» Articles » PMID: 29740733

Modification of Housing Mobility Experimental Effects on Delinquency and Educational Problems: Middle Adolescence As a Sensitive Period

Overview
Journal J Youth Adolesc
Date 2018 May 10
PMID 29740733
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Residential mobility is one documented stressor contributing to higher delinquency and worse educational outcomes. Sensitive period life course models suggest that certain developmental stages make individuals more susceptible to the effects of an exposure, like residential mobility, on outcomes. However, most prior research is observational, and has not examined heterogeneity across age or gender that may inform sensitive periods, even though it may have important implications for the etiology of adolescent development. Moreover, there are important translational implications for identifying the groups most vulnerable to residential mobility to inform how to buffer adverse effects of moving. In this study, low-income families were randomized to residential mobility out of public housing into lower poverty neighborhoods using a rental subsidy voucher ("experimental voucher condition"), and were compared to control families remaining in public housing. The sample was comprised of 2829 youth (51% female; 62% Non-Hispanic Black, 31% Hispanic, 7% other race). At baseline, youth ranged from 5 to 16 years old. This study hypothesized that random assignment to the housing voucher condition would generate harmful effects on delinquency and educational problems, compared to the control group, among boys who were older at baseline. The results confirmed this hypothesis: random assignment to the experimental voucher condition generating residential mobility caused higher delinquency among boys who were 13-16 years old at baseline, compared to same-age, in-place public housing controls. However, residential mobility did not affect delinquency among girls regardless of age, or among boys who were 5-12 years old at baseline. The pattern of results for educational problems was similar but weaker. Families with teenage boys are particularly vulnerable to residential transitions. Incorporating additional supports into housing programs may help low-income, urban families to successfully transition to lower poverty neighborhoods.

Citing Articles

Housing mobility protects against alcohol use for children with socioemotional health vulnerabilities: An experimental design.

Thyden N, Schmidt N, Joshi S, Kim H, Nelson T, Osypuk T Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2022; 46(9):1695-1709.

PMID: 36121443 PMC: 9509446. DOI: 10.1111/acer.14911.


Racial Inequalities in Adolescents' Exposure to Racial and Socioeconomic Segregation, Collective Efficacy, and Violence.

Pinchak N, Browning C, Calder C, Boettner B Demography. 2022; 59(5):1763-1789.

PMID: 36095161 PMC: 9757129. DOI: 10.1215/00703370-10210688.


Long-Term Effects of Local-Area New Deal Work Relief in Childhood on Educational, Economic, and Health Outcomes Over the Life Course: Evidence From the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study.

Modrek S, Roberts E, Warren J, Rehkopf D Demography. 2022; 59(4):1489-1516.

PMID: 35852411 PMC: 9516431. DOI: 10.1215/00703370-10111856.


Neighborhoods, Schools, and Adolescent Violence: Ecological Relative Deprivation, Disadvantage Saturation, or Cumulative Disadvantage?.

Pinchak N, Swisher R J Youth Adolesc. 2022; 51(2):261-277.

PMID: 35000029 PMC: 8831473. DOI: 10.1007/s10964-021-01551-8.


Helped into Harm: Mediation of a Housing Voucher Intervention on Mental Health and Substance Use in Boys.

Rudolph K, Gimbrone C, Diaz I Epidemiology. 2021; 32(3):336-346.

PMID: 33783392 PMC: 8015202. DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001334.


References
1.
McCormick M, Brooks-Gunn J, Buka S, Goldman J, Yu J, Salganik M . Early intervention in low birth weight premature infants: results at 18 years of age for the Infant Health and Development Program. Pediatrics. 2006; 117(3):771-80. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-1316. View

2.
Pribesh S, Downey D . Why are residential and school moves associated with poor school performance?. Demography. 1999; 36(4):521-34. View

3.
Clampet-Lundquist S, Kling J, Edin K, Duncan G . Moving teenagers out of high-risk neighborhoods: how girls fare better than boys. AJS. 2011; 116(4):1154-89. DOI: 10.1086/657352. View

4.
Acevedo-Garcia D, Osypuk T, McArdle N, Williams D . Toward a policy-relevant analysis of geographic and racial/ethnic disparities in child health. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008; 27(2):321-33. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.27.2.321. View

5.
Wood D, Halfon N, Scarlata D, Newacheck P, Nessim S . Impact of family relocation on children's growth, development, school function, and behavior. JAMA. 1993; 270(11):1334-8. View