Abstract
Zusammenfassung. Im Jugendalter nimmt die Prävalenz von sexuellem Risikoverhalten (SR) zu. Familiäre und individuelle Bedingungen stehen in Zusammenhang mit SR. Das Ziel der vorliegenden Querschnittsstudie bestand in der Überprüfung eines Modells, das individuelle und familiäre Faktoren zu SR in Beziehung setzt. Die Stichprobe der 12- bis 17-jährigen Jugendlichen (N = 246) stammt aus dem DFG-Projekt „Zukunft Familie III”. Im Rahmen eines Strukturgleichungsmodells wiesen die familiäre Lebensumwelt direkt sowie indirekt via externalisierende Verhaltensauffälligkeiten und Alkoholmissbrauch signifikante Zusammenhänge zu SR auf. Das Modell klärte etwa 25 % der Varianz auf. Diese Ergebnisse bieten einen ersten Ansatz für mögliche Korrelate von SR und können bei der zielgerichteten Anpassung von Präventionsmaßnahmen helfen.
Abstract. The prevalence of risky sexual behaviors rises during adolescence. Younger adolescents with risky sexual behavior show lower rates of safe sex, more frequent sexual intercourse while under the influence of alcohol and drugs, and rarely get tested and treated for sexually transmitted diseases. These practices are also accompanied by psychological and social impairments. To develop effective preventive measures, individual and family-related risk factors need to be identified. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to test a mediation model of individual and family factors for understanding risky sexual behaviors. Individual factors include externalizing behavior problems, alcohol misuse, age, and gender; family factors include family climate, knowledge of the leisure activities of the child, and mother–child conflicts. The sample of adolescents (N = 246, aged 12 – 17 years) was derived from the DFG study “Zukunft Familie III” (“Future Families III”). Structural equation modeling was used to examine family environment and its direct and indirect associations with risky sexual behavior through adolescent externalizing behaviors and alcohol misuse. The model fit the data well, accounting for about 24 % of the variance in boys’ and 26 % of the variance in girls’ risky sexual behavior. Family environment significantly predicted risky sexual behavior, and this was partially explained through increased risk for alcohol misuse and externalizing behavior problems. These results help identify important targets for prevention efforts aimed at reducing adolescents’ risky sexual behavior. The results support the importance of family environment, alcohol misuse, and externalizing behavior problems as targets for prevention. Preventive efforts with a family-based intervention approach may lead to reductions in risk for adolescents’ risky sexual behavior through improving family environment and reducing the risk for alcohol misuse and other externalizing behaviors.
Literatur
2010). Teenagers in the United States: Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing, national survey of family growth 2006 – 2008. Data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 30, 1 – 47.
(2002). Predictors of risky sexual behaviour in African American adolescent girls: Implications for prevention interventions. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27, 519 – 530.
(2010). Jugendsexualität: Repräsentative Wiederholungsbefragung von 14- bis 17-jährigen und ihren Eltern. Aktueller Schwerpunkt Migration. Köln: BZgA.
(2007). Psychosocial predictors of sexual initiation and high-risk sexual behaviors in early adolescence. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 1, 14 – 25.
(2010). How can parents make a difference? Longitudinal associations with adolescent sexual behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 731 – 739.
(2013). Childhood behavior problems and adolescent sexual risk behavior: Familial confounding in the Child and Adolescent Twin Study in Sweden (CATSS). Journal of Adolescent Health, 52, 606 – 612.
(2014). Deutsche Schulalter-Formen der Child Behavior Checklist von Thomas M. Achenbach. Elternfragebogen über das Verhalten von Kindern und Jugendlichen (CBCL/6 – 18R), Lehrerfragebogen über das Verhalten von Kindern und Jugendlichen (TRF/6 – 18R), Fragebogen für Jugendliche (YSR/11 – 18R). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
(2004). Parental influences on adolescent problem behavior: Revisiting Stattin and Kerr. Child Development, 75, 781 – 796.
(2010). Putting pubertal timing in developmental context: Implications for prevention. Developmental Psychobiology, 52, 254 – 262.
(2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549 – 576.
(2003). WHO-Jugendgesundheitssurvey – Konzept und ausgewählte Ergebnisse für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Erziehungswissenschaft, 27, 79 – 108.
(1992). Risk behavior in adolescence: A psychosocial framework for understanding and action. Developmental Review, 12, 374 – 390.
(2001). Adolescent sexual risk behavior: A multi-system perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 493 – 519.
(2011). Pornografiekonsum, sexuelle Skripts und sexuelle Aggression im Jugendalter. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 43, 133 – 141.
(2004). Sexuelle Skripts im Jugendalter. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 35, 241 – 260.
(2004). ‘In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s 1999 findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320 – 341.
(2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64 – 82.
(2001). A randomized controlled trial of a behavioral intervention to reduce high-risk sexual behavior among adolescents in STD clinics. Behavior Therapy, 31, 27 – 54.
(1998 – 2012). Mplus User’s Guide. (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
(2009). Trajectories of HIV risk behavior from age 15 to 25 in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth Sample. Journal Youth and Adolescence, 38, 1226 – 1239.
(2008). The role of perceived parental knowledge on emerging adults′ risk behaviors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 847 – 859.
(1991). Do parent-child relationships change during puberty?. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 47.
(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879 – 891.
(2014). Gesundheit von Kindern und Jugendlichen in Eineltern-, Stief- und Kernfamilien. Bundesgesundheitsblatt-Gesundheitsforschung-Gesundheitsschutz, 57, 860 – 868.
(2008). Long-term health correlates of timing of sexual debut: Results from a national US study. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 155.
(2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147 – 177.
(2003). Entwicklungsorientierte Prävention von aggressiv-dissozialem Verhalten und Substanzmissbrauch. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 12, 84 – 99.
(1985). Familienklima-Skalen. München: Institut für Psychologie-Persönlichkeitspsychologie und Psychodiagnostik, Ludwig Maximilians Universität.
(2000).
(Development matters: Taking the long view on substance abuse etiology and intervention during adolescence . In P. MontiS. ColbyO’Leary, T.Eds., Adolescents, alcohol, and substance abuse: Reaching teens through brief intervention (pp. 19 – 57). New York: Guilford Press.2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development, 71, 1072 – 1085.
(2010). A dual systems model of adolescent risk‐taking. Developmental Psychobiology, 52, 216 – 224.
(2010). Elternbildfragebogen für Kinder und Jugendliche (EBF-KJ). Manual. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
(1999). Der Sozialschichtindex im Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey. Gesundheitswesen, 61, 178 – 183.
(