Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227

International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2012)

Risk behaviors in adolescents with special needs: Are social

and emotional competences important?

Celeste Simõesa,b, Margarida Matosa,b, Equipa do Projecto Aventura Sociala,b*

a
Faculty of Human Kinetics/ Technical University of Lisbon, 1495-688 Lisbon, Portugal
b
Center of Malaria and other Tropical Diseases/ Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 1349-008 Lisbon, Portugal

Abstract

Background
One of the major threats for adolescent’s health and well-being is risk behaviors. The negative effects of risk
behaviors are currently well known. They lead to personal, social and economic problems, and are associated
with mortality, namely through accidents, violence and crime. Several factors are associated to risk behaviors.
Negative life events are one of the factors that could promote the involvment in risk behaviors. Nevertheless
there are other factors, like emotional and social competences that are important resources for well-being in
adolescence. Adolescents with this kind of competences present a greater capacity for adapt to different
situations and deal with adversity.

Aims
The aim of the present work is to analyse the role of negative life events and emotional and social competences
on risk behaviors, in a population of Portuguese adolescents with special needs.

Sample(s)
The sample included 494 adolescents with special needs, mean age 14 years old. Pupils attended 77 public schools
from all Portugal.

Methods
Data collection was held within the HBSC (Health Behaviour in School aged Children) survey (Currie et al,
2004; Matos et al, 2006). For the purpose of this specific study, the questionnaire “Risk and resilience in
adolescence survey” included questions about personal and social competencies (Resilience Module - Califórnia
Healthy Kids Program Office, 2000), life events (Life Events Checklist, Johnson, 1986) and risk behaviors
(substance use and disruptive behavior).

Results and Conclusions

Results showed that negative life events and some of personal and social competencies – cooperation and
communication, empathy, self-awareness, and self-efficacy are associated to risk behaviors. Adolescents that
present higher levels of negative life events or lower levels of these competences present higher levels of
disruptive behavior. The promotion of social and emotional competences is an important issue in intervention
with adolescents. Implications for prevention field are discussed.

Keywords:
Adolescence; Risk behaviours; Social and Emotional Competences; Prevention

© 2012 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
© 2012 Published
Selection by Elsevier Ltd.
and peer-review underSelection and/or peer-review
responsibility under
of Dr. Zafer responsibility of
Bekirogullari of Cognitive
Dr. Zafer Bekirogullari of Cognitive
– Counselling, Research – &
Counselling, Research & Conference Services C-crcs.
Conference Services C-crcs.

* Corresponding author. Celeste Simões.

E-mail address: csimoes@fmh.utl.pt

1877-0428 © 2012 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Dr. Zafer Bekirogullari of Cognitive – Counselling, Research & Conference
Services C-crcs.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.191
2220 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227

1. Background

Risk behaviors include a series of different behaviors, like substance use or disruptive behaviour,
which can compromise adolescent’s health and well-being. These behaviors have negative effects not
only on adolescents at a short and long term, but also on their families, as well as on the enlarged
community through the social and economic problems associated to these kind of behaviors (Simões,
2007). Disruptive behaviors include different forms of aggression and violence. These behaviors are
associated, on one hand, to illicit drugs use and traffic, urban, racial and xenophobic violence (Delles,
2001); on another hand, these behaviours are associated to anxiety and mood disorders, and other
behavioural disorders (Hill, 2002; Teplin, Abram, McClelland, Dulcan, & Mericle, 2002). Substance use
and abuse is also associated with mental disorders, namely anxiety (Degenhardt, Hall, & Lynskey, 2001)
and depression (Haarasilta, Marttunen, Kaprio, & Aro, 2004), as well as premature and violent deaths,
which generally result in the three most common forms of mortality in this life stage: accidents,
homicides and suicides (Pechansky, Szobot, & Scivoletto, 2004; Pentland, Hutton, & Jones, 2005;
Tardiff, et al., 2005). Substance use is also associated with the increased probability of having sexual
intercourses (Matos & Equipa do Projecto Aventura Social, 2012), and consequently to the increased
probability of contracting HIV and other sexually transmissible diseases, as well as unplanned pregnancy
in adolescence. These risk behaviors have also several social adverse outcomes, like disadvantages
regarding social integration and economic independency (Moffitt, Caspi, Harrington, & Milne, 2002;
Werner & Smith, 2001), and other costs for society related to medical, rehabilitation and custody costs
(DiClemente, Hansen, & Ponton, 1996).
Nowadays, it is widely recognized that this kind of behaviors has several determinant factors at
different levels. Among these, it is possible to find environmental factors like life events in the main
contexts, namely family, peers and school (Simões, Matos, & Batista-Foguet, 2008; Simões, et al., in
press) and individual factors, like cognitive, emotional and social competences (Ferreira, et al., 2012;
Schutter, Bokhoven, Vanderschuren, Lochman, & Matthys, 2011; Simões, Matos, & Batista-Foguet,
2008; Vaske, Galyean, & Cullen, 2011). Some of these factors can act as risk factors and other can act as
protective factors. Negative life events are associated with adjustment problems in adolescence and in
adult life (Forehand, Biggar, & Kotchick, 1998; Werner & Smith, 2001). A review by Johnson (1986)
found that life stress in children and adolescents was significantly related to anxiety, depression, low
levels of self-esteem, delinquent behavior and poor school performance. This is especially true when
several life negative events take place. The fact that the number of risk factors is a key feature for the
understanding of maladjustment problems was raised by Rutter who found that the combination of four
risk factors quadruplicates the likelihood of maladjustment, comparatively with the combination of three
risk factors (Rutter, 1979). This hypothesis, known has cumulative risk, emphasizes to a large extent the
quantitative aspects of risk as the crucial question comparatively to the qualitative aspects of risk
(Forehand, et al., 1998; Simões, Matos, Tomé, & Ferreira, 2008).
Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that these life events don’t act in vacuum. These
events interact with adolescent’s competencies and the result of this confront can be translated in different
outcomes (positive or negative). For instance Levers-Landis, Greenley, Burant, and Borawski (2006)
found that lower cognitive social maturity and greater life change events significantly predicted health
risk behaviors. More specifically, life events partially mediated the relationship between cognitive social
maturity and health risk behaviors. On other hand, some authors refer that these competences can act as
moderators of the impact of negative life events on health outcomes (Simões, Matos, Ferreira, & Tomé,
2009). Some of these competences, that are going to be under analysis in this study, are emotional and
social competences, namely, cooperation and communication, empathy, problem solving, self-efficacy,
self-awareness and goals and aspirations (Hanson & Kim, 2007). Cooperation and communication
competences are associated with flexibility in relationships, work team skills and assertiveness in the
expression of emotions, feelings, ideas and needs (Austin & Kilbert, 2000). Empathy, the ability to
understand others’ feelings and perspectives, is viewed as an important aspect in the area of interpersonal
functioning (Fitness & Curtis, 2005). Benard (2004) mentions “empathy not only helps facilitate
relationships development, it also forms the basis of morality, forgiveness, compassion and caring for
others” (p.15). Problem solving entails the ability to plan, critical thinking, reflecting and evaluating
different solutions before taking a decision or doing an action (Austin & Kilbert, 2000). Problem solving
skills seem to have a fundamental role in risk and resources evaluation, in the search for healthy
environments or relations, as well as in the development of realistic plans that are key aspects for
adaptation (Werner & Smith, 2001). Self-efficacy is related to people’s ability to judge to what extent
they will accomplish a certain level of performance (Bandura, 2001). According to Bandura, efficacy
beliefs are important foundations of human action. These beliefs affect adjustment not only through their
 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227 2221

direct impact on outcomes, but also because they influence other outcomes determinants. Like problem
solving skills, “efficacy beliefs also play a key role in shaping the courses lives take by influencing the
types of activities and environments people choose to get into” (Bandura, 2001, p. 10). Self-awareness
refers to the capacity to become the object of one’s own attention (Morin, 2006). Greater levels of self-
awareness were found to be associated to lower levels of depressive symptoms and to well-being (Tandon
& Solomon, 2009). Lastly, goals and aspirations and other future oriented strengths are associated to
positive outcomes in health (Benard, 2004). Future goals help to delay immediate gratification (Munist, et
al., 1998). Thus, having goals and aspirations is a determinant aspect in the active construction of our own
lives, that means be an agent (Bandura, 2001).

This study aims at:

(1) Verifying the relationship between negative life events and risk behaviors (substance use and
disruptive behavior);
(2) Verifying the relationship between emotional and social competences and risk behaviors (substance
use and disruptive behavior;
(3) Verifying if emotional and social competences (communication and cooperation, empathy, self-
efficacy, problem solving, self-awareness, goals and aspirations) are moderators of the relationship
between negative life events and risk behaviors in adolescents with special needs.

2. Methods

Sample
The sample consists of 494 pupils, adolescents with special needs, 285 boys and 209 girls, aged
between 10 and 19 years old (M=14,36; DP=2,329). Pupils were selected from 77 Portuguese public
schools, randomly selected from all country, 35.4% were attending the 6th grade, 25.3% the 8th grade and
12.3% the 10th grade. Most pupils had Portuguese nationality (95.1%), and working parents, either father
(73.8%), or mother (59.1%).

The survey
The questionnaire used in this study was the “Risk and resilience in adolescence survey” (Simões,
Matos, Tomé, et al., 2009). This questionnaire includes, besides socio-demographic questions, a set on
HBSC/WHO questions regarding life styles and a set of questions related with resilience, life events, and
mental health.

For the purpose of this study, the following instruments were used:
- Substance Use (Currie, Smith, Boyce, & Smith, 2001; Matos, et al., 2006) - seven substance use
related questions that included tobacco use frequency (1=I do not smoke; 2=Less than once a week;
3=At least once a week, but not every day; 4=Every day), alcohol use frequency (beer, wine and
spirits: 1=Often; 2=Rarely; 3=Never) and illicit drugs use (last month use:1=None; 2=Once; 3=More than
once; 4=Often; cannabis use – last 30 days and last year: 1=Never; 2=Once; 3=Sometimes; 4=Often).
- Disruptive Behaviour scale - Beck Youth Inventories for Children and Adolescents (Beck, Beck, &
Jolly, 2001) (20 items; 1-Never; 5-Always).
-“Resilience – California Healthy Kids Program Office” (CHKS, 2000), 18 items referring to six
emotional and social competences (cooperation and communication; empathy; problem solving; self-
efficacy; self-awareness; goals and aspirations) (3 items per competence; 1-Never; 5-Always).
-“Life Events Checklist” (Johnson, 1986), 41 life events list and four open questions. Adolescents
refer to: a) relevant life events in past year; b) type of event (1-Good; 2-Bad); c) impact in ones’ life (1-
None; 4-A lot).

Procedure
From a national official list of schools from the whole country, 143 public schools were randomly
selected. Detailed sampling and data collection procedures were presented elsewhere (Currie, et al., 2001;
Matos, et al., 2006; Simões, et al., 2009). During the data collection procedure, a letter was sent to all the
selected schools with the questionnaires and the information about procedures for the different kinds of
students’ special needs. The questionnaire took about 90 minutes to respond. The response rate for
schools was 54% and for adolescents with special needs was 35%.
2222 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227

Analysis
PAWS Statistics 19 was used in data analysis. Reliability analyses were conducted with the items of
each of the emotional and social competences and disruptive behavior scales. After the reliability
analysis, the items of each scale/subscales were summed to obtain the six emotional and social
competences scales and the disruptive behavior scale. The substance use related variables were submitted
to an optimal scaling procedure (see Simões, Batista-Foguet, Matos, & Calmeiro, 2008 for more
details).The object scores were saved to obtain substance use factor. The Negative Life Events Scale was
obtained by selecting the negative events that had been experienced in past year from the life events
checklist. Each event, selected as bad event, was multiplied by its impact or effect. After this operation,
all these scores were summed to obtain the Negative Life Events Scale.(2008)
For the analyses, the six subscales emotional and social competences scales were categorized in two
categories. The scores of each emotional and social competences scales were divided into two groups
according to answer options (low: scores 3 to 9; high: scores 10 to 15). The Negative Life Events Scale
was also categorized into three groups. The criterion for the categorization was theoretical based in the
cumulative risk effect mentioned above. The first group was composed by the subjects that referred no
negative events in the past year (score 0); the second group included the subjects that referred few
negative life events with significant impact in their lives2 (score 1 to 12); the third group included the
subjects that referred several negative life events in the past year (score above 12). In the analyses of
variance, robust tests of equality of means (Brown-Forsythe) were used when homogeneity of variance
wasn’t verified.

3. Results

Cronbach Alpha for each of the six emotional and social competences scales ranged from α=. 60
(cooperation and communication sub-scale) to α= .76 (self-awareness sub-scale). The disruptive behavior
scale had a Cronbach Alpha of .95. Psychometric properties of these scales were deeply reported
elsewhere (Simões, Matos, Tomé, et al., 2009). Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for the emotional
and social competences scales, disruptive behavior and negative life events scales.

Table 1. Mean values, Standard Deviations, Maximum and Minimum values of Substance Use,
Disruptive Behavior, Emotional and Social Competences scales (for the 2 groups in study), and
Negative Life Events Scale (for the 3 groups in study)

Domain Group Min. Max. Mean SD

Substance Use -.34 13,22 0.00 1,00

Disruptive Behavior 20 100 30.30 13.41
Cooperation & Communication /Low 3 9 7.79 1.69
Cooperation & Communication /High 10 15 12.30 1.66
Empathy /Low 3 9 7.07 1.95
Empathy /High 10 15 12.30 1.62
Emotional and Problem Solving /Low 3 9 7.34 1.80
Social
Competences Problem Solving /High 10 15 12.67 1.76
Self-efficacy /Low 3 9 7.09 1.89
Self-efficacy /High 10 15 12.39 1.78
Self -awareness /Low 3 9 7.59 1.82
Self -awareness /High 10 15 12.65 1.66
Goals and aspiration /Low 3 9 6.76 1.96
Goals and aspiration /High 10 15 12.49 1.82
None 0 0 0.00 0.00
Negative Life Events Few 1 12 5.27 3.20
Many 13 91 23.14 12.72

2
In this group the maximum number of negative life events with lot of impact was three
 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227 2223

Relationship between negative life events (NLE) and risk behaviors (substance use and disruptive
behavior)

Two one-way ANOVA were carried out to analyse the relations between negative life events and
risk behavior (substance use and disruptive behavior). The variance analyses reveals only a significant
effect of the negative life events factor on disruptive behavior (F2, 388=4.83, p<.01). Despite reaching
statistical significance, the effect size, calculated using eta squared, was .02. Post-hoc comparisons using
the Scheffe test indicated that mean scores for the group with no NLE (M= 28.89; SD=15.61) and the
group with few NLE (M= 29.89; SD=11.49) were significantly different from group with several NLE
(M= 35.62; SD=13.41). The group with no NLE did not differ significantly from the group with few NLE.
The effect of NLE on substance use was not significant (F2, 490=2.11, p=ns).

Relationship between emotional and social competences and risk behaviors (substance use and
disruptive behavior)

Two sets of six one-way ANOVA were carried out for each of the dependent variables in order to
analyse the relations between emotional and social competences and risk behavior (substance use and
disruptive behavior). The results obtained are summarized in Table 2.

As it is possible to verify, variance analyses reveals only a significant effect of the emotional and
social competences on disruptive behavior (namely cooperation and communication, empathy, self-
awareness and self-efficacy). This significant effect means that adolescents who have higher levels of
these competences present lower levels of disruptive behavior. Table 3 present the means and standard
deviations for the groups of competences that reach statistical significance in the analyses. Despite
reaching statistical significance, the effect size, calculated using eta squared, was .02 for cooperation and
communication, empathy, and self-efficacy, and .03 for self-awareness.

Table 2. One-way Anova for substance use and disruptive behavior as dependent variables and emotional
and social competences as factors

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Substance use
Disruptive Behavior
Cooperation & Communication: F1, 418=.71, p=ns
Empathy: F1, 417=.23, p=ns
Problem Solving: F1, 440=2.24, p=ns
Self-Efficacy: F1, 438=.00, p=ns
Self-Awareness: F1, 412=.38, p=ns
Goals & Aspirations: F1, 422=2.34, p=ns
Cooperation & Communication: F1, 366=5.93, p<.05
Empathy: F1, 362=6.76, p<.05
Problem Solving: F1, 374=2.03, p=ns
Self-Efficacy: F1, 365=5.88, p<.05
Self-Awareness: F1, 359=5.78, p<.05
Goals & Aspirations: F1, 365=3.56, p=ns
2224 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227

Table 3. Means and standard deviations (SD) for disruptive behavior in the different groups of
emotional and social competences

Emotional and Social Competences Group Mean SD

Cooperation & Communication Low 33.38 15.70
High 29.10 12.14
Empathy Low 32.72 15.33
High 28.77 11.75
Self-efficacy Low 32.49 15.11
High 28.83 11.92
Self -awareness Low 32.37 13.25
High 28.86 12.82

Emotional and social competences as moderators of the relationship between Risk behaviors and
negative life events

Since it was verified a significant relation between negative life events and disruptive behavior, as
well as between four (of the six emotional and social competences) and disruptive behavior, four two-way
ANOVA’s were carried out in order to see whether these competences mitigate the effect of negative life
events over disruptive behavior. The results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Two-way Anova: Disruptive Behavior as dependent variable

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Cooperation & Cooperation & Communication: F1, 367=3.77, p<.05
Communication Negative Life Events: F2, 367=4.59, p<.05
Cooperation & Communication x Negative Life Events: F2, 367=.35,
p=ns
Empathy Empathy: F1, 363=7.04, p<.01
Negative Life Events: F2, 363=3.28, p<.05
Empathy x Negative Life Events: F2, 363=.20, p=ns
Self-Efficacy Self-Efficacy: F1, 377=5.01, p<.05
Negative Life Events: F2, 377=4.78, p<.01
Self-Efficacy x Negative Life Events: F2, 377=.56, p=ns
Self-Awareness Self-Awareness: F1, 360=3.55, p<.05
Negative Life Events: F2, 360=3.16, p<.05
Self-Awareness x Negative Life Events: F2, 360=.27, p=ns

As it possible to see in Table 4, only significant main effects of negative life events and emotional
and social competences were obtained. Again, these analyses had revel that adolescents that have no or
few life events, as well as the ones who have higher levels of these competences present lower levels of
involvement in disruptive behavior. The interactions between negative life events and the four emotional
and social competences under study weren’t significant.

4. Conclusions

Negative life events and emotional and social competences, specifically, cooperation and
communication, empathy, self-awareness and self-efficacy present a significant effect on disruptive
behavior. Negative life events reveal as a risk factor, since adolescents that present higher levels of
negative life events present higher levels of disruptive behavior. Interestingly, the cumulative risk effect
was verified, as in other studies (Forehand, et al., 1998; Simões, Matos, Tomé, & Ferreira, 2008), since
the effect of negative life events is significantly higher in the group that refers four or more life events
with significant impact in their life’s, comparatively to the group that has no negative life events or few
negative life events, that don’t differ from each other. Emotional and social competences reveal as a
 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227 2225

protective factor, since adolescents that present higher levels of cooperation and communication,
empathy, self-awareness and self-efficacy present lower levels of disruptive behavior. These results are
supported by other studies in this field (Schutter, et al., 2011; Vaske, et al., 2011; Wied, Wied, & Boxtel,
2010) that point out the protective effects of empathy, social skills and coping skills on disruptive
behavior. Although these competences appear as a protective factor, additional analysis reveal that these
competences can’t mitigate the effect of negative life events in order to maintain the disruptive behavior
in the levels verified in the groups with no negative life events or few negative life events. Problem
solving and goals and aspirations didn’t appear as significant protective factors for disruptive behavior as
it is pointed out in other studies (Simões, Matos, & Batista-Foguet, 2008; Vaske, et al., 2011).
For substance use, neither negative life events, nor emotional and social competences present a
significant effect, unlike other studies (Ferreira, et al., 2012; Hanson & Kim, 2007). Probably, the small
number of adolescents that refer an involvement in substance use may have a contribution for this result.
Nevertheless, this is an issue that should be investigated in deep to see whether there are other
mechanisms in this scope for adolescents with special needs.
These results point towards two important directions in disruptive behavior prevention: (1) the
reduction of risk impact and the reduction of negative chain reactions as referred by Rutter (1987) since
the effect of cumulative negative events is a risk factor for disruptive behavior; (2) the importance of
emotional and social competences promotion since they act as protective factors for disruptive behavior.
A meta-analysis conducted by Wilson and Lipsey (2007) about the effectiveness of school-based
psychosocial prevention programs for reducing aggressive and disruptive behavior show that overall,
interventions oriented to behavioral, cognitive and social skills present positive effects on disruptive
behavior. This analysis shows that the most common and most effective approaches were universal
programs and targeted programs for selected/indicated children. This is a crucial issue for adolescents
with special needs because they face a significant level of negative life events due to their condition and
the restrictions that society impose to them (Simões, Matos, Ferreira, et al., 2009), as well as because, in
some cases, their opportunities to acquire and practice these competences is limited due to their
disadvantaged or restricted life contexts.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the Aventura Social Team Project for their fieldwork, collecting data. Thanks to the
national funding agency- Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia / Ministério da Ciência e do Ensino
Superior – Projecto RIPD/PSI/63669/2005.

References

Austin, G., & Kilbert, G. (2000). Healthy Kids Resilience Module Report. California: California Healthy
Kids Program Office WestEd.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology
Retrieved 20-09-2002, from www.findarticles.com
Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What have we learned? San Francisco: WestEd.
CHKS (2000). Resilience Module. Los Alamitos: California Healthy Kids Program Office.
Currie, C., Smith, R., Boyce, W., & Smith, R. (2001). HBSC, a WHO cross national study: Research
protocol for the 2001/2002 survey. Copenhagen: WHO.
Delles, J. (2001). Prevenção de delinquência em França: História e perspectiva. Paper presented at the
"1º Encontro Pensar e Agir. Prevenção da desviância juvenil: Reflexões do interior do
problema", Lisboa.
DiClemente, R. J., Hansen, W. B., & Ponton, L. E. (1996). Adolescents at risk: A generation jeopardy. In
R. J. DiClemente, W. B. Hansen & L. E. Ponton (Eds.), Handbook of Adolescent Health Risk
Behavior (pp. 1-4). New York: Plenum Press.
Ferreira, M., Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Ramiro, L., Diniz, J. A., & Social Adventure Team (2012). The
role of social and emotional competences on risk behaviors in adolescence. International
Journal of Emotional Education, 4(1), 43-55.
Fitness, J., & Curtis, M. (2005). Emotional intelligence and the trait meta-mood scale: Relationships with
empathy, attributional, self-control, and response to interpersonal conflit. E-Journal of Applied
Psychology: Social Section, 1(1), 50-62. Retrieved from
http://ojs.lib.swin.edu.au/index.php/ejap/article/viewFile/6/15
2226 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227

Forehand, R., Biggar, H., & Kotchick, B. A. (1998). Cumulative risk across family stressors: Short- and
long-term effects for adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology Retrieved 20-09-2002,
from www.findarticles.com
Haarasilta, L. M., Marttunen, M. J., Kaprio, J. A., & Aro, H. M. (2004). Correlates of depression in a
representative nationwide sample of adolescents (15-19 years) and young adults (20-24 years).
Eur J Public Health, 14(3), 280-285.
Hanson, T. L., & Kim, J.-O. (2007). Measuring resilience and youth development: the psychometric
properties of the Healthy Kids Survey (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 034) Available
from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs
Hill, J. (2002). Biological, psychological and social processes in the conduct disorders. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(1), 133-164.
Johnson, J. H. (1986). Life events as stressors in childhood and adolescence. Beverly Hills: Sage
Publications.
Levers-Landis, G. E., Greenley, R. N., Burant, C., & Borawski, E. (2006). Cognitive Social Maturity,
Life Change Events, and Health Risk Behaviors among Adolescents: Development of a
Structural Equation Model. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 13(2), 111-120.
Matos, M. G., & Equipa do Projecto Aventura Social (2012). A saúde dos adolescentes portugueses:
Relatório do estudo HBSC 2010. Lisboa: CMDT/IHMT/UNL; FMH/UTL.
Matos, M. G., Simões, C., Tomé, G., Gaspar, T., Camacho, I., Diniz, J. A., et al. (2006). A saúde dos
adolescentes portugueses: Hoje em 8 anos Retrieved 20-12-2006, from
http://www.fmh.utl.pt/aventurasocial/pdf/191206/nacional.pdf
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Harrington, H., & Milne, B. J. (2002). Males on the life-course-persistent and
adolescent-limites antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years. Development and
Psychopathology, 14, 179-207.
Morin, A. (2006). Levels of consciousness and self-awareness: A comparison and integration of various
neurocognitive views Consciousness and Cognition, 15(2), 358-371.
Munist, M., Santos, H., Kotliarenco, M. A., Ojeda, E. N. S., Infante, F., & Grotberg, E. H. (1998).
Manual de identificación y promoción de la resiliencia en niños y adolescentes. Washington:
Organización Panamericana de la Salud - Organización Mundial de la Salud.
Pechansky, F., Szobot, C. M., & Scivoletto, S. (2004). [Alcohol use among adolescents: concepts,
epidemiological characteristics and etiopatogenic factors]. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria 26
Suppl 1, 14-17.
Pentland, B., Hutton, L. S., & Jones, P. A. (2005). Late mortality after head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg
Psychiatry, 76(3), 395-400.
Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children´s responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent &
J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology: Social competence in children (Vol. 3,
pp. 49-74). Hanover: University Press of New England.
Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 57(3), 316-331.
Schutter, D. J. L. G., Bokhoven, I. v., Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J., Lochman, J. E., & Matthys, W. (2011).
Risky Decision Making in Substance Dependent Adolescents with a Disruptive Behavior
Disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39, 333-339.
Simões, C. (2007). Comportamentos de risco na adolescência [Risk behaviors in adolescence]. Lisboa:
FCT/FCG.
Simões, C., Batista-Foguet, J., Matos, M. G., & Calmeiro, L. (2008). Alcohol use and abuse in
adolescence: Proposal of an alternative analysis. Child: Health, Care and Development, 34(3),
291-301.
Simões, C., Matos, M. G., & Batista-Foguet, J. (2008). Juvenile delinquency: Analysis of risk and
protective factors using quantitative and qualitative methods. Cognition, Brain & Behavior,
XII(4), 389-408.
Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Ferreira, M., & Tomé, G. (2009). Facing the adversity: The role of personal
and social competencies on well-being. Paper presented at the 3rd ESRA Conference.
Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Ferreira, M., Tomé, G., Diniz, J. A., & Equipa do Projecto Aventura Social
(2009). Risco e Resiliência em adolescentes com NEE: Estado da arte. Lisboa: Aventura Social
e Saúde/Faculdade de Motricidade Humana.
Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Moreno, M. C., Rivera, F., Batista-Foguet, J., & Simons-Morton, B. (in press).
Substance use in Portuguese and Spanish adolescents: Highlights from differences and
similarities and moderate effects. Spanish Journal of Psychology.
 Celeste Simões et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 69 (2012) 2219 – 2227 2227

Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Tomé, G., & Ferreira, M. (2008). Impact of Negative Life Events on
Positive Health in a population of adolescents with special needs, and protective factors.
Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 8(1), 53-65.
Simões, C., Matos, M. G., Tomé, G., Ferreira, M., Diniz, J. A., & Equipa do Projecto Aventura Social
(2009). Risco e Resiliência em adolescentes com NEE: Da teoria à prática. Lisboa: Aventura
Social e Saúde/Faculdade de Motricidade Humana.
Tandon, D. S., & Solomon, B. S. (2009). Risk and Protective Factors for Depressive Symptoms in Urban
African American Adolescents. Youth & Society 41(1), 80-99.
Tardiff, A. K., Wallace, Z., Tracy, M., Piper, T. M., Vlahov, D., & Galea, S. (2005). Drug and alcohol use
as determinants of New York City homicide trends from 1990 to 1998. J Forensic Sci, 50(2),
470-474.
Teplin, L. A., Abram, K. M., McClelland, G. M., Dulcan, M. K., & Mericle, A. A. (2002). Psychiatric
disorders in youth in juvenile detention. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59(12), 1133-1143.
Vaske, J., Galyean, K., & Cullen, F. T. (2011). Toward a biosocial theory of offender rehabiltiation: Why
does cognitive-behavioral therapy work? Journal of Criminal Justice 39, 90-102.
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (2001). Journeys from childhood to midlife: Risk, resilience and recovery.
New York: Cornell University Press.
Wied, M. d., Wied, C. G.-d., & Boxtel, A. v. (2010). Empathy dysfunction in children and adolescents
with disruptive behavior disorders. European Journal of Pharmacology 626, 97-103.
Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2007). School-Based Interventions for Aggressive and Disruptive
Behavior Update of a Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 33(2S), 130-
143.