Youth Violence and Positive Psychology Research Potential Through Integration
Positive psychologists can study the relation between some of the discipline's core dimensions and aversive outcomes including youth violence. Dimensions such as gratitude, forgiveness, sense of meaning, altruism (or at least apparent altruism) prudence, and humility have received attention within positive psychology, and evidence is reviewed suggesting that these may also deserve empirical attention in terms of their relation to youth violence and even their potential to reduce youth violence. Youth Violence and Positive Psychology 3 Youth violence and positive psychology: Research potential through integration Positive psychology as a field of study has shown remarkable growth over the last 15 years. The field now has its own journal (Journal of Positive Psychology) graduate programs (e.g. University of Pennsylvania, University of East London, Claremont Graduate University) dedicated scholarships and research grants, international conferences each year, researchers from Europe, the U.S. and other regions, and wide sales for some of its textbooks (e.g. Peterson, 2006; Snyder Lopez, 2007) One topic receiving little if any attention within this growing field is the application of positive psychology to research on youth violence. However, a positive psychology approach to youth violence research may not only be possible, but beneficial. We will argue for research explicitly linking some core constructs from positive psychology with research on youth violence. These constructs may reduce or at least predict reduced levels of youth violence. Admittedly, positive psychology and youth violence research may initially seem incompatible. Definitions of positive psychology tend to focus on the scientific study of positive traits and well being (and sometimes positive institutions; e.g. Seligman, 2002) This definitional focus may seem to exclude a focus on youth violence. Bringing Balance to Positive Psychology by Studying Aversive Outcomes However, applying positive psychology to youth violence research may help bring balance to positive psychology. A persuasive case has been made by Wong (2009, in press) that more balance is needed in positive psychology. In particular, he argued that positive psychology focuses on the human appetitive system. In other words, the discipline tends to focus on goals that motivate approach, goals such as happiness and character strengths. These foci, of course, have value. However, Wong has argued that a balanced approach must also integrate the aversive system that helps people avoid or cope well with undesirable outcomes. Well being requires not only approaching positive goals, but also avoiding negative outcomes or at least dealing well with negative outcomes. An exclusive focus on strengths and positive emotions ignores significant parts of human life. All humans must not only approach appetitive outcomes, but also avoid aversive outcomes. Building a sustainable future for individuals (O'Brien, 2008) requires not only building the good, but also avoiding the bad. In a sense, the tendency to ignore human tragedy and pain within positive psychology is surprising given the fact that resilience research (which presupposes the existence of tragedy that must be overcome) has been accepted by some to be within the domain of positive psychology (e.g. Yates Masten, 2004) Furthermore, if positive psychology studies only appetitive constructs, the discipline may over represent concerns and causal agents especially relevant for the societal elites and ignore the social issues and barriers to the good life that are more common among the non elite (e.g. poverty, hunger, violence; Wong, 2007) Thus, a balanced positive psychology will seek to promote strengths and happiness while simultaneously reducing aversive outcomes. Youth violence is clearly an undesirable outcome. As such, it has been largely ignored within positive psychology. Some evidence will be discussed, however, suggesting that the positive psychology approach to studying human strengths may deserve to be extended to research on youth violence. Admittedly, some violence researchers have begun to study protective factors which could be considered human strengths (e.g. Borum, Bartel, Forth, 2003) however explicitly linking positive psychology and youth violence will encourage study Youth Violence and Positive Psychology 4 of some strength variables largely ignored in the violence literature. Thus, positive psychology may have high relevance for research on factors that may inhibit youth violence. Further Pragmatic and Theoretical Justifications Some people could argue that aversive outcomes such as youth violence are justifiably largely ignored within positive psychology research. They could argue that the definition of positive psychology is antithetic to the study of youth violence and other societal problems that induce human pain and tragedy. Admittedly, the link between positive psychology and youth violence research might seem tenuous at first. We have discussed the potential of this link to contribute to balance in positive psychology. However, other reasons can also justify a link. Initially, for us, pragmatic considerations helped prompt our efforts to link youth violence and positive psychology. In a series of community consultations on youth violence, community leaders welcomed research that could help reduce youth violence. However, a number of these same leaders told us that they were fatigued by and would not support research drawing attention to problems in the region or in an ethnic group even if these efforts were well intentioned (e.g. Group of 10, 2005) Thus, they wanted research that could help reduce youth violence, but that would not focus on problems. Such a challenge may seem impossible researching strategies for reducing violence without focusing on problems among youth or the community as a whole. We proposed a positive psychology perspective on youth violence. In particular, we proposed studying potentially modifiable strengths that protect kids from becoming involved in violence. We are now exploring potentially modifiable external (social) strengths, internal (character) strengths, and cognitive strengths (reasons not to commit crimes) as factors that may protect youth from involvement in violence. School systems that might resist research on pathology have expressed openness to studies of strengths. Also, service providers are excited to join in with programs that primarily build strengths rather than ameliorate pathology. Theoretical reasons also justify a focus on youth violence and positive psychology. The positive psychology perspective is unusual in this domain, and as a result may generate theoretically novel ideas. Many forensic psychologists and criminologists have studied the criminal act and factors contributing to the criminal act. Far fewer have examined factors keeping youth out of crime and even fewer have focused on factors particularly interesting to positive psychologists, factors such as gratitude, altruism, and forgiveness that have attracted much interest in positive psychology. Few if any, for example, have explored positive psychology interventions (e.g. gratitude interventions) as strategies for keeping kids away from violence. Just as positive psychology has generated novel approaches to treating depression (e.g. Sin Lyubomirsky; 2009) likewise a positive psychology orientation may generate novel and possibly practical strategies for reducing youth violence. Thus, we are focusing on potentially modifiable strengths that protect youth from involvement in violence. A goal frustration perspective provides further support for the relevance of positive psychology to research on factors reducing youth violence. At least some youth violence may result from a frustration of basic needs for success and fulfillment. Frustration may be exacerbated by the youth accepting societally valued goals including materialism, fame, and good looks. These goals are often unfulfilled and unfulfilling (Kasser Ryan, 1996) Furthermore, frustration of goals and needs can lead to violence as an alternative strategy for meeting one's psychological needs. In fact, a tendency towards violence following goal frustration seems to be a biologically wired response (Wong, 1994) However, finding alternative goals can preclude or at least abbreviate this inclination towards violence (Wong, 1994) Positive psychology, with its emphasis on building human strengths can provide youth Youth Violence and Positive Psychology 5 with achievable goals to replace goals such as wealth, fame, and attractiveness that are widely valued (Kasser Ryan, 1996) but often difficult to achieve. Thus, some of these strength constructs studied within positive psychology deserve attention as factors that may reduce youth violence. An alternative to a positive psychology orientation would be pathology focused research and intervention. This alternative would identify and treat pathologies that contribute to violence. Such an approach will, of course, continue to have relevance in many contexts, but pathology focused interventions have disadvantages. First, community members will tire of hearing about problems in their community. Second, youth at risk may resist involvement in programs drawing attention to their pathologies. Third, many deficit based programs exist already. Thus, in our current context, the study of modifiable protective strengths makes sense and may deserve attention much more broadly. To our knowledge, little if any published research applies positive psychology to youth violence. Admittedly, resilience researchers have drawn attention to social assets and some internal assets such as sense of control. Also, there have been movements in related fields of forensic psychology and mental health to include protective factors in violence risk assessment and management approaches. For example, several