Table of Contents I. Scale Description II. Report Sample III. Scaling IV. Differences Between Groups V. Recommendations for Use VI. Item and Scale Means and SDs VII. Item and Scale Correlations Appendix SAS scoring program Normative Beliefs about Aggression Grade 5/Year 6 Fast Track Project Technical Report Cynthia Rains March 27, 23 Citations Instrument Huesmann, L.R. and Guerra, N.G. (1997). Children s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 48-419. Reference Huesmann, L.R., Guerra, N.G., Miller, L.S., and Zelli, A. (1992). The role of social norms in the development of aggressive behavior. In A. Fraczek and H. Zumkley (Eds.), Socialization and Aggression (pps.139-152). New York, Springer. Reports Rains, C. (23). Normative Beliefs about Aggression (Fast Track Project Technical Report). Available: http://www.fasttrackproject.org Harnish, J. (1995). Normative Beliefs about Aggression Scale (Fast Track Project Technical Report). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Data Sources Raw: Scored: C6H NBA6 I. Scale Description Guerra and Huesmann (1992) developed the Normative Beliefs about Aggression measure (NOBAG) as a measure for assessing a child s beliefs about the acceptability of specific aggressive behaviors in specific contexts. The 2 items vary along the dimensions of severity of provocation, severity of response, gender of provoker, and gender of responder. The first eight items are brief scenarios where child A is verbally aggressive ( says something bad ) to another child (B); these scenarios vary by the gender of the children involved (same sex and opposite sex). Following each of these scenarios, the interviewer first asks the respondent if it is wrong or okay for B to respond with verbal aggression (screaming) toward A and then asks the respondent if it is wrong or okay for B to respond with physical aggression (hitting). For example, the first scenario is, Suppose a boy says something bad to another boy, John. Item 1 then asks the respondent, Do you think it s ok for John to scream at him? Item 2 asks, 1
Do you think it s ok for John to hit him? Items 3 and 4 involve a boy saying something bad to a girl, items 5 and 6 involve two girls, and items 7 and 8 involve a girl saying something bad to a boy. Items 2 through 8 use the same pattern of questioning as with 1 and 2 with one exception: the same sex items begin with the phrase do you think it s ok? while items involving children of the opposite sex begin with the phrase do you think it s wrong? For the next four items, 9 through 12, the interviewer presents the respondent with four versions of the same scenario (child A hits child B); the scenarios vary by the gender of the children involved (two same sex, two opposite sex). The interviewer then asks the respondent if it is wrong to hit the child of the same sex or if it is okay to hit the child of the opposite sex. The last eight items do not include any scenarios describing a provocative action and instead ask the respondent how wrong or okay it is to act physically or verbally aggressive in general. No gender is specified. Ten of the 2 statements/questions are read with the reverse statement it is wrong, while the other 1 statements/questions are read with the statement it is okay. II. Report Sample These exploratory analyses were conducted on the first cohort on the high-risk control sample (N = 155) and the normative sample (N = 387, 463 with overlap) from the sixth year of the study. 69 records were missing the complete measure. 21 records were missing from the control sample (4 from Durham, 3 from Nashville, 7 from Pennsylvania, and 7 from Washington) and 59 records were missing from the normative sample (6 from Durham, 13 from Nashville, 2 from Pennsylvania, and 2 from Washington). These numbers may reflect some overlap between the two samples. III. Scaling The Normative Beliefs about Aggression measure is first scored by rescoring each item in order to correspond with the scoring system used by Guerra and Huesmann. The rescoring occurs as follows: Original Score New Score = Perfectly OK 4 = Perfectly OK 1 = Sort of OK 3 = Sort of OK 2 = Sort of Wrong 2 = Sort of Wrong 3 = Really Wrong 1 = Really Wrong The ten items whose wording includes it is wrong are reverse-scored in the measure itself, still using the same scale so that 1 = Really Wrong and 4 = Perfectly OK. These items are 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11-13, and 17-19. Seven derived subscales (some with overlapping items) are created by calculating the mean of the items included in the subscale. The subscales are as follows: Subscales Items Description NBA6TAM 1-2 Total Aggression NBA6GAM 13-2 General Aggression NBA6APR 1-12 Retaliation NBA6ARW 1-8 Retaliation, Weak Provocation NBA6ARS 9-12 Retaliation, Strong Provocation NBA6ARM 1-4, 9, 1 Retaliation Against Males NBA6ARF 5-8, 11, 12 Retaliation Against Females 2
For each subscale, means range from 1 to 4, with higher means indicating greater endorsement of the acceptability of aggression. In addition to these subscales, logarithmic transformations are calculated for each subscale to help deal with skewness. The new logarithmic transformation variables are as follows: Original Subscale Logarithmic Description Variable Subscale NBA6TAM NBA6TAL Total Aggression LOG NBA6GAM NBA6GAL General Aggression LOG NBA6APR NBA6ARL Retaliation LOG NBA6ARW NBA6AWL Retaliation, Weak Provocation LOG NBA6ARS NBA6ASL Retaliation, Strong Provocation LOG NBA6ARM NBA6AML Retaliation Against Males LOG NBA6ARF NBA6AFL Retaliation Against Females LOG Cronbach s alphas were calculated for each subscale and are reported as follows: Subscales Control Sample Normative Sample NBA6TAM.89.89 NBA6GAM.77.81 NBA6APR.88.88 NBA6ARW.82.83 NBA6ARS.79.84 NBA6ARM.81.8 NBA6ARF.8.79 All of the subscales showed a high level of internal consistency for both the control and the normative samples. IV. Differences between Groups A series of t-tests between the high-risk control sample and the normative sample (including the overlap) indicated no significant differences for any of the subscales. The t-tests also indicated no significant differences for any of the logarithmic subscales as well. 3
Normative Beliefs about Aggression--Subscales The TTEST Procedure Variable Total Aggression (NBA4TAM) General Aggression (NBA6GAM) Retaliation (NBA6APR) Retaliation, Weak Provocation (NBA6ARW) Retaliation, Strong Provocation (NBA6ARS) Retaliation Against Males (NBA6ARM) Retaliation Against Females (NBA6ARF) Total Aggression LOG (NAB5TAL) General Aggression LOG (NBA6GAL) Retaliation LOG (NBA6ARL) Retaliation, Weak Provocation LOG (NBA6AWL) Retaliation, Strong Provocation LOG (NBA6ASL) Retaliation Against Males LOG (NBA6AML) Retaliation Against Females LOG (NBA6AFL) Normative Sample Control Sample DF t Value Pr > t Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev 1.5.41 1.56.47 392 1.47.1411 1.23.34 1.29.37 392 1.51.132 1.67.53 1.75.6 391 1.29.1987 1.61.49 1.67.57 391 1.16.2455 1.8.82 1.9.81 392 1.14.257 1.79.63 1.89.71 392 1.45.148 1.55.51 1.6.59 391.83.499.37.26.41.28 392 1.33.1836.18.22.22.25 392 1.58.1155.47.31.5.33 391 1.14.2545.43.3.46.33 391.91.3636.49.44.55.42 392 1.34.1814.52.35.57.37 392 1.27.248.39.3.42.32 391.66.515 4
V. Recommendations for Use Analysts should note that four of the subscales showed a fairly normal distribution for both the normative and control samples. These subscales were Retaliation, Retaliation with a Weak Provocation, Retaliation with a Strong Provocation, and Approval of Retaliation against Males. Both the normative and the control samples were positively skewed for the Total Aggression, General Aggression, and Retaliation against Females. One subscale, General Aggression, indicated floor effects for both the normative and the control samples. 85% of the normative sample and 81% of the control sample had responses score between 1. and 1.5 (4. was the highest possible score). Another subscale, Retaliation against Females, indicated a floor effect for the control sample only, with 87% scoring between 1. and 2. (4. was the highest possible score). In addition, analysts should note that six of the logarithmic subscales were normally distributed for both the normative and control samples. Only one subscale, General Aggression LOG, was positively skewed for both samples. 5
VI. Item and Subscale Means and SDs Normative Beliefs about Aggression Items Year 6 Normative Sample C6H1r C6H2r C6H3r C6H4r C6H5r C6H6r C6H7r C6H8r C6H9r C6H1r C6H11r C6H12r C6H13r C6H14r C6H15r C6H16r C6H17r C6H18r C6H19r C6H2r OK for John to scream? OK for John to hit? Wrong for girl to scream? Wrong for girl to hit? OK for Mary to scream? OK for Mary to hit? Wrong for boy to scream? Wrong for boy to hit? Wrong for John to hit back? OK for girl to hit back? Wrong for Mary to hit her back? Wrong for boy to hit her back? Wrong to hit other people? OK to say mean things when angry? OK to yell at others? OK to push or shove other people? Wrong to insult other people? Wrong to take it out on others? Wrong to get in physical fights? OK to use physical force? 326 1.945122 1.257645 2.237849 1.44367 1.9449541 1.26655 1.738869 1.1288344 1.8323171 2.146728 1.8256881 1.4786585 1.253488 1.439244 1.2957317 1.24893 1.235474 1.212195 1.198177 1.1432927.883933.523782.9759356.78489.874578.5698273.8145872.4526468.9981289 1.171666.989351.886887.5418198.6835339.564836.511442.5221137.484372.571926.4717 Normative Beliefs about Aggression Log Subscales Year 6 Normative Sample NBA6TAL NBA6GAL NBA6ARL NBA6AWL NBA6ASL NBA6AML NBA6AFL NOBAG Total Aggression LOG NOBAG General Aggression LOG NOBAG Retaliate LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females LOG.3769161.189637.472132.434484.522466.532736.3961865.2614387.2353625.3125689.339541.436742.348272.38939 1.2237754 1.252763 1.3437347 1.3217558 1.3862944 1.299283 1.3862944 Normative Beliefs about Aggression Subscales Year 6 Normative Sample NBA6TAM NBA6GAM NBA6APR NBA6ARW NBA6ARS NBA6ARM NBA6ARF NOBAG Total Aggression NOBAG General Aggression NOBAG Retaliation NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females 1.5143 1.2468242 1.685385 1.6183377 1.8193598 1.894512 1.56328.4249916.3542667.5496526.5129364.819553.6453173.5389165 3.4 3.5 3.8333333 3.75 3.6666667 6
Normative Beliefs about Aggression Items Year 6 Control Sample C6H1r C6H2r C6H3r C6H4r C6H5r C6H6r C6H7r C6H8r C6H9r C6H1r C6H11r C6H12r C6H13r C6H14r C6H15r C6H16r C6H17r C6H18r C6H19r C6H2r OK for John to scream? OK for John to hit? Wrong for girl to scream? Wrong for girl to hit? OK for Mary to scream? OK for Mary to hit? Wrong for boy to scream? Wrong for boy to hit? Wrong for John to hit back? OK for girl to hit back? Wrong for Mary to hit her back? Wrong for boy to hit her back? Wrong to hit other people? OK to say mean things when angry? OK to yell at others? OK to push or shove other people? Wrong to insult other people? Wrong to take it out on others? Wrong to get in physical fights? OK to use physical force? 2.74627 1.291448 2.2761194 1.5746269 2.11943 1.335829 1.6492537 1.4 1.9477612 2.261194 1.942985 1.4358 1.357463 1.414478 1.261194 1.2686567 1.298575 1.23886 1.2835821 1.179145.9999719.635123 1.576736.96783 1.4877.7248959.866473.5172374 1.712733 1.1884729 1.315416.763695.6855925.6627884.519244.591979.613553.629889.5958748.4395956 3. Normative Beliefs about Aggression Log Subscales Year 6 Control Sample NBA6TAL NBA6GAL NBA6ARL NBA6AWL NBA6ASL NBA6AML NBA6AFL NOBAG Total Aggression LOG NOBAG General Aggression LOG NOBAG Retaliate LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males LOG NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females LOG.463959.21834.535229.465331.55476.572544.4156187.28316.249746.5232.634.4246738.3688629.3223359 1.163158 1.986123 1.3437347 1.3217558 1.3862944 1.299283 1.3862944 Normative Beliefs about Aggression Subscales Year 6 Control Sample NBA6TAM NBA6GAM NBA6APR NBA6ARW NBA6ARS NBA6ARM NBA6ARF NOBAG Total Aggression NOBAG General Aggression NOBAG Retaliation NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females 1.563597 1.286386 1.7475124 1.673575 1.8955224 1.893348 1.6199.4653776.3665478.65724.5741352.865.7139858.5933742 3.2 3. 3.8333333 3.75 3.6666667 7
VII. Item and Scale Correlations Normative Beliefs about Aggression Items Year 6 Report Sample Pearson Correlation Coefficients, N = 391 Prob > r under H: Rho= C6H1r C6H2r C6H3r C6H4r C6H5r C6H6r C6H7r C6H8r C6H9r C6H1r C6H11r C6H1r OK for John to scream? C6H2r OK for John to hit? C6H3r Wrong for girl to scream? C6H4r Wrong for girl to hit? C6H5r OK for Mary to scream? C6H6r OK for Mary to hit? C6H7r Wrong for boy to scream? C6H8r Wrong for boy to hit? C6H9r Wrong for John to hit back? C6H1r OK for girl to hit back? C6H11r Wrong for Mary to hit her back? C6H12r Wrong for boy to hit her back? C6H13r Wrong to hit other people? C6H14r OK to say mean things when angry? C6H15r OK to yell at others? C6H16r OK to push or shove other people? C6H17r Wrong to insult other people? C6H18r Wrong to take it out on others? C6H19r Wrong to get in physical fights? C6H2r OK to use physical force?.4345.4345.57949.3577.66987.36221.42527.172.7.36655.3867.39998.27331.3343.24136.2324.22.18563.2.1657.352.22244.1387.96.57949.15728.18.15728.18.342.29859.41218.23913.37555.37986.3895.36912.27648.27262.1375.96.15193.26.26131.16985.7.2814.37798.29.3577.342.43578.43578.58816.34969.37897.14113.52.34679.47524.36671.15348.23.27196.21922.31811.19463.1.21499.17447.5.21442.2868.66987.29859.58816.2975.2975.49179.1792.4.35821.4167.48333.4289.18639.2.2757.17646.5.3551.2236.3462.3293.3293.19277.1.36221.41218.34969.49179.47648.47648.54447.26654.34146.3576.4343.3144.3567.27138.3484.27129.21242.2198.29723.26612.42527.23913.37897.1792.4.54447.2852.2852.44356.44469.38329.45832.3118.29824.27157.38395.41224.465.3719.3536.385.172.7.37555.14113.52.35821.26654.44356.44254.44254.24712.14614.38.27827.3975.11311.253.14564.39.233.15894.16.19119.1.153.29.15613.2.2962.36655.37986.34679.4167.34146.44469.24712.28657.28657.16325.12.394.42647.22228.1833.3.2444.26973.28425.1988.1.4352.33599.3867.3895.47524.48333.3576.38329.14614.38.16325.12.62722.62722.6924.43475.39642.21647.21751.25741.32178.27449.4.25855.39998.36912.36671.4289.4343.45832.27827.394.6924.68177.68177.32511.32593.15453.22.2233.24532.22659.22298.26557.1842.3.5338.3762.2189.29299.25634.23112.24877.28385.21115 8
Pearson Correlation Coefficients, N = 391 Prob > r under H: Rho= C6H12r C6H13r C6H14r C6H15r C6H16r C6H17r C6H18r C6H19r C6H2r C6H1r OK for John to scream? C6H2r OK for John to hit? C6H3r Wrong for girl to scream? C6H4r Wrong for girl to hit? C6H5r OK for Mary to scream? C6H6r OK for Mary to hit? C6H7r Wrong for boy to scream? C6H8r Wrong for boy to hit? C6H9r Wrong for John to hit back? C6H1r OK for girl to hit back? C6H11r Wrong for Mary to hit her back? C6H12r Wrong for boy to hit her back? C6H13r Wrong to hit other people? C6H14r OK to say mean things when angry? C6H15r OK to yell at others? C6H16r OK to push or shove other people? C6H17r Wrong to insult other people? C6H18r Wrong to take it out on others? C6H19r Wrong to get in physical fights? C6H2r OK to use physical force?.27331.27648.15348.23.18639.2.3144.3118.3975.42647.43475.32511.5338.3343.27262.27196.2757.3567.29824.11311.253.22228.39642.32593.3762.25218.25218.18744.2.16226.13.19186.1.2572.1878.3.23786.27228.24136.1375.96.21922.17646.5.27138.27157.14564.39.1833.3.21647.15453.22.2189.18744.2.26848.26848.2137.25198.3759.1626.13.38747.3279.2324.15193.26.31811.3551.3484.38395.233.2444.21751.2233.29299.16226.13.2137.4668.4668.38454.3994.26917.21123.49.22.26131.19463.1.2236.27129.41224.15894.16.26973.25741.24532.25634.19186.1.25198.38454.4963.4963.33381.31637.266.32598.18563.2.16985.7.21499.3462.21242.465.19119.1.28425.32178.22659.23112.2572.3759.3994.33381.28573.28573.3552.443.43863.1657.352.2814.17447.5.3293.2198.3719.153.29.1988.1.27449.22298.24877.1878.3.1626.13.26917.31637.3552.44642.44642.33321.47359.22244.37798.21442.3293.29723.3536.15613.2.4352.4.26557.28385.23786.38747.21123.266.443.33321.23694.23694.3515.1387.96.29.2868.19277.1.26612.385.2962.33599.25855.1842.3.21115.27228.3279.49.32598.43863.47359.3515.4867.4867 9
Normative Beliefs about Aggression Log Subscales Year 6 Report Sample Pearson Correlation Coefficients Prob > r under H: Rho= Number of Observations NBA6TAL NBA6GAL NBA6ARL NBA6AWL NBA6ASL NBA6AML NBA6AFL NBA6TAL NOBAG Total Aggression LOG.74162.9798.89386.83427.92896.89554 NBA6GAL NOBAG General Aggression LOG.74162.56153.5352.4766.53168.53292 NBA6ARL NOBAG Retaliate LOG.9798.56153.91542.86182.96127.91453 NBA6AWL NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation LOG.89386.5352.91542.59194.86932.858 NBA6ASL NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation LOG.83427.4766.86182.59194.84333.76713 NBA6AML NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males LOG.92896.53168.96127.86932.84333.76929 NBA6AFL NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females LOG.89554.53292.91453.858.76713.76929 1
Normative Beliefs about Aggression Subscales Year 6 Report Sample Pearson Correlation Coefficients Prob > r under H: Rho= Number of Observations NBA6TAM NBA6GAM NBA6APR NBA6ARW NBA6ARS NBA6ARM NBA6ARF NBA6TAM NOBAG Total Aggression.7697.964.89619.8269.9186.88756 NBA6GAM NOBAG General Aggression.7697.5741.54898.46487.5182.5473 NBA6APR NOBAG Retaliation.964.5741.92197.86852.94252.91169 NBA6ARW NOBAG Approval Retaliate Weak Provocation.89619.54898.92197.688.85795.8548 NBA6ARS NOBAG Approval Retaliate Strong Provocation.8269.46487.86852.688.83155.77456 NBA6ARM NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Males.9186.5182.94252.85795.83155.72199 NBA6ARF NOBAG Approval Retaliate vs. Females.88756.5473.91169.8548.77456.72199 11