the office. It is actually as confidential and private as they want it to be.

Table 7. Summary of Themes by Participants Themes Positive View of Therapy 1 X 2 3 Participant 4 5 X X 6 X 7 8 X 9 X 10 X

72

Negative View of Therapy

Build Trust With Clients The researcher asked each therapist to explain how he or she builds trust with clients who display aggressive behavior. Based on the perception of the therapists, the themes manifested with this particular question included methods such as avoid mimicking of a parental relationship, allowing time, not judging, being genuine, and showing empathy and understanding. Although many of the participants pointed out not condoning the behaviors, there was a sense of agreement that these youth need to know they will be heard and understood. Participant 1 even compared aggression to defiance when building trust quoting Really I just I take a lot of time to try to get to know them especially if they are aggressive. I dont have so much trouble building trust with aggressive its more the kids who are oppositional defiant that its harder to build a relationship with. Just taking time to build a relationship just not really telling them what they should be doing initially and try not to make it like a parenting relationship. Participant 10 pointed out a very interesting way of building a trust with Generation Z males and females who display aggressive behavior differently. Building trust with these youth to me depends on the gender. With boys I tend to relinquish authority to the client. This makes them feel that they are not being told what to do and if they dont like it we dont do it. Avoiding a power struggle works very well for me with boys. There may be times where they act like they are giving up, but when they see I am not going to force anything, 99 percent of the time they regroup and continue. With girls on the other hand, I feel like it is important to entertain every little detail in order to build trust.

73

Table 8. Summary of Themes by Participants Themes Not Mimicking Parent Relationships Allowing Time Not Judging Being Genuine Showing Empathy/Understanding 1 X X 2 Participant 3 4 X 5 6 X 7 8 9 X X X X X 10

X X X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

Influence of Cognitive Behavior Therapy When asked What influence does Cognitive Behavior Therapy have on aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth? there was nearly 100% agreement among the therapists that Cognitive Behavior Therapy is helpful with youth who display aggression. However, there was a point brought out in one of the interviews that although this approach is helpful, there is some type of disconnect. This participant 4 shared: Sometimes it can be helpful when it comes to learning different coping skills or learning some techniques for approaching questioning situations in a different way. I think it can be helpful, but it seems like there is a lot of psychology brought to kids pretty early in life these days and some of the kids may have learned the skills, but still not be able to fully apply them. There might be a bit of a disconnect there that has to be sort of overcome that they have to make on their own. Thats a bit of a gap that CBT cant really help with. Participant 1 pointed out the very important fact that Cognitive Behavior Therapy gives the opportunity to practice what needs to happen in real life responding I think Cognitive behavioral therapy is good in that it emphasizes the kids acting things out and role playing. It helps them to take it from just talking about it to actually practicing which helps them to generalize it to their own situation.

74

Table 9. Summary of Themes by Participants Theme Cognitive Behavior Therapy 1 X 2 X 3 X Participant 4 5 X X 6 7 X 8 X 9 X 10 X

Influence of Social Learning Theory While all of the participants agreed that the environment component of the Social Learning Theory is one of the most prominent influences on aggressive behavior, it was also mentioned that the influence can be both positive as well as negative. Participants expressed that the influence can come from anyone in the social environment, not just the parents or caretakers. Participant 7 really iterated the sense of hopelessness that can be developed from the social environment responding Yes, environment. There are kids who come from an extremely deprived background. They have parents who have been incarcerated, generations of parents who have been incarcerated. Parents are dead due to violence. Sometimes they think well Im not going to live to be 21 what he hell. I have had clients tell me that Im going to die anyway so Im going to do what I want Participant 5 also gave a breakdown on the difference of the effect between boys and girls stating Its interesting you say that because I was talking with a client today and how there is with boys the aggression, a boy has a more difficult time with bullying because they cant back down from it because of how they are going to be viewed so I think that with this kid there is a lot of talk about being a man being a man and what that means. He is 15 he is not a man so I think that can play a big part particularly if your family ascribes to what the traditional view might be of what a boy/teen/male and then a man. With girls I think its going to come out more in the cyber bullying, the texting its not as directly in your face in my experience. I see there being a middle man with girls and with boys there is a direct one on one.

75

Table 10. Summary of Themes by Participant Theme Social Learning Theory 1 X 2 X 3 Participant 4 5 X X 6 7 X 8 X 9 X 10 X

Additional Input Prior to ending each interview, the researcher asked each participant Is there anything else that you would like to share regarding therapeutic tools and or methods for treating Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors? There was not one participant who did not want to give any more input at this point. From all of the participants, utilizing a family/systemic approach and group therapy were beneficial tools in working with this population. Participant 3 ended his interview responding Yes, I feel that a systemic approach, especially family therapy I have also found to be very helpful in terms of aggression and looking at the systemic view. A lot of times you can really see where the aggression is coming from and instead of addressing the symptoms that are highlighting the aggression in the child or teenager, but in really in a system where the aggression is coming from addressing the root cause to have long lasting and be more effective in addressing that. Participant 6 concluded his interview by adding I think I believe in the systems approach to this as in most adolescent behavior problems. Where the adults and the kids lives meet on some kind of common ground. A lot of times I think aggression comes out of an actual frustration that teenagers might feel but arent actually able to articulate and it might have something to do with the way the family deals with their own issues in terms of conflict resolution and things like that.

76

Table 11. Summary of Themes by Participant Themes Family/Systemic Approach Group Therapy 1 X 2 Participant 3 4 5 X X X 6 X 7 8 X 9 10 X X

Summary The purpose of this qualitative study was to capture the thoughts and opinions of therapists who treat Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. Specifically, trying to understand their lived experiences with therapeutic tools and treatment methods for this population. After spending much time and effort working on being a change agent for youth who display aggressive behavior, each participant eagerly expressed experiences, which included frustration as well as accomplishment. Based on their therapeutic experiences, therapists relayed how disheartening it is to know that Generation Z youth have this feeling of hopelessness and the perception that those who should be helping, including parents and teachers, at times are the most provoking. It was with excitement and passion in their voices that the therapists revealed what they feel is the root of aggression in Generation Z youth and also what tools and methods have proven to be the most effective in decreasing the aggression. The findings of this research project were solely based on the opinions of therapists. To the researcher, this information was extremely relevant coming from the therapists due to the fact that when individuals seek therapy, they are generally looking for change to take place. Being experts in the field of change, therapists and their views on the subject of decreasing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth can be seen as a 77

valuable contribution to researchers, youth, families, and other professionals dealing with this population as well as other youth evidencing aggressive behavior. Chapter 5 will provide a summary of the study, a discussion of the results, and make recommendations for practice and further research.

78

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand therapeutic tools and methods for reducing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Finding motivation and effective treatment plans for aggressive youth has been a great challenge for professionals (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney, 2009; Browning, 2007; Burleigh, 2007; Byron, 2010; Shifrel, Burke & Lemire, 2008; Smalley & Kahn, 2005). This chapter provides a summary of the study, a discussion of the results, conclusions, and recommendations.

Summary of the Results The problem that was being addressed with this research study is a lack of
information concerning the understanding of therapeutic methods regarding the reduction of aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. By conducting a generic qualitative study

looking at the methods that therapists believe work best with Generation Z youth who demonstrate aggressive behaviors, educators, social workers, and other mental health professionals may be able to add to their knowledge base concerning working with this population. Hearing from therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z is helpful in understanding effective therapeutic methods to decrease the aggressive behaviors in this population (Regan, 2009). The problem was a lack of information concerning specific therapeutic methods used by therapists who work with aggressive behavior in Generation Z. In targeting therapists who are currently providing therapeutic services, this study is envisioned to help professionals understand the most effective 79

therapeutic methods when treating youth who use aggression as a release of anger. Results of this study may guide community service organizations in designing programs for youth receiving services that will decrease their aggression. The results of the study may also bring awareness to the aggressive youth by having them acknowledge the behaviors and what triggers them and encourage alternative therapeutic methods.

Literature Reviewed Literature clearly shows that there is a significant amount of aggressive behavior among Generation Z youth in the United States of America (deKemp, Engles, Scholte, & Overbecek, 2006; U.S. CDC, 2007). Literature also makes it clear that there are many social factors that contribute to the aggressive behavior (Ahmed, Mack & Sweeney 2009; Byron, 2010, Shifrel, Burke & Lemire 2008, Smalley & Kahn, 2005). Being able to successfully determine how to decrease the aggression in youth has not fully been determined. This study contributed to reaching this goal by addressing the subjects who actually treat the aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. The results can provide professionals and community organizations working with these youth pertinent information on how to reduce aggressive behaviors. By understanding effective therapeutic methods, professionals may be able to propose programs that will actually have an impact on the lives of Generation Z youth. In reviewing the literature, a significant gap was identified. Reviewing this information showed that while it is very clear that aggressive behavior exists, has common causes, and continues to increase, there was a need for the effective therapeutic methods used to reduce aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth to be looked at from 80

the prospective of therapists who feel their selected therapeutic method has been effective. A search of the literature found a definite lack of information from that perspective.

Methodology The research study was guided by a generic qualitative inquiry. According to Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003), generic qualitative inquiry is exploratory research that seeks understanding and discovery and can be appropriate for understanding an experience or event. Merriam (1998) stated that generic qualitative research is designed to detect and understand a process, or the perceptions and views of those who are involved. A generic qualitative inquiry guided this research program because the approach was based on enabling the voices of all those who participated in the research to be valued (Harding, 1987). Caelli, Ray, and Mill (2003) indicate that generic qualitative inquiry does not adhere to one type of qualitative methodology nor is it guided by any specific set of philosophical assumptions.

Study Findings The findings of the completed project are based on the opinions of therapists. It is possible that others working with this population or Generation Z youth themselves might have different ideas. This is something to be considered when conducting future research on the subject. However, the thoughts of the therapists are extremely important as they have direct contact with the aggressive youth and are seen as a helping tool within themselves. 81

The results of this study were presented in narrative form with supporting tables and responses to answer the following research question What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Sub questions to this research question directed toward the therapists were as follows: 1. 2. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior? What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display

aggressive behaviors? 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the

effect teachers have on their level of aggression? There were 10 main questions that guided the interviews with the participants. From the interviews, there were many findings. Based on the findings, the researcher identified the themes that manifested from the data, the information was put into NVivo 9 to be coded for findings. Of the 10 identified questions in the interview guide, there were a total of 36 themes manifested overall. The first question identified was explanation of aggressive behavior. The themes that were discovered were physical aggression, verbal aggression and destruction of property. The next question on the guide reflected on characteristics in Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. After all participants responded, the themes emerged were male, self-righteous, immature, sense of entitlement, angry, low self esteem, and lacking supervision from parents. Another question from the guide focused

82

on tools used to measure the level of aggression. The commonalities or themes for this topic were self-report, parent report, school report, observation, and community report. In addition participants were asked to give their opinion on the effect teachers have on the level of aggression in the identified population. While few reported that teachers can increase or decrease the level of aggression in Generation Z youth, all participants reported that teachers only increase the level of aggression in these youth. The next question presented represented the reason for aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Similar responses provided by the participants identified themes, which were frustration, needs not being met by caretakers, learned behavior, media, and image to uphold. An additional question posed to participants questioned how Generation Z youth view therapy. The responses concurred that while some youth are apprehensive about therapy, others may actually be open to the idea. Yet another question explored how the participants build trust with their clients in treatment. The themes for this question included avoid mimicking parents relationship, allowing time, not judging, being genuine, and showing empathy and understanding. The next two questions surveyed the beliefs of the participants toward Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Social Learning Theory and there influence on treatment for Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. While 90 percent of the participants agreed that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is effective, all of the therapists felt that Social Learning Theory is effective. The final question that concluded each interview asked about additional input the participants had to give regarding therapeutic tools and or methods for treating Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors. Although there were 10 participants, the only two themes in this area were family/systemic approach and 83

group therapy. This pertinent information concludes the summary of the results for this research project.

Discussion of the Results The qualitative research study was based on the following limitations: 1. The experiences of the therapists was not monitored or assessed. In selecting participants for this research, no specified criteria other than age of population served, behaviors problems of population served, and treatment of aggressive behaviors were employed. 2. The research was limited to therapists. 3. Responses only apply to treatment methods for Generation Z youth. 4. The researcher minimized bias. 5. The data collection was completed in three weeks.

Discussion of the Conclusions

The problem was a lack of information concerning the understanding of therapeutic methods regarding the reduction of aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. In the past,

parenting was identified as a significant influence on the development of social competence, resulting in the creation of intervention programs targeting the entire family (Dunst & Kassow, 2004; Gallagher, 2003). According to the findings of this research project, the interviewed therapists agree with these findings, feeling strongly that parents and other environmental factors exert a great amount of influence on aggression in Generation Z youth. The participants nearly unanimously concluded that family therapy 84

is an effective therapeutic method for aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. Through the interviews held with the participants, the researcher heard the surety in the responses that more than anything, family plays a huge role in the aggressive behaviors of Generation Z youth. Being able to work through issues and factors with the entire family, based on the completed research project, has a more lasting effect on the youth who display aggressive behavior. Findings from the study showed that participants believe that social learning theory is both positively and negatively influential on Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. This belief concurs with Akers (2009), in the idea that social learning theory is a theory that favors criminal and aggressive behaviors. The results of this study proved this to be true by way of hearing the therapist discuss how even there is information being absorbed and or learned in therapy, Generation Z youth tend to revert back to their cultural norm. There were times during the interview when the researcher could hear the frustration in the voice of the participant. Some of the participants were sure to clarify for the researcher that just as much as families have a positive influence, at times the influence is just as much negative. Although, according to Cormier and Cormier (1998), there cannot be a substantial change without cognitive therapy, participants expressed that due to the lack of improvement, there is a disconnect between the youth actually changing and cognitive behavior therapy. During the data collection process, the researcher heard from nearly everyone about the many different cognitive behavior therapy techniques used and preferred. This information told the researcher that while Cognitive behavior Therapy is a great tool, it is important to recognize the other influences may cause stagnation in the 85

treatment of Generation Z youth. The researcher was able to put the response to the questions regarding Social learning Therapy and Cognitive Behavior Therapy together to come up with this analysis. Enquist and Ghirland (2007) indicated that individuals have the ability to take their own moral values into consideration when deciding on behaviors to engage in. Although aggressive behaviors may be noted in society, it is not always normal to adapt to those behaviors if they do not agree with the values of the original culture (Enquist and Ghirland, 2007). However, results from the completed study show otherwise. Participants in this study talked in length about the image that youth attempt to uphold based on an environment or media that glorifies violence. According to the therapists who participated, society in the form of media, family, friends, and reputation are major causes of aggression in Generation Z youth. Smalley and Kahn (2005) noted that the aggressive behavior does not stop at the boys, but teen girls are also raging with aggression. According to Smalley and Kahn, some of the aggressive behaviors girls are involved in include hurting others with knives, box cutters, and even carrying guns. On the other hand, findings from this study revealed that when it comes to aggression in boys versus girls, girls are less likely to physically harm others, but are more emotional and likely to harm themselves. The researcher heard from a number of the participants that aggression in boys and girls manifests totally different. One participant in particular initially responded Have I had any boys lately? Even though I could use girls when the researcher began to ask about aggression. Those participants that did mention girls spoke on how girls are much more emotional and tend to internalize. This showed the researcher that to some degree, aggression may 86

be overlooked in girls. This could happen in two ways, one the physical aggression could be being ignored because these participants assume it does not exist for the most part, and two if it is internalized the aggression is not seen until it gets out of control. Twemlow, Fonagy, Sacco, and Brethour (2006) completed a study that showed that teachers at times do bully students in school. The data collected in this research project suggested that more often than not, teachers may behave in a manner that increases the level of aggression in Generation Z youth. According to the participants his can happen by way of verbal instigation as well as youth feeling misunderstood. Based on this information, the researcher believes that when it comes to school settings there is a vicious cycle that prevents the students and teachers from excelling. With the therapist conveying that the youth feel that those who should be helping are actually hurting, this tells the researcher that teachers play a major role in the aggressive behavior of Generation Z youth and should be addressed so that the necessary actions to correct this perception can take place. Based on the findings of this study, the researcher has concluded that there are different types of violence that the therapists believe exist among Generation Z youth. These include physical aggression, verbal aggression, and destruction of property. The youth in this population tend to be angry immature males who have a sense of entitlement and low self-esteem. Often times, there is also a lack of supervision for these youth. Therapists who participated in the study believe that effective tools for measuring the levels of aggression include self-report, parent report, school report, observation, and community report.

87

While there are a number of contributing factors to aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth, frustration, unmet needs, learned behavior, and issue surrounding reputation tend to stand out. In addition, the therapists were of the opinions that while these youth are in school, teachers tend to increase their level of aggression. Overall for Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors, therapists report that there is a mixed feeling regarding their receptiveness to therapy. In order to build trust with these clients, therapists tend to avoid mimicking parental relationships, show empathy, be genuine and avoid becoming judgmental. The participants in this study acknowledged that both Cognitive Behavior Therapy as well as Social Learning Theory both a great influence on aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth. It was expressed that Cognitive Behavior Therapy yields change through learning and role play which allows the individual to practice what he or she is expected to do in a real life situation as an alternative to aggressive behavior. When speaking of Social Learning Theory, participants clearly indicated that while very effective, the influence could be positive or negative in regards to aggressive behavior in Generation Z Youth. In addition to these methods, the therapists believe that both family and group therapy are very effective because the entire system should be addressed for long term change, and youth have a chance to share the experience of peers.

Limitations The proposed qualitative research study was based on five limitations. The first limitation was that the experiences of the therapists were not monitored or assessed. In selecting participants for this research, no specified criteria other than age of population 88

served, behaviors problems of population served, and treatment of aggressive behaviors were employed. Throughout the study, there was no one who assisted in the process of selecting the sample. Having an additional person could to some degree increase accuracy when analyzing data. Also with the interviews, there was no observer, nor did the researcher use a transcriber for the data collected. The entire process was completed by the researcher alone which left full responsibility to the researcher to capture the necessary cues in finding results. The second limitation was that the research was limited to therapist. After collecting the data and reviewing the findings, the researcher was made aware of delimitation, which was the inclusion of other professionals who encounter Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors and how this type of sample could have yielded additional findings. If the researcher was aware of this prior to the study, it is possible that the sample would not have only included therapists, but other professionals as well. Some additional professionals could have been teachers, probation officers, and even sports coaches. In particular, the researcher would have been able to note the responses teachers would have given to the question How does Generation Z youth explain the effect that teachers have on their level of aggression? An additional limitation identified was that the responses only apply to treatment methods for Generation Z youth. Another dimension could be added if similar studies were done with professionals who come in contact with other populations. Finally, the data collection was completed in three weeks. This was done in order to complete the project in a timely manner not allowing time for late responses or delayed transcription for the project. The time constraints prevented therapist who may have 89

responded late or may not check their email on a regular basis from being considered as participants for this particular project. However, the sample was selected based on only the first ten subjects to respond and fit the criteria.

Recommendations for Further Research A separate quantitative study could be done using the themes as variables. This study could use more than just therapists as participants. The sample could include professionals such as teachers, sports coaches, and even probation officers who work with Generation Z youth. This would broaden the responses in terms of seeing these youth in different arenas. It would be interesting to discover if teachers are aware of how Generation Z youth feel they increase their aggression. Another recommendation would be for this research project to be completed using therapists who work with a population other than Generation Z. Possibly focusing on children ages six through 12 or the New Silent Generation would yield results that would be effective in decreasing aggressive behavior in Generation Z youth by approaching the aggression earlier in life. This could also determine if the aggressive behavior has been present for some time or if it is just manifesting during the teenage years. Finally the researcher recommends this study could focus only on boys or girls. This type of study would allow more time and attention to actually identify clear differences in aggressive behaviors in Generation Z boys and aggressive behavior in Generation Z girls. This would allow findings for therapeutic tools and treatment to be more gender specific if necessary. This study suggested that the type of aggression

90

shown in boys and girls is different, but was not dedicated to focusing on gender specific differences.

Conclusion
The problem addressed was a lack of information concerning the understanding of therapeutic methods regarding the reduction of aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth. To that end, it was decided that therapists dealing with this population could provide insight into this problem. They agreed with Dunsta and Kassow (2004) and Gallagher (2003) that parenting is significant in the development of social competence and intervention programs are designed to improve parental skills are a very important tool when dealing with aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth.

The research questions designed for the completed study included one main question and three sub-questions directed toward the therapist. The sub-questions were as follows: 1. Why do Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior?

The study revealed that therapists believe Generation Z youth display aggressive behavior because they are frustrated; their needs are not being met by their caretakers, learned behavior, media, and reputations these youth feel they need to uphold. 2. What characteristics can you identify in Generation Z youth that display

aggressive behaviors? Results from the conducted study show that therapists characterize Generation Z youth as a population of predominantly males who are self-righteous, immature, have a

91

sense of entitlement, angry, battle low self esteem, and have a lack of supervision from parents and or guardians. 3. How do Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors explain the

effect teachers have on their level of aggression? The findings from this study disclosed that from their experience with this population, the therapists found that many Generation Z youth believe that their teachers do not support them. Due to choice of words, and other types of instigation, the youth strongly expressed to the participants that teachers tend to increase the level of aggression when at school. The main research question that guided this study was What do therapists feel are the best therapeutic tools and methods used when working to reduce aggressive behaviors in Generation Z youth? Results of this research project concluded that when measuring the level of aggression in Generation Z youth, the therapists used self-report, parent report, school report, observation, and community report as measuring tools is effective. When attempting to develop a relationship with Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior the most effective methods the therapists found were avoiding mimicking parental relationships, allowing time, not judging the youth, being genuine, and showing empathy and understanding. It was believed by the therapists that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, an effective hands on learning tool, and Social Learning Theory, an environmental teaching tool, have a great influence on treatment for Generation Z youth who display aggressive behavior. Finally, when treating Generation Z youth who display aggressive behaviors, the therapists found that using the family/systemic approach, which 92

impacts the youths entire system, has greater long term effect, and group therapy, which exposes individuals to the experience of their peers, are also very effective based on the finding of the completed study.

93

REFERENCES Abbott -Feinfield, K., & Baker, B. L. (2004). Empirical support for a treatment program for families of young children with externalizing problems. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(1), 182-195. Adler, P.A., & Adler, P. (1994). Observational techniques. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 377-392). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ahmed, A., Mack, K., & Sweeney, A. (2009, October 6). Fenger kids tell why they fight. Chicago Tribune 2(2), 13-23. Akers, R. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction. Allen-Meares, P., & Lane, B.A (1990). Social work practices: Integrating qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques. Social Work, 35(5), 452-458. Aspy, C.B., Oman, R.F., Vesely, S.K., McLeroy, K., Rodine, S., & Marshall, L. (2004). Adolescent violence: The protective effects of youth assets. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82, 268-276. Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research. (9th ed). New York, NY:Wadsworth. Bandura, A., & Walters, R. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart &Winston. Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York, NY: General Learning Press. Bennett, S.B., Farrington, D.P., & Huesmann, L.R. (2005, March-April). Explaining gender differences in crime and violence: The importance of social cognitive skills. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(3), 263-288. Berg, B. L. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Berg, B.L. (2006). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon. 94

Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon. Bogdan, R. (1972). Participation observation in organizational settings. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. Bordens, K.S., & Abbott, B.B. (2005). Research and design methods: A process approach (6th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill Companies. Bourassa, C. (2007). Co-Occurrence of interparental violence and child physical abuse and its effect on the adolescent behavior. Journal of Family Violence, 22(8), 691701. Bowen, M. (1976). Theory in the practice of psychotherapy. In P. J. Guerin. (Ed.). Family therapy. New York, NY: Gardner. Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York, NY: Aronson. Brendtro, L.K. (2006). The vision of Urie Bronfenbrenner: Adults who are crazy about kids. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 15, 162-166. Brendtro, L., & Larson, S. (2004). The resilience code: Finding greatness in youth. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 12, 194-200. Browning, C. (2007). Teens jailed in mortal kombat murder. Retrieved June 28, 2010 from http://www.thebitbag.com/blog/2007/12/22/teens-jailed-in-mortal-kombatmurder. Burleigh, N. (2007). A high school students nightmare, Dating Violence, 68(11), 14. Byron, S. (2010, January 14). Teens arrested on PPO violation, will be charged with domestic violence. Retrieved June 28, 2010 from http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/01/14/news/cops_and_courts/doc4 b4f37e071609072013368.txt?viewmode=fullstory
Caelli, K., Ray, L., Mill, J. (2003). 'Clear as mud': Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2). Campbell, S.B. (1995). Behavior problems in preschool children: A review of recent research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36, 113-149.

Chen, X., Chang, L., Liu, H., & He, Y. (2008, March/April). Effects of the peer group on the development of social functioning and academic achievements: A longitudinal study in Chinese children. Child Development, 79(2), 235-251. 95

Copeland, W.E., Miller-Johnson, S., Keeler, G., Angold, A., & Costello, E.J. (2007, November). Psychiatric disorders and young adult crime: A perspective, population-based study. The American Journal of Psychiatry Childhood, 164, 1668-1675. Crabtree, S. (2004). Americans on local schools: Show us the money. Retrieved June 28, 2010 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/13774/americans-local-schools-showmoney.aspx Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage. Crick, N. R. (1997). Engagement in gender normative vs. nonnormative forms of aggression: Links to social-psychological adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 33, 610-617. Crisis Services and Standards. (2006). Retrieved February 2, 2010, from http://www.dhhs.state.nc.us/MHDDSAS/announce/crisisservicestrustfund2-1306rfaappend.pdf Dabbs, J. M., Jr. (1982). Making things visible. In J. Van Maanen (Ed.), Varieties of qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Dahinten, V.S., Shapka, J.D., & Willms, J.D. (2007). Adolescent children of adolescent mothers: The impact of family functioning on trajectories of development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(2), 195-212. Daigle, L.E, Cullen, F.T., & Wright, J.P. (2007, July). Gender differences in the predictors of juvenile Delinquency: Assessing the generality-specificity debate. Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice, 5(3), 254-286. DeVries, A. P. J., Kassam-Adams, N., Canaan, A., Sherman-Slate, E., Gallagher, P. R., & Winston, F. K. (1999). Looking beyond the physical injury: Posttraumatic stress disorder in children and parents after pediatric traffic injury. Pediatrics, 104, 12931299. DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical education, 40, 314-321.
Division for Early Childhood. DEC concept paper on the identification of and intervention with challenging behavior. (1999, October 4) Young Exceptional Children, Monograph Series, 63-70.

96

Dubowitz, H., Zuravin, S., Starr, R.H., Feigelman, S., & Harrington, D. (1993). Behavior problems of children in kinship care. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 14, 386-393.
Dunlap, G., Strain, P.S., Fox, L., Carta, J.J., Conroy, M., Smith, B., Kern, L., Hemmeter, M.L., Timm, M.A., McCart, A., Sailor, W., Markey, U., Markey, D.J., Lardieri, S., & Sowell, C. (2006). Prevention and intervention with young childrens behavior: Perspectives regarding current knowledge. Behavioral Disorders, 32(1), 29-45. Dunst, C.J., & Kassow, D.Z. (November, 2004). Characteristics of interventions promoting parental sensitivity to child behavior. Bridges, 3(3). Retrieved June 10, 2010 from www.evidencebased practicies.org/bridges/bridges_vol3_no3.pdf

Dyrli, O.E. (September, 2005). Cyberbullying: Online bullying affects every school district. The Online Edge. Retrieved June 28, 2010 from http://www.districtadministration.com/article/cyberbullying. Eisenhart, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. Ellis, A. (1980). Rational-emotive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy: Similarities and differences. New York: Plenum. Enqusit, M., & Ghirlanda, S. (2007, May 7). Evolution of social learning does not explain the origin of human cumulative culture. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 46(1), 129-135. Fagan, A.A., Van Horn, M.L., Hawkins, J.D., & Arthur, M.W. (2007, June). Gender Similarities and differences in the association between risk and protective factors and self reported serious delinquency. Prevention Science, 8(2), 115-124. Fenning, P. & Rose, J. (2007, November). Overrepresentation of African American students in exclusionary discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42(6), 536-559. Finkelman, J. D. (1995). Child abuse: A multidisciplinary survey series: Short and long term effects. New York, NY: Garland.
Gallagher, N. (2003). Effects of parent-child interaction therapy on young children with disruptive behavior disorders. Bridges, 1(4), retrieved July 10, 2006 from www.evidencebasedpractices.org/bridges/bridges_vol1_no4.pdf

Giorgi, A. (1985).Sketch of a psychological phenomenological method." In A. Giorgi, (Ed.), Phenomenology and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. 97

Giorgi, A. (1997). The theory, practice, and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a qualitative research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28(2), 235 Glaser, B., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery for Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Goldstein, S. (2009). Developing resilient children: Changing live of challenged children, 4, 145-165. Greenstein, T.N. (2001). Methods of family research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Harding, S. (1987). Introduction:Is there a feminist method? In S. Harding (Ed.), Feminism and methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Harm, D.M. (2002). Taking stock of risk factors for child/youth externalizing behavior problems. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Mental Health. Hart, J.L., OToole, S.K., Price-Sharps, J.L. & Shaffer, T.W. (2007). Risk and protective factors of violent juvenile offending: An examination of gender differences. Youth Violence & Juvenile Violence, 5(4), 367-384. Hoepfl, M.C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9(1). Retrieved on November 23, 2007 from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/hoepfl.html. Last modified on July 31, 2006. Hunt, J. (2006). Do teen births keep American crime high? University of Chicago: Journal of Law & Economics. 49. Hurd, N.M., Zimmerman, M.A., & Reischl, T.M. (2010, June). Role model behavior and Youth Violence: A study of positive and negative effects. The Journal of EarlyAdolescence, 30(3), 323-354. Johnson S.B., Bradshaw C., & Wright J. (2007). Characterizing the teachable moment: is an emergency department visit a teachable moment for intervention among assault-injured youth and their parents? Pediatric Emergency Care, 23, 553-559.

Kim, Y.S., Leventhal, B.L., Koh, Y.J., Hubbard, A., & Boyce, T. (2006). School bullying and youth violence: Causes and consequences of psychopathological behavior? 63(9), 1035-1041. Knouse, L. (2009). Which parenting components are most effective? The ADHD Report, 98

17(2), 14. Kottler, J.A. (2010). On being a therapist. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kumpfer, K.L. (2003). Family strengthening approaches for the prevention of youth Problem behaviors. American Psychologist. 58 (6-7), 457-465. Leedy, P. & Omrod, J.E. (2005). Practical Research: Planning and Design (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lerner, R. M., & Steinberg, L. (2004). Handbook of Adolescent Psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Limbos, M.A., Chan, L.S., Warf, C., Schneir, A., Iverson, E., Shekelle, P., & Kipke, D. (2007, July). Effectiveness of interventions to prevent youth violence: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 33(1), 65-74. MaCaslin, M.L & Scoot, K.W. (2003). The five question method for framing a qualitative research study. The Qualitative Report, 8 (3), 447-461. Mandara, J., Murray, C. B., & Joyner, T.N. (2005). The impact of fathers absence on African American adolescents gender role development. Sex Roles, 53(3-4), 207. Mastain, L. (2006). The lived experience of spontaneous altruism: A phenomenological study. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 37(1), 25-52. Matier, D. (2011). Retrieved September 11, 2011 from http://www.helium.com/items/2207618-a-definition-of-generation-z May, J.C. (2005). Family attachment narrative therapy: Healing the experience of early childhood maltreatment. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(3), 221-237. McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What hurts, what helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass. Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches (2th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Merz, E.C. & McCall, R.B. (2010, January 19). Behavior problems in children adopted From psychsocially depriving institutions. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(4), 459-470. 99

Miller, H.V., Jennings, W.G., Alvarez-Rivera, L.L., & Miller, J.M. (2008). Explaining substance use among Puerto Rican adolescents: A partial test of social learning theory. Journal of Drug Issues, 38(1), 261-283. Mitcham-Smith, M. (2007). Relationships among school counselor self-efficacy, perceived school counselor role, and actual practice. Manuscript in preparation. Retrieved June 28, 2012, from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Advocacy-professional+school+counselors+closing+the+achievement+gap...-a0165235181 Morrison, D. R., & Coiro, M. J. (1999). Parental conflict and marital disruption: Do children benefit when high-conflict marriages are dissolved? Journal of Marriage & Family, 61, 626-637. Moustakas, C.E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. National Association for Gifted Children. (2008). Retrieved February 1, 2010, from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=565 Neuman, W.L. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon. Newton, C. J. (2001, April). Child abuse: An overview. FindCounseling.com Mental Health Journal (formerly TherapistFinder.net). Osborne, J. (1994, April). Some similarities and differences among phenomenological and other methods of psychological qualitative research. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 35(2), 167-189. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Perkins, D.F., Luster, T., & Jank, W. (2002). Protective factors, physical abuse, and purging from community-wide surveys of female adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 377-400.

Poggenpoel, M., & Myburgh, C. (2003). The researcher as research instrument in educational Research: A possible threat to trustworthiness? Education, 124(2), 418421. Polit, D.F., & Beck, C. T. (2003). Nursing research: Principles and practice. (7th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

100

Powell, D., Fixsen, D., Dunlap, G., Smith, B., & Fox, L. (2007). A synthesis of knowledge relevant to pathways of services delivery for young children with or at risk of challenging behavior. Journal of Early Intervention, 29(2), 81-106. Raver, C. (2002). Emotions matter: Making the case for the role of young childrens emotional development for early school readiness. Social Policy Report, 16(3), Retrieved July 11, 2006 from www.srcd.org/spr.html

Redding, R., Dill, K., Smith, Surette, R., & Cornell, D. (2011, Spring). Recurrent issues in efforts to prevent homicidal youth violence in schools: Expert opinions. New Directions for Youth Development, 129, 113. Regan, M.E. (2009). Implementation and evaluation of a youth violence prevention program for Adolescents. The Journal of School Nursing, 25 (1), 27-33. Rubin, K.H., Burgess, K.B., & Hastings, P.D. (2002). Stability and social behavioral consequences of toddlers inhibited temperament and parenting behaviors. Child Development, 73(2), 483-495. Schwandt, T. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shifrel, S., Burke, K., & Lemire, J. (2008, May 23). Black teens arrested in assault on Jewish teen in Crown Heights. New York Daily News, 54. Smalley, S. & Kahn, R. (2005, June, 20). Violence raging among teen girls. Global. Smith, D.L. & Smith, B.J. (2006, February-March). Perceptions of violence: The views of teachers who left urban schools. The High School Journal, 89(3), 34-42. Snider, C. & Lee, J. (2009, March). Youth violence secondary prevention initiatives in emergency departments: A systematic review. The Journal of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, 11(2), 161-168. Snyder, J.J., Reid, J.B., & Patterson, G.R. (2003). A social learning model of child and adolescent antisocial behavior. In B.B. Lahey, T.E. Moffitt, & A. Caspi (Eds.), The causes of conduct disorder in juvenile delinquency (p. 27-48). New York, NY: Guildford Press. Sprenkle, D.H., Piercy, F.P. (2005). Research methods in family therapy. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Guilford. Sproull, N. (1988). Handbook of research methods: A guide for practitioners and students in the social sciences. 2nd ed. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. Stipek, D., Miles, S. (2008, Nov-Dec). Effects of aggression on achievement: Does conflict with the teacher make it worse? Child Development, 79(6), 1721-1735. 101

Stormshak, E. A., Bierman, K. L., McMahon, R. J. & Lengua, L. J. (2000). Parenting practices and child disruptive behavior problems in early elementary school. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29(1), 17. Stormont, M., Lewis, T. J., & Beckner, R. (2005). Positive behavior support systems: Applying key features in preschool settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(6), 4249. Strohschein, L. (2005). Parental divorce and child mental health trajectories. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1286-1300. Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). Retrieved June 13, 2010 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualapp.php Twemlow, S.W., Fonagy, P., Sacco, F.C., & Brethour, J.R. (2006, May). Teachers who bully students: A hidden trauma. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 52(3), 187-198. U.S. Centers for Disease Control: Division of Adolescent and School Health, National center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (2007). National youth risk behavior survey overview. Atlanta, GA: Author. Varjas, K., Myers, J., Bellmoff, L., Lopp, E., Birckbichler, L., & Marshall, M. (2008). Missing voices: Fourth through eighth grade urban students perceptions of bullying. Journal of School Violence, 7(4), 997-118.
Walker, H.M., Ramsey, E., & Gresham, F.M. (2004). Antisocial behavior in school: Evidence-based practices (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Walsh, M. (2003). Teaching qualitative analysis using QSR NVivo. The Qualitative Report, 8(2), 251-256. Weis, R.S, (1995). Learning form strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Weston, C., Gandell, T., Beauchamp, J., McAlpine, L., Wisemand, C., & Beauchamp. C. (2001). Analyzing interview data: The development and evolution of a coding system. Qualitative Sociology, 24(3), 381-400. Wilmot, A. (2005). Designing sampling strategies for qualitative social research: with particular reference to the Office for National Statistics Qualitative Respondent Register. ONS Survey Methodology Bulletin No. 56. Wood, J.J., Cowan, P.D. & Baker, B.L. (2002). Behavior problems and peer rejection in preschool boys and girls, The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 136 (1), 7288. 102

Wright, S. S. (1921). Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research 20, 557585. Xue, Y., Zimmerman, M.A., & Cunningham, R. (2009, November 1). Among urban African American youths from adolescence to emerging adulthood: A longitudinal study. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11), 2041-2048. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

103