Resilience in adolescence: Prospective Self moderates the association of early life adversity with externalizing problems

Abstract

Introduction: Early life adversity (ELA) can result in negative behavioral outcomes, including internalizing and externalizing problems. Evidence suggests that adolescence is a critical developmental period for processing ELA. Identity formation, which is crucial to this developmental period, may moderate the effect between ELA and these problems. One potential moderating variable associated with identity formation is the latent construct Prospective Self, comprised of future-oriented attitudes and behaviors.

Methods: Participants are from the first wave of an ongoing longitudinal study designed to characterize behavioral and cognitive correlates of risk behavior trajectories. A community sample of 10th and 12th grade adolescents (N = 2017, 55% female) were recruited from nine public school districts across eight Southeastern Michigan counties in the United States. Data were collected in schools during school hours or after school via self-report, computer-administered surveys. Structural equation modeling was utilized to assess Prospective Self as a latent construct and to evaluate the relationship between ELA, internalizing and externalizing problems, and Prospective Self.

Results: Preliminary findings indicated a satisfactory fit for the construct Prospective Self. The predicted negative associations between Prospective Self and internalizing and externalizing problems were found and evidence of moderation was observed for externalizing problems, such that the effects of ELA (i.e., childhood maltreatment) on externalizing problems were lower for individuals with higher levels of Prospective Self.

Conclusions: These results indicate that Prospective Self may play a role in supporting resilience against externalizing problems associated with ELA among adolescents.

Keywords: Adolescence; Adolescent health; Adverse childhood experiences; Early life adversity; Internalizing and externalizing problems; Self-concept.

Figure 1.

Main effects model between child maltreatment, social environment and Prospective Self predicting internalizing (R² = .44) and externalizing (R² = .44) problems (RMSEA = .03, 90% CI RMSEA = .02 - .03, SRMR = .07, CFI = .87, AIC = 64236.7). All values are standardized coefficients. Latent constructs are shown in ellipses, and observed variables are shown in rectangles. Dotted lines indicate a non-significant path (p > .05). *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 2.

Moderation model of childhood maltreatment, social environment, Prospective Self and their interactions predicting internalizing (R² = .49) and externalizing (R² = .81) problems (AIC = 64134.9). All values are standardized coefficients. Latent constructs are shown in ellipses, and observed variables are shown in rectangles. Dotted lines indicate a non-significant path (p > .05). *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 3.

Plot of interaction effect between childhood maltreatment and externalizing problems with Prospective Self (PS) as a moderator. The X- and Y-axes depict a continuous range of standardized childhood maltreatment and externalizing problem scores respectively, with zero representing the mean with low indicating 1 SD below and high indicating 1 SD above the mean. Scores for externalizing problems fell within three standard deviations of the mean.

Figure 4.

Plot of interaction effect between social environment and externalizing problems with Prospective Self (PS) as a moderator. The X- and Y-axes depict a continuous range of standardized social environment and externalizing problem scores respectively, with zero representing the mean with low indicating 1 SD below and high indicating 1 SD above the mean. Scores for externalizing problems fell within three standard deviations of the mean. More positive mean social environment scores depict higher adversity while more negative mean scores depict lower adversity.