Cognition, Brain, Behavior.

An Interdisciplinary Journal
Copyright © 2012 ASCR Publishing House. All rights reserved.
ISSN: 1224-8398
Volume XVI, No. 1 (March), 89-105

PROBLEM BEHAVIOR IN DIFFERENT SOCIAL

ENVIRONMENTS AMONG ADOLESCENTS OF
BULGARIAN AND ROMA ORIGIN
Eva PAPAZOVA1, Radostina ANTONOVA2*
1
Institute for Population and Human Studies, Bulgarian Academy of Science,
Sofia, Bulgaria
2
Health and Social Development Foundation, Sofia, Bulgaria

ABSTRACT

The aim of this article was to trace out and analyze the behavioral problems at
adolescents from four different social environments: institutions for children and
adolescents deprived from parental care (ICADPC), segregated school in a
neighbourhood with compact Roma population, school with pupils of both
Bulgarian and Roma origin (mixed school) and school with predominantly
Bulgarian pupils (Bulgarian school). 309 adolescents were studied. Achenbach
and Edelbrock (1979, 1991) Children Behavior Check List scale was used. The
results showed that the assessed girls were characterized by internalized
behavioral problems, and boys were characterized with externalized behavioral
problems. Most aggressive were the youngest adolescents (14-15 years old), and
least aggressive were the oldest adolescents (18-19 years old). Most problems were
encountered at the social environment at ICADPC, and least problematic was the
environment at Bulgarian schools, except externalized problem behavior indicators
for the second. Mixed school environment was not significantly more problematic
than the segregated Roma environment.

KEYWORDS: Roma Community Bulgaria, segregrated schools, adolescents

behavioral problems, Children Behavior Check List scale,
quantitative survey

*
Corresponding author:
E-mail: r.antonova@hesed.bg
90 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

Adolescence is a period of difficulties. During this life cycle the behavioral

problems are more interesting from a research perspective, rather than normative
adolescent development. Previous research has documented the factors subjacent to
these behavioral problems, seeking correlation between aggressive behavior in
adolescence and problems in the context of family and school environment.
Studies which analyze the relationship between school environment and
behavioral problems of pupils indicate that adolescents who are violent in school,
have more negative interactions with teachers (Meehan, Hughes & Cavell, 2003;
Murray & Murray, 2004), a more negative school self-concept (Andreou, 2000;
Boders, Earleywine, & Huey, 2004; O'Moore & Kirkham, 2001), and in some cases
are rejected by their peers (Hay, Payne, & Chadwick, 2004; Rubin, Bukowski, &
Parker, 1998; Werner, 2004). Adolescents who are rejected by their peers also tend
to have negative school self-concept (Estevez et al., 2006). It is also shown that
adolescents who manifest antisocial behavior usually have a negative attitude
towards the authorities such as police, law and legislation, and school teachers
(Emler, Ohana, & Dickinson, 1990; Emler & Reicher, 1995).
In 1999 R. Harvey conducted a study related to stigmatization among
African-American students in different social contexts - in universities with the
presence of predominantly Anglo-Saxon Americans and with prevalence of African
Americans. The results showed that African-Americans in the predominantly
"white" universities scored significantly higher rates on the scale which measured
the perception of stigmatization (Harvey, 2001).
The psychological literature did not reveal studies that discuss the
relationship between behavioral problems and segregation of Roma children in
Bulgaria. By the mid-90s of the 20th century the existence of segregated "Roma"
schools in Bulgaria is not noticed. Their existence is associated with the presence of
Roma neighborhoods in almost all big Bulgarian cities, and the enrollment of the
children in the primary education is linked to their neighborhood. The established
"segregated" schools are not thought as a problem of the Bulgarian society and of
the educational system as a whole. It should be noted that along with the
"segregated" schools in Bulgaria there exist "mixed" schools as well - with both
Bulgarians and Roma children. However, the behavior of children in this kind of
social environment is not subject to review, analyze, and study by the psychologists
and researchers.

EXTERNALIZED AND INTERNALIZED PROBLEM BEHAVIOR

Externalized and internalized problems are two key dimensions of child and
adolescent behavior (Garber et al., 1991; Serbin et al., 1991). Externalized problems
(such as disruptive and aggressive behavior, disrespect for adults, explosive temper,
impulsive and hyperactive behavior) are powerful developmental risks, which can

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 91

contribute to school dropout and criminal behavior in later years (Hymel et al.,
1990; Ladd & Burgess, 1999; Loeber, 1990). Externalized behavior is related to
conflict, dependent and not close relationships with others (Birch & Ladd, 1998;
Howes, 2000; Howes et al., 2000; Pianta & Niemitz, 1991). The consequences of
internalized problems (e.g., feelings of inferiority, anxiety, somatic complaints,
loneliness) seem less compatible. Internalized problems in some studies do not lead
to predictable negative consequences (Ladd & Burgess, 1999; Serbin et al., 1991),
while other studies have found later development of anxiety in the presence of
internalized problems (Hymel et al., 1990; Rubin et al., 1989).
Externalized problems jeopardize the student-teacher relationship to a
greater extent than internalized problems. Several studies have shown that teachers
perceive externalized behavioral problems of students as very disturbing, unlike
shyness and anxiety in children and adolescents (Alton-Lee et al., 1993; Lovejoy,
1996; Mullen & Wood, 1986). It should be emphasized that aggressive children
prefer violent solutions to problems which directly involves their teachers
(Trachtenberg & Viken, 1994). In turn, socially withdrawn children have no close
relationships with teachers (Birch & Ladd, 1998; Howes, 2000), but these
relationship may be improved (Ladd & Burgess, 1999).

TYPES OF BEHAVIORAL PROBLEMS

Aggression and antisocial behavior, depression and anxiety, crime and criminal
tendencies and social withdrawal are among the types of behavioral problems that
are characteristic of late childhood and adolescence (Steinberg & Morris, 2001).

Aggression and aggressive behavior

Offenses in adolescents are common and prevalent in boys, and can even be
described as normative. Moffitt (Moffitt, 1993) suggests that for many boys
offenses are not only legal but also a kind of "adjustment", expressing the function
of autonomy in adolescence. However, the frequency of these behaviors should not
be underestimated, and their seriousness ignored. Crimes committed by adolescents
have often serious consequences.
Moffitt proposes an integrative model of adolescent antisocial behavior,
which is a person-environment model (Moffitt, 1993). She claims that the amount
of youth offenses is a result from a phenomenon called "maturity gap”, which is
caused by the discrepancy between the attainments of different biological stages of
maturity in adolescence, without simultaneously reaching the maturity status. Under
these circumstances, offenses are ways of self-determination, expression of
autonomy and substitute of adulthood. This is an adaptive attempt by teenagers to
build a bridge between changing self-perceptions and social roles ascribed to them.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
92 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

Most of the aggressive boys seem to develop problems early in life and
maintain such behavior in adulthood (Farrington et al., 1990; Robins, 1985).
Virtually all men in that study who were diagnosed with antisocial personality
disorder have the same diagnosis from childhood (Robins, 1985). Thus there is
broad empirical support for identifying chronic, antisocial and criminal behavior.
Offenses are also a problem for adolescents, as significant number of criminal
activities increased dramatically during this age period (Moffitt, 1993; Robins &
Rutter, 1990).

Criminal behavior and criminal tendencies

Juvenile delinquency is a complex issue and many factors are involved in its
development (Jessor, 1992). The peer group is important. The influence of family is
also very important, through conflict and aggression in family environment,
parenting style, family breakdown and other factors. The personality of adolescents
is another important factor. Personality traits such as negative attitudes toward
school and to the authorities, disengagement with goal setting, refusal to take
responsibility and disregard of the rights of others might be indicators of
predisposition to criminal behavior.
It is important to emphasize that deviant peer group is the strongest
predictor of adolescent delinquency among girls, especially when parents, school
and other interpersonal factors are controlled (Aseltine, 1995; Brownfield &
Thompson, 1991; Gomme, 1985), friendship is another important aspect of the
relationship between peers. Aspects of emotion and affection in the group of peers
are unclear. There are disturbing and criminal friendships in the context of
"intimate" versus "unintimate" relationship.
Research into gender differences and peer pressure is considered in the
context of crime. In theory, the more susceptible are teenagers are and the more
powerful non-conformist attitudes in the group of peers, the higher the likelihood to
become deviant. Boys are more likely to believe their friends put pressure on them
(Angenent & de Man, 1996; Giordano et al., 1986). Early matured girls are more
susceptible to pressure from their peers than boys, matured in time or later matured
girls (Caspi et al., 1,993;. Ge et al., 1996.). In support of the theory, both boys and
girls that matured early are more likely to be deviant (Canter, 1982; Phelps &
McClintock, 1994).

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 93

Depression / Anxiety

Modern investigations suggest that adolescence is an important period of

development and understanding of depression, as many significant changes in
depressive problems occur during adolescence (Petersen et al., 1993).
Modern integrative perspectives recognize the importance of the
operationalization of the three levels of depression in adolescence - depressed mood
(Kandel & Davies, 1982), anxiety-depressive syndorme (Achenbach, 1991) and
depressive disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), as all have important
influences and unique contribution to the understanding of significant psychological
problems in adolescence and all contain unique features during this age period
(Angold, 1988; Compas et al, 1993).
Increasing rate of depressive problems (with higher levels of depression
observed in girls compared to boys), appears in adolescence, and remain relatively
stable in adulthood (Petersen et al., 1993).
Early and middle adolescence is marked by increased risk of the occurrence
and development of depression, compared to childhood (Petersen et al., 1993). Girls
are twice as likely to develop depression than boys (Nolen - Hoeksema & Girgus,
1994).
Longitudinal research also show that the course of depressive problems
differs for boys and girls. In a longitudinal study with 335 adolescents, Petersen and
colleagues (Petersen et al., 1991) revealed no significant gender differences in the
measurement of depressive affects and the number of depressive episodes in early
adolescence (6-8 grade), but there were significant differences in adolescents in
twelfth grade. In 12th grade girls are characterized by an increase in depressive
affect, while the boys remained relatively stable.

School dropout (social withdraw)

Each year about 700 thousand young people in the United States drop out of school
and about 25% of all 18-19 year do not finish high school (Dryfoos, 1990; Simons
et al., 1991).
Low school achievement, failure and dropping out of school in adolescents
are associated with a range of individual and contextual changes which researchers
discussed in terms of substance abuse and risky sexual behavior. Being at school is
the single most important thing young people can do to improve their future life
prospects.
Students at risk of dropping out, often suffer from inadequate learning
habits, unclear objectives, lack of interest in school, missing self-initiative and are
disorganized. They drag on when faced with cases that need intellectual
independence and responsibility, and are often unable to identify and participate in
the life of the educational institution (Edwards et al., 1990).

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
94 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

In Bulgaria most frequent cases of school dropouts occur in children from

Roma origin (Milenkova, 2004). Roma children have many inexcusable absences
from school. In the group of students with inexcused absences "from 11 to 20"
Roma constitute 78.6% and in the group of children with "more than 20 inexcused
absences' their share is 90.9%. Therefore, dropping out of school in Bulgaria has its
ethnic correlates, which means that the accumulation of absences from school
reflect cultural values, typical for the respective ethnic group (Milenkova, 2004).
The whole system of individual-context interaction must be committed to
the social withdrawal and leaving from the educational system.

BULGARIAN RESEARCH ON THE ISSUE

In the literature there are no studies that explicitly consider the issue of problem
behavior in adolescence in different social environments, such as institutions for
children and adolescents deprived of parental care (ICADPC), segregated Roma
schools, mixed schools (with students of both Bulgarian and Roma origin), and
Bulgarian schools (schools that teach mainly children of Bulgarian origin).
The issue of behavioral problems in adolescence itself is explicitly
addressed in the study of Shumkova with 449 students aged between 13 and 18
years. The study showed that regardless of the type of behavioral problems in both
sexes, the group of adolescents with behavioral problems did not demonstrate
significantly greater levels of problematic relationships with parents, teachers and
peers. In the context of school environment, alcohol and sex in adolescence is
accompanied by problems in relations with teachers only. (Shumkova, 2006).
In another study that was conducted with 94 students in middle school age
and with Buss-Durki questionnaire for the study of aggression it was found that in
21%, or one out of five of the studied population was with hyperactive symptoms,
accompanied by rude and violent behavior. 59% of students share a lack of
intimacy, friendship and trust. The most aggressive children were at the beginning
of puberty (11-12, 13-14 years). There were no gender differences, the percentage
of aggressive girls was not significantly different from that of boys. It is alarming,
however, that with increase of age in girls and boys aggressiveness increases as
well (Krastev, 2011).
Research of Tamanova with 170 adolescents aged between 13 and 18 years
found that during this age period anxiety and aggression increases in adolescents.
There are gender differences, as aggressive irritability is more characteristic for
girls, while physical aggressiveness for boys (Tamanova, 2011).
The issue of problem behavior is implicitly reflected in its research with
other ethnic groups in the country. For example, investigation of Stoyanova with
Bulgarians, Turks, Pomaks, Roma, Jews and Armenians showed that Bulgarians
have the most negative attitude and the greatest social distance towards the Roma.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 95

According to the author, this can be explained by the theory of Tajfel whereby in
intergroup comparison "we-they" expresses preference to your group of religion and
lifestyle. The Bulgarians have the most negative attitude towards Roma due to their
inexceptance of lifestyle. The intensive negative attitude of Bulgarians towards
Roma and greatest social distance from them is a fact established by previous
studies in the period 1990-2000 (Stoyanova, 2003).
In another study of Dimitrov with adolescents from Bulgarian, Turkish,
Greek and Roma origin it was found that Roma show highly positive attitude
towards socialization and integration to schol environment. According to the author,
the declared satisfaction of Roma pupils with school life and their interest in school
activities can indicate their desire to continue their education (Dimitrov, 2010).
In Bulgaria, in the institutions for children and adolescents deprived from
parental care Bulgarian and Roma children live together. That makes this social
environtment ethnically “mixed”. Furthermore, the adolestents from ethnically
mixed schools live and learn at ethnically mixed social environment as well. In
comparison, the social environment in segregated Roma schoools and Bulgarian
schools is not mixed and the pupils are from one and the same ethnic origin. That
makes the four groups of adolescents compatible in the context of “social
environment”.
It can be assumed that in homes for children and adolescents deprived of
parental care (ICADPC) and in mixed schools where Bulgarian and Roma pupils
learn and live together there will be stronger manifestations of behavioral problems,
which is based on the larger social distance and negative attitudes among
Bulgarians and Roma, compared with adolescents from segregated Roma school
and Bulgarian school where adolescents are more satisfied with their school
environment and accordingly will be observed weaker manifestations of behavioral
problems.
The so made theoretical and empirical analysis inspired the idea to trace
out and analyze the behavioral problems in adolescence at ICADPC, segregated
Roma schools, mixed schools and Bulgarian school.

Objective
The major objective of this study is to track out and analyze the behavioral
problems in adolescents from ICADPC, segregated Roma school, mixed school and
Bulgarian school.

Consequently we intend to: - (i) identify the gender differences in behavioral

problems of adolescents; - (ii) identify the age differences in behavioral problems of
adolescents; - (iii) identify the influence of the "social environment" factor on the
behavioral problems of adolescents.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
96 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

Hypotheses
1. In the case of internalized girls, problem symptoms will be more characteristic,
while for boys - externalised problem symptoms will dominate (Tamanova,
2011; Farrington et al., 1990; Robins, 1985; Nolen - Hoeksema & Girgus,
1994).
2. With the increase of age both the internalized and externalized problem behavior
will increase, regardless of gender of adolescents (Tamanova, 2011; Krastev,
2011).
3. Social environment will influence the problem behavior in adolescents.
ICADPC and mixed school will show higher levels of problem behavior based
on the larger social distance and negative attitudes between Bulgarians and
Roma than in segregated Roma school and Bulgarian school where learn
children mostly from one and the same ethnic origin (Smith, 2003; Dimitrov,
2010).

METHOD

Participants
The sample consists of 309 adolescent respondents (aged 14-19). 102 (33%) of
them are pupils from the 31st High School "I. Vazov" in Sofia, which is a Bulgarian
school; 51 (16,5%) pupils are from the 135th school" Jan Amos Comenski " in
Sofia, which is a mixed school with Bulgarian and Roma students; 89 (28,8%) are
pupils from High School "Nayden Gerov " in Plovdiv, which is a segregated Roma
school and 67 (21,6%) participants are from 5 ICADPC - "Luba Teneva" in
Berkovitsa, "Asen Zlatarov" in Sofia, "Constantza Lyapcheva" in Dolna Banya,
"Bulgarka" in Stara Zagora and "Hr. Smirnenski" in Balvan,Veliko Tarnovo. The
study was conducted as group study during regular school classes between March,
2011 - October, 2011.

Measures
The scale for measurement of problem behavior of Achenbach and Edelbrok-
Children Behavior Check List was used (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1979, 1991). For
the purposes of the study four of the eight subscales of the questionnaire were used,
namely the scales of social withdrawal, anxiety/depressive symptoms, criminal
tendencies and aggressive behavior. The participants assessed each of the 52 items
with "false", "somewhat true" and "completely true". The scale was adapted for
Bulgarian context by G. Balev (1996).

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 97

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The statistical analysis of data shows a very good internal consistency of the 52
items scale of Achenbach and Edelbrok for measurement of problem behavior
(Children Behavior Check List; Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1979, 1991). The
reliability of the scale is determined by the Cronbach’s alpha and the measured
coefficient is equal to 0.88.
Table 1 represents the results of One-way ANOVA, reflecting the influence
of gender on behavioral problems of adolescents in the studied sample. In bold in
the table are indicated the significant Fischer coefficients.

Table 1.
Influence of gender on adolescent behavioral problems (ANOVA)

Boy Girl F p Alpha

Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
social withdraw 4,45 2,49 4,64 2,81 0,41 0,51 0,56
anxiety/ depression 7,94 4,87 9,31 5,52 5,28 0,02 0,79
criminal tendencies 5,82 3,73 4,35 3,4 13,02 0 0,7
agresssive behaviour 13,64 5,94 11,79 5,87 7,59 0,006 0,8
internalized behavioural problems 12,38 6,75 13,96 7,73 3,58 0,05 0,82
externalized behavioural problems 19,43 8,76 16,14 8,51 11,14 0,001 0,85

As seen from Table 1, significant gender differences are observed on three

out of the four subscales of problem behavior. The girls are characterized by
significantly stronger anxiety-depressive symptoms than boys (F=5,284; p=0,02). In
turn, the boys are characterized by more pronounced criminal tendencies and
aggressive behavior than girls (F=13,028;p=0,001). Only on the social withdrawal
subscale there are no gender differences. This finding is duly reflected in the
internalized and externalized problem behavior, as girls differ with internalized
problem symptoms (F=3,584; p=0,059) and boys with externalized problem
behavior (F=11,142; p=0,001). Thus, our first hypothesis is fully confirmed.

Table 2 represents the results of One-way (ANOVA), reflecting the

influence of age on behavioral problems of adolescents in the studied sample.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
98 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

Table 2.
Influence of age on behavioral problems of adolescents (ANOVA)

14-15 y.o. 16-17 y.o. 18-19 y.o. F p Alpha

Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
social withdraw 4,46 2,68 4,74 2,67 4,14 2,52 1,21 0,29 0,56
anxiety/ depression 8,95 5,5 8,75 5,22 8 5,03 0,63 0,53 0,79
criminal tendencies 5,43 3,76 4,91 3,28 5,01 4,35 0,56 0,57 0,7
agresssive behaviour 13,78 6,29 12,49 5,31 11,8 7,03 2,13 0,02 0,8
internalized behavioural problems 13,41 7,41 13,49 7,35 12,14 7,04 0,56 0,44 0,82
externalized behavioural problems 19,22 9,25 17,41 7,81 16,72 10,41 0,56 0,18 0,85

For the purposes of the study adolescents were divided into three age
groups: 14-15 years old, 16-17 year old and 18-19 year old. As seen from Table 2,
age has a significant influence only on the subscale of aggressive behavior in
adolescents (F=2,128; p=0,021). The most aggressive are the youngest aged 14-15
followed by 16-17 year olds, and finally the least aggressive are 18-19 year olds.
Based on this finding, our second hypothesis is rejected entirely. The finding is
consistent with results from other Bulgarian studies who found that children in their
early teens are the most aggressive (Krastev, 2011).
Table 3 represents the results of One-way ANOVA, reflecting the influence
of social environment on behavioral problems of adolescents in the studied sample.

Table 3.
Influence of social environment on behavioral problems of adolescents (ANOVA)

Bulgarian school ICADPC F p Alpha

Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
social withdraw 3,65 2,26 5,97 2,5 11,72 0 0,56
anxiety/ depression 7,08 4,33 11,68 6,1 12,18 0 0,79
criminal tendencies 4,66 3,15 6,59 3,47 5,39 0,001 0,7
agresssive behaviour 12,23 4,76 14,44 7,18 2,9 0,03 0,8
internalized behavioural problems 10,74 5,96 17,65 8,01 14,3 0 0,82
externalized behavioural problems 16,9 6,73 21,04 10,03 4,47 0,004 0,85

Segregated school Mixed school F p Alpha

Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev.
social withdraw 4,68 2,67 4,23 2,73 11,72 0 0,56
anxiety/ depression 8,68 4,47 7,72 5,41 12,18 0 0,79
criminal tendencies 4,47 4,36 4,92 2,8 5,39 0,001 0,7
agresssive behaviour 11,77 6,29 12,92 5,42 2,9 0,03 0,8
internalized behavioural problems 13,36 6,53 11,96 7,48 14,3 0 0,82
externalized behavioural problems 16,24 10,06 17,72 7,16 4,47 0,004 0,85

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 99

As seen from table, the social environment is a powerful factor that

influences both the four subscales of problem behavior, and internalized and
externalized behavior of adolescents. The results are better illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1.
Influence of school environment on behavioral problems of adolescents (Mean scores)

As seen from Figure 1, adolescents from ICADPC (orphanages), are

characterized by highest values in the four subscales of problem behavior in terms
of scales for the internalized and externalized problem behavior. In other words, the
social environment in ICADPC is characterized by strong social withdrawal of
children, anxiety and depression, criminal tendencies and aggressive behavior.
Second to ICADPC, segregated Roma school is with the most problematic behavior

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
100 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

in terms of internalized problems - social withdrawal, anxiety and depression.

Mixed school (after the ICADPC) has most problematic behavior in terms of
externalized problems - criminal tendencies and aggressive behavior.
It can be concluded that segregated Roma school environment creates more
internalized behavioral problem, and mixed school environment creates more
externalized behavioral problem. In this way our third hypothesis is partially
confirmed as mixed school environment does not appear to be more problematic
than segregated school environment. The least problematic context is Bulgarian
schools, excluding scales of aggressive behavior and criminal tendencies. For these
two indicators externalized problem behavior is more pronounced than in
segregated Roma school and put Bulgarian schools on third place after ICADPC
and mixed school. The finding is consistent with the frequent in the media recently
cases of beatings, violence and harassment between students in Bulgarian schools.

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

The proposed survey enables us to delineate and analyze the influence of gender,
age, school and / or social environment on problem behaviors in adolescence.
The obtained results give grounds to assert that:
- The girls in this study have higher internalized behavioral problems, and
boys have higher externalized behavioral problems.
- The most aggressive are the youngest adolescents aged 14-15, and the less
aggressive are the oldest 18-19 year olds, which is explained by the onset
of puberty and biological maturation of teenagers.
- Most behavior problems are found in the social environment in ICADPC,
and the least problematic are Bulgarian schools, excluding indicators of
aggressive behavior and criminal tendencies. Mixed school environment
does not appear to be more problematic than segregated Roma
environment. Mixed school is characterized by more pronounced criminal
tendencies and aggressive behavior (externalized behavioral problem), and
segregated schools are characterized by more pronounced social
withdrawal, anxiety and depressive symptoms (internalized problem
behavior).
Here we should particularly emphasize that the observed social withdrawal
in segregated Roma school, accompanied by depression and anxiety can be
regarded as an indicator for easy dropout of Roma teenagers from the school
system. An individual work is needed with these children, and on group level as
class by their teachers and class teachers in order to keep them in the classroom.
Moreover, one of the ways to integrate Roma children in Bulgarian schools
is through mixed schools. We should pay particular attention to the fact that this

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 101

type of social environment holds more externalized problem behaviors - aggressive

behavior and criminal tendencies.
In this study it appears that the environment in these schools is more
aggressive than in segregated schools, but another study from the same authors
showed that this environment is more psycho-socialy mature (Papazova &
Antonova, in press). Thus, the path of integration of Roma children in Bulgaria
should be this - moving them from segregated to mixed schools, notwithstanding,
that they could become subject of aggression and discrimination by their Bulgarian
peers. In other words, for the better integration of Roma children in our educational
system it is needed a special program for the prevention of aggressive behavior in
the classroom in which Bulgarian and Roma pupils study together.
In the period 2002-2005, the Health and Social Development Foundation
implemented several projects jointly with the 28th High School (mixed school
where learn children from a neighbourhood with compact Roma population
"Faculteta" in Sofia), funded by PHARE LIEN that aims the approbation and
adaptation of successful programs for integration of Roma children in the Bulgarian
educational system. One of the most important conclusions from these projects is
that the main predictor for successful integration of Roma children in Bulgarian
educational system and for prevention of their early dropout is pre-preparation
system (starting from 4 years of age) of these children together with their parents. In
other words, educational programs for early child development for the children are
needed to develop appropriate cognitive and behavioral skills combined with
training for their parents to develop effective parental skills to support the
educational process of the children. Second predictor is a specialized training for
teachers, as systematic work in classes with mixed ethnic composition, in order to
increase the understanding of diversity and overcome discriminatory perceptions
and attitudes of both ethnic groups to one another.
And last but not least, a special attention should be given to the fact that in
Bulgarian schools manifestations of externalized problem behavior have been
observed (aggressive behavior and criminal tendencies), which are more
pronounced than in segregated Roma schools. Besides the subject of visibility
through the media when events are truly shocking and striking, these events should
be detected in the classroom by properly trained teachers to work with children with
problem behavior. Unfortunately, in the Bulgarian educational system this is a
serious omission that NGO sector is trying to fill through different projects. One of
these projects was the project "School without Violence" initiated by the Bulgarian
Psychologists Society, funded by UNICEF-Bulgaria, but after its conclusion it was
not considered necessary to be funded and supported again by the Ministry of
Education.
Statistical facts deduced in this paper highlight the need of qualitative study
to focus on the above results.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
102 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T.M. (1991). Integrative guide for the 1991 CBCL/4-18, YSR, and TRF Profiles.
Burlington, VT : University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
Alton-Lee, A., Nuthall, G., &. Patrick, J. (1993). Refraining classroom research: A lesson
from the private world of children. Harvard Educational Review, 63, 50-84.
American Psychiatric Association .(1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental
Disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychiatry Press, 4th ed.
Andreou, E. (2000). Bully/victim problems and their association with psychological
constructs in 8- to 12-year old Greek schoolchildren. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 49-
56.
Angenent, H., & de Man, A. (1996). Background factors of juvenile delinquency. New York:
Peter Lang.
Angold, A. (1988). Childhood and adolescent depression. Epidemiological and aetiological
aspects. British Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 601-617.
Aseltine, R. H. (1995). A reconsideration of parental and peer influences on adolescent
deviance. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 103-121.
Balev, J. (1996). Premises and stimulation of democratic pedagogical climate at labour
schools and ICADPC. Investigational paper. Unpublished material [in Bulgarian]
Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1998). Children's interpersonal behaviors and teacher-child
relationships. Developmental Psychology, 34, 934-946.
Boders, A., Earleywine, M., & Huey, S. J. (2004). Predicting problem behaviors with
multiple expectancies: Expanding expectancy-value theory. Adolescence, 39, 539-
550.
Brownfield, D., & Thompson, K. (1991, January). Attachment to peers and delinquent
behaviour. Canadian Journal of Criminology, pp. 45-60.
Canter, R. J. (1982). Sex differences in self-report delinquency. Criminology, 20, 373-393.
Caspi, A., Lyman, D., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. A. (1993). Unraveling girls' delinquency:
Biological, dispositional, and contextual contributions to adolescent misbehavior.
Developmental Psychology, 29, 19-30.
Compas, B.E., Grant, K.E., Ey, S. (1993). Taxonomy , assessment, and diagnosis of
depression during adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 323-344.
Dimitrov, I. (2010). Ethno-cultural environment and psycho-social development. Sofia, “St.
Kl. Ohridski”. [in Bulgarian]
Dryfoos, J.G. (1990). Adolescents at Risk: Prevalence and Prevention. New York: Oxford
University.
Edwards, M., Cangemi, J.P. (1990). The College drop out and institutional responsibility.
Education, 111, 1, 107-117.
Emler, N., & Reicher, S. (1995). Adolescence and delinquency: The collective management
of reputation. Oxford: Blackwell.
Emler, N., Ohana, J., & Dickinson, J. (1990). Children's representation of social relations. In
G. Duveen & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Social representations and the development of
knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Estevez, E., Herrero, J., Martinez, B., & Musitu, G. (2006). Aggressive and non-aggressive
rejected students: An analysis of their differences. Psychology in the Schools, 43,
387-400.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 103

Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R., & Van Kammen, W. B. (1990). Long-term criminal outcomes
of hyperactivity-impulsivity-attention deficit and conduct problems in childhood.
In L. Robins & M. Rutter (Eds.), Straight and Devious Pathways from Childhood
to Adulthood (pp. 62-81). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Garber, J., Quiggle, N. L., Panak, W., & Dodge, K.A. (1991). Aggression and depression in
children: Comorbidity, specificity, and social cognitive processing. In D. Cicchetti
& S. L. Toth (Eds.), Internalizing and externalizing expressions of dysfunction (pp.
225-264). Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Ge, X., Conger, R. D., & Elder, G. H. (1996). Coming to age too early: Pubertal influences
on girls' vulnerability to psychological distress. Child Development, 67, 3386-3400.
Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., & Pugh, M. D. (1986). Friendship and delinquency.
American Journal of Sociology, 91, 1170-1202.
Gomme, I. M. (1985). Predictors of status and criminal offences among male and female
adolescents in an Ontario community. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 27, 147-
159.
Harvey, R. (2001). Individual differences in the phenomenological impact of social stigma.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 141 (2), 174-189.
Hay, D. F., Payne, A., & Chadwick, A. (2004). Peer relations in childhood. Journal of
Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 84-108.
Howes, C. (2000). Socio-emotional climate in child care, teacher-child relationships and
children's second grade peer relations. Social Development, 9, 191-203.
Howes, C., Phillipsen, L. C., & Peisner-Feiberg, E. (2000). The consistency of perceived
teacher-child relationships between preschool and kindergarten. Journal of School
Psychology, 38, 113-132.
Hymel, S., Rubin, K. H., Rowden, L., & Lemare, L. (1990). Children's peer relationships:
Longitudinal prediction of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems from
middle to late childhood. Child Development, 61, 2004-2021.
Jessor, R. (1992). Risk Behavior in adolescence: a psychosocial framework for
understanding and action. Developmental Review, 12, 374-390.
Kandel, D.B., Davies, M. (1982). Epidemiology of depressive mood in adolescents. Archives
of General Psychiatry, 39, 1205-1212.
Krastev, Al. (2011). Psychological models of aggressive behavior at pupils from middle
school age. Bulgarian Journal of Psychology. Collection of scientific papers, VI
national congress of psychology, Sofia 18-20. XI.2011, 288-292 [in Bulgarian]
Ladd, G. W., & Burgess, K. B. (1999). Charting the relationship trajectories of aggressive,
withdrawn, and aggressive/withdrawn children during early grade school. Child
Development, 70, 910-929.
Loeber, R. (1990). Development and risk factors of juvenile anti-social behavior and
delinquency. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 1-41.
Lovejoy, M. C. (1996). Social inferences regarding inattentive-overactive and aggressive
child behavior and their effects on teacher reports of discipline. Journal of Clinical
Child Psychology, 25, 3342.
Meehan, B. T., Hughes, J. N., & Cavell, T. A. (2003). Teacher-student relationships as
compensatory resources for aggressive children. Child development, 74, 1145-
1157.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
104 E. Papazova, R. Antonova

Milenkova, V. (2004). Dropping out from school. Sofia, Marin Drinov. [in Bulgarian]
Moffitt, T.E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behaviour: a
developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674-701.
Mullen, J. A., & Wood, F. H. (1986). Teacher and student ratings of the disturbingness of
common problem behaviors. Behavioral Disorders, 11, 168-176.
Murray, C., & Murray, K. M. (2004). Child level correlations of teacher-students
relationships: An examination of demographic orientation characteristics, academia
orientations, and behavioral orientations. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 751-762.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Girgus, J. (1994). The emergence of gender differences in depression
during adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 424-443.
O'Moore, M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-concept and its relationship to bullying behavior.
Aggressive Behavior, 27, 269-283.
Papazova, E., Antonova, R. Statuses of psycho-social maturity and social environment at
adolescence. Psychological Investigations (in Press) [in Bulgarian]
Petersen, A.C., Compas, B.E., Brooks-Gunn, J., Stemmler, M., Ey, S., Grant, K.E. (1993).
Depression during adolescence. American Psychologist, 48, 155-168.
Petersen, A.C., Sarigiani, P.A., Kennedy, R.E. (1991). Adolescent depression: Why more
girls? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 247-271.
Phelps, L., & McClintock, K. (1994). Papa and peers: A biological approach to conduct
disorder. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 53-67.
Pianta, R. C., & Niemitz, S. L. (1991). Relationships between children and teachers:
Associations with classroom and home behavior. Journal of Developmental
Psychology, 12, 379-393.
Robins, L.N. (1985). The epidemiology of antisocial personality. In: ed. JO Cavenar,
Psychiatry, 3, 1-14. Philadelphia: Lippincott
Robins, L.N., Rutter, M. (1990). Straight and Devious Pathways from Childhood to
Adulthood. New York: Oxford University Press
Rubin K. H., Hymel, S., & Mills, R. S. L. (1989). Sociability and withdrawal in childhood:
Stability and outcomes. Journal of Personality, 57, 237-256.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. G. (1998). Peer interactions, relationships, and
groups. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology.
Vol. 3: Social, emotional and personality development (pp. 553-617). New York:
Wiley.
Serbin, L., Schwartzman, A. E., Moskowitz, D. S., & Ledingham, J. E. (1991). Aggressive,
withdrawn, and aggressive/withdrawn children in adolescence: Into the next
generation. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development of childhood
aggression (pp. 55-70). Hillsdale, N J: Erlbaum.
Shumkova, I. (2006). Problems at behavior – problems at communication. Investigation
among adolescents at age 13 to 18 years. Annual book of SU “St. Kl. Ohridsky”,
FF, Book of Psychology, Volume 100, 313-328 [in Bulgarian]
Simons, J.M., Finlay, B., Yang, A. (1991). The adolescent and young adult fact book.
Washington, DC: Children’s Defense Fund
Steinberg, L., Morris, A.M. (2001). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology,
52, 83-110.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105
 E. Papazova, R. Antonova 105

Stoyanova, S. (2003). Ethnical attitudes and social distances of Bulgarians towards other
ethnical communities (social-psychological investigation). Doctoral Dissertation,
UZU “Neofit Rilski”, Blagoevgrad [in Bulgarian]
Tamanova, Tz. (2011). Adolescence – period of transition, carring anxiety and aggression,
connected with uncertainty. Bulgarian Journal of Psychology. Collection of
scientific papers, VI national congress of psychology, Sofia 18-20. XI.2011, 331-
336 [in Bulgarian]
Trachtenberg, S., & Viken, R. J. (1994). Aggressive boys in the classroom: Biased
attributions or shared perceptions? Child Development, 65, 829-835.
Werner, N. E. (2004). Maladaptive peer relationships and the development of relational and
physical aggression during middle childhood. Social Development, 13, 495-514.

Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal

16 (2012) 89-105