Gun Exposure Among Black American Youth Residing in Low-Income Urban Environments

Abstract

Objective: The current study examined the extent of gun exposure, referring to the mere presence of guns in youth’s lives, in a sample of Black American adolescents residing in low-income urban neighborhoods. The relationship of gun exposure to internalizing and externalizing outcomes was also explored. Method: Data were collected from a sample of 185 Black American eighth-grade students (M = 13.58 years old, 59% female). Results: Just under half of the youth reported some type of gun exposure with youth most often exposed to guns outside of the home. Overall gun exposure was related to externalizing but not internalizing symptoms, while knowing someone who owns a gun was related to both externalizing and internalizing symptoms. However, the majority of youth reported exposure to guns in a safe manner (stored locked and unloaded). Conclusions: In addition to gun violence and gun carrying, general gun exposure is a factor that should be accounted for when attempting to address consequences associated with guns.

Keywords

Black American adolescents guns mental health urban

Youth exposure to guns across different conditions is an important issue due to the potential life-threatening consequences associated with guns. In the current study, gun exposure refers to the presence of guns in youths’ lives, including whether they know someone with a gun, a gun is in their home, a gun is in their relative’s home, or they have ever held a gun. This is a distinctive construct from gun carrying (which, in urban communities, is typically associated with the ownership of firearms among high-risk youth) and gun violence exposure (which refers to witnessing or being victimized by violent acts committed with a gun).

Gun-related injury and death is higher in the United States than any other industrialized nation (Fleegler, Lee, Monuteaux, Hemenway, & Mannix, 2013). It is estimated that over 300 million guns are owned in the United States (Congressional Research Service, 2012) with approximately 2 million more being manufactured every year (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012). Gun ownership and use are particularly important to understand in high violence, low-income urban environments, as homicide due to gun violence is a leading cause of death among Black and Latino youth in these areas (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016). While rates of homicide and violent crime have generally been declining for over a decade (“Crime in Chicago by month,” 2018), approximately 86% of homicides carried out over the year of 2014 were performed with a gun (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016). This issue remains just as relevant today, as evidenced by a recent spike in violence in some cities such as Chicago, the location of the current study (FBI National Press Office, 2016).

The presence of firearms across communities is a public health issue, as studies have indicated that states with higher levels of private firearm ownership show greater rates of firearm-related violent crimes (Monuteaux, Lee, Hemenway, Mannix, & Fleegler, 2015). However, despite guns being an issue for the entire country and possibly more present among adults in White, rural areas (Smith & Son, 2015), the negative outcomes associated with guns disproportionately affect youth in low-income, urban, Black American communities. Among people aged 10 to 29 years, homicide is the leading cause of death for non-Latino Black youth (American Public Health Association, 2016). Gun use is particularly salient in Chicago, the location of the current study, as the city’s homicide rate ranged from 450 to 650 deaths per year from 1999 to 2009 and represented one of the highest rates in the country (Crandall et al., 2013). These trends directly relate to race and socioeconomic status as the lowest resourced and most segregated areas of Chicago (i.e., the South and West sides of Chicago where residents are predominately Black and Latino) are plagued by the most community violence (Fessenden & Park, 2016).

Although rural areas tend to have high rates of gun ownership, the disproportionately higher murder rates in urban areas may in part be due to the higher accessibility of guns in these areas, both legal and illegal (Downey, Zun, Burke, & Jefferson, 2013). In one study of 300, 12- to 17-year-olds (65% Black, 24% White, 9% Latino) presenting to the emergency department in an urban area, 22% reported that they could easily buy a gun and 28% stated that they could acquire access to a gun in less than 3 hours (Pelucio et al., 2011). Certain groups of youth also face different levels of gun exposure. In one study of 201 urban youth, it was found that boys were more likely than girls to be exposed to guns and Black participants were more likely than White participants (Downey et al., 2013). It appears that for youth within urban contexts, boys and Black youth may have increased gun exposure when compared with other demographics.

Given the accessibility of guns amid the high degree of violence, poverty, and other systemic problems prevalent in low-income urban communities, a clearer picture is needed of the presence of guns among youth, as well as how this exposure may relate to their mental health and behaviors. Although it is evident that homicides in low-income urban communities involve the use of guns, less is known about gun exposure among Black American youth residing in these communities and how this relates to internalizing and externalizing issues. Distinguishing between gun violence, gun carrying, and general gun exposure can help tailor potential interventions and ensure that resources are directed to the most relevant factors. Consequently, the following study will examine the extent of gun exposure in a sample of Black American, young adolescents residing in low-income urban neighborhoods and the relationship of gun exposure with various internalizing and externalizing outcomes.

Gun Exposure and Early Adolescence

Within some samples, gun exposure has been associated with negative outcomes when youth’s identity-related needs for respect and power motivated their desire to have a gun. For instance, Cunningham, Henggeler, Limber, Melton, and Nation (2000) classified Black American elementary and middle school students from rural areas into three groups in the context of gun ownership and risky behavior: no-risk (i.e., students who did not own guns), low-risk (i.e., gun ownership for sport or protection), and high-risk (gun ownership to gain respect or intimidate others). Although no significant difference emerged between the no- and low-risk groups, the high-risk group reported higher rates of antisocial behavior and increased likelihood of having friends and family who were high-risk gun owners. While the current study does not directly examine gun ownership, findings from past research (e.g., Ruggles, & Rajan, 2014) provide insight into the emotional significance that being around guns has in youths’ lives. The increased risk that youth face when they own guns to gain respect and to intimidate others is particularly relevant in the context of adolescence and high-risk communities.

Early adolescence is a period marked by many developmental changes as youth are experiencing a time of identity formation and are in the midst of cognitive changes that will lead to full maturation in their mid-twenties (Meeus, van de Schoot, Keijsers, Schwartz, & Branje, 2010). Youth at this developmental stage seek to integrate and establish their own unique identities, which is often accompanied by some degree of confusion. This process of identity formation in adolescence can be of particular concern in urban, low-income communities when appropriate supports for healthy identity formation are missing. Achievement of a stable sense of identity helps determine whether youth in marginalized communities become overwhelmed by or demonstrate resiliency amid environmental stressors (Bingham & Okagaki, 2012).

In addition, adolescents, particularly young adolescents, possess underdeveloped frontal lobe regions and synaptic connections, which make them more prone to having poor executive functioning abilities (Zelazo & Carlson, 2012). Youth engage in more reckless and impulsive behavior as the brain regions linked to capacities such as impulse control and planning are still in development. Additionally, many youth have a sense of invulnerability, which makes them more at risk for participating in dangerous acts (Hill, Duggan, & Lapsley, 2012). Among Black youth growing up in low-income urban environments, experiences of social and economic marginalization can heighten this risk-taking mind-set and pave the way for apathy and self-destructive behavior (Goddard & Myers, 2017). In a mixed ethnicity, national sample of 20,745 students in Grades 7 to 12, nearly 25% of those who identified as Native American, and 20% of those who identified as Black or Hispanic believed they would die early compared with only 10% of White youth (Borowsky, Ireland, & Resnick, 2009). For Black youth who received public assistance, these numbers rose to over 30% (Borowsky et al., 2009). In this same sample, higher anticipated risk of early death was associated with worse health-compromising behaviors over time (Borowsky et al., 2009). Researchers theorize that this sense of fatalism develops due to the oppressive dynamics of the environments in which many Black youth live, which create a sense of helplessness and a belief that their wellbeing is beyond their control and is of little concern to the larger society (Goddard & Myers, 2017). Consequently, these youths may not engage in healthy coping methods or healthy behaviors and, therefore, remain vulnerable to adverse outcomes. When guns are introduced to the already potentially confusing and marginalizing circumstances of growing up Black in low-income urban communities, another layer of adversity may be added. Exposure to guns is theorized to negatively affect children’s mental health, due to a potential destabilizing effect the presence of guns may have on youth’s perceptions of safety (Kim, 2017). Consequently, gun exposure may negatively affect the way youth conceptualize themselves and their environments, paving the way for maladaptive cognitions and behaviors. Independent of gun violence, it is important to examine to what extent gun exposure can be a problematic force associated with negative outcomes for youth amid circumstances of adversity.

Gun Exposure and Internalizing Symptoms

A relationship between psychological distress and gun violence has been established in the extant literature. Among those who witness shootings, for instance, gun violence can lead to an increase in reports of anger, dissociation, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (Slovak & Singer, 2001; Williamson, Guerra, & Tynan, 2014). Conversely, the association between the mere presence of guns in youth’s environments and internalizing symptoms has rarely been examined. In a study that looked at the association between exposure to firearms in the home and violence perpetration, substance use, and mental health symptoms, the presence of symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder was higher among students who reported exposure to a firearm in the home (Oscos-Sanchez & Oscos-Flores, 2015). Youth who have experienced gun violence in the home are at greater risk for developing posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms (Garbarino, Bradshaw, & Vorrasi, 2002). In a longitudinal, mixed race, sample of 13,465 adolescents Grades 7 to 12, the presence of a gun in the household was related to higher suicidal ideation, with higher odds of a male attempting suicide (Bearman & Moody, 2004). These findings suggest the importance of identifying further the negative effects of gun exposure in the home so that they can be prevented or remediated.

Some studies have indicated that gun access may also be indirectly linked to internalizing symptoms due to the positive relationships between gun access and gun violence exposure and the link between gun violence exposure and internalizing symptoms (Slovak, 2002). Youth who have an easier time getting their hands on a gun have an increased likelihood of gun violence exposure, injury, and associated psychological disturbances. Even so, little research exists that directly connects gun exposure in the home with emotional distress. In line with existing research, the current study will examine the effects of increased gun exposure in association with internalizing symptoms.

Gun Exposure and Externalizing Symptoms

The presence of weapons in one’s environment raises concern for the development of maladaptive behaviors in youth, particularly aggression. Cognitively, aggressive environmental cues like guns can increase hostile thoughts and behaviors (Bartholow, Anderson, Carnagey, & Benjamin, 2005; Killias & Haas, 2002). Physiologically, interacting with guns versus toys over 15 minutes has been shown to increase levels of testosterone and subsequent aggressive behavior (i.e., adding more hot sauce to another’s water) in a sample of 30 male college students (Klinesmith, Kasser, & McAndrew, 2006). Similarly, for 24 pairs of preschool children residing in urban communities, access to parents’ firearms was correlated with gun play as well as the ability to discern real from fake guns, while handling guns in the home was correlated with more aggressive behavior (Hardy, Armstrong, Martin, & Strawn, 1996).

Additional literature supports the notion that gun exposure is linked to youth exhibiting other types of externalizing symptoms. In a sample of 379 Latino adolescents in a disciplinary alternative education program, exposure to a gun in the home was strongly associated cross-sectionally with increased perpetration of school, nonschool, and intimate partner violence as well as increased substance use (e.g., alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine) in the past 30 days (Oscos-Sanchez & Oscos-Flores, 2015). These associations with externalizing symptoms were stronger than those discussed previously for internalizing outcomes. Similarly, having a gun available in the home at seventh grade predicted increased weapon involvement in eighth grade for a nationally representative sample of Black youth (Shetgiri, Boots, Lin, & Cheng, 2016). Externalizing behavior has also been shown to be a predictor of gun exposure. In another study, involving minority youth from a southern urban high-poverty city, youth who were gang members, exposed to violence, and engaged in violent behavior were found to be 665% more likely than those without these characteristics to initiate gun carrying after 1 year (Spano & Bolland, 2011). This finding suggests that with increased access to situations where guns are likely being used, the potential for personal gun possession increases as well.

Altogether, this research indicates that gun exposure may have a detrimental impact on psychological functioning and behavioral outcomes. However, few studies in the literature have examined gun exposure in urban areas and these behavioral outcomes among Black American adolescents. More research is needed to illuminate what gun exposure looks like within this population and whether previously identified research trends emerge.

Gender as a Moderator

Boys across ethnicities tend to be exposed to higher rates of community violence than girls (Finkelhor, Turner, Shattuck, & Hamby, 2013), and some studies have found that males in urban and rural areas report higher rates of gun exposure than females (Shapiro, Dorman, Welker, & Clough, 1998). However, little is known about the way in which exposure to guns affects males and females differently, resulting in an incomplete understanding of how adolescents respond to the presence of guns. Past research on exposure to violence suggests that African American boys and girls residing in low-income urban areas demonstrate distinct responses to violent events, both in community and family settings, with female participants more likely to report internalizing problems, including increased depression and anxiety, and male participants more likely to display “self-protective” (e.g., withdrawal) and aggressive tendencies in response to community violence (Elsaesser & Voisin, 2015; Reese, Vera, Thompson, & Reyes, 2001). The effects of witnessing violence within the family can also manifest in different ways for boys and girls, with one meta-analysis finding that boys show more externalizing behaviors than girls (Evans, Davies, & DiLillo, 2008), though some studies have found no gender differences in these effects (Bradford, Burns Vaughn, & Barber, 2007; Fagan & Wright, 2011). Gender differences in both the rates of exposure to violence and their responses to violence suggest that boys and girls may also exhibit differences in their responses to exposure to guns. Given these mixed findings, as well as the relevant clinical implications, gender differences must be further examined in order to develop a more nuanced understanding of the effects of gun exposure on youths’ mental health and adjustment.

Current Study

As little research has been done in this area, there is a critical need for additional studies on gun exposure in relation to well-being, among Black young adolescents, residing in urban, low-income areas. Unlike many studies that focus on gun violence or gun carrying of high-risk youth in urban environments, the current study focuses on the presence of guns in other aspects of youths’ lives, namely, general gun exposure in their homes and relatives’ homes. Thus, the primary purpose of the current study is twofold. First, the authors aim to provide a picture of what gun exposure looks like among a sample of Black American, early adolescents residing in low-income areas of Chicago by reporting on the type and prevalence of exposure. Second, the authors will explore the relationship of gun exposure to internalizing (anxiety, depression, and trauma) and externalizing (beliefs about aggression and delinquency) outcomes and whether these relationships differ by gender. A measure of neighborhood environment was included as a control to assess the effects of gun exposure independent of other neighborhood stressors. It is hypothesized that increased gun exposure will be related to increased levels of externalizing and internalizing symptoms. It is additionally hypothesized that boys will experience more externalizing symptoms and that girls will experience more internalizing symptoms as gun exposure increases. Finally, the researchers will examine which condition of gun exposure is most associated with these aforementioned outcomes.

Method

Participants

A sample of 185 Black American adolescents (M = 13.58 years, 59% female) responded to a gun exposure measure in the third year of a 3-year longitudinal study. Youth were recruited from six public schools located in low-income urban Chicago neighborhoods. Chicago Police Department crime statistics obtained in the year prior to data collection characterize the recruitment schools as located in high-crime areas. Data were collected during a 3-year longitudinal study aimed at examining students’ exposure to violence from sixth grade (1999-2000 school year) to eighth grade (2001-2002 school year). Only data from eighth grade is used in the current study as the gun exposure measure was only administered at the third time point. The majority of participants lived in low-income households with a median family income between $10,000 and $20,000 as reported by parents or guardians. Almost half (48%) of participants lived in single parent households. Though only 10% of parents reported having a college or graduate/professional degree, most parents of participants (83%) had achieved a high school degree.

Procedure

Researchers obtained student assent and parental consent prior to data collection from all those who agreed to participate. Youth completed questionnaires administered by trained research staff over the course of five consecutive days. This study will analyze self-report data from the eighth grade. Youth were notified at the start of the study of games and gift certificates ($20) they would receive as compensation for each year of participation.

Measures

Gun exposure

Gun exposure was measured using a seven-item self-report questionnaire (Stevens et al., 2001). The questionnaire asked participants to respond either “Yes” or “No” to a series of questions pertaining to gun exposure, and instructed participants to consider only guns that work, excluding “BB guns, pellet guns, tear gas guns, or display guns that cannot be fired.” The measure included four main questions: “Have you ever held a gun?” “Do you know someone who owns a gun other than your parent or relative?” “Is there a gun at your home?” and “Is there a gun in a relative’s home?” Following the questions on gun presence inside the participant’s home and a relative’s home, the measure includes follow-up questions on safety behaviors in these settings (i.e., “Is the gun at your home loaded?” and “Is the gun at your home locked up?”), for a total of seven questions on the entire questionnaire. Using these questions, a total gun exposure score was created, which included the four main questions along with related safety behaviors. The measure was created for use with an adolescent sample, and was found to have adequate internal consistency within the current sample (α = .68).

Externalizing

Normative Beliefs About Aggression

Youth responded to a shortened version of the Normative Beliefs About Aggression Scale (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997). The original version consists of 28 questions. Prompts were changed to have gender neutral language and one set of questions. Additionally, items that included an example of relational aggression as a prompt (i.e., “Suppose a boy says something bad to a girl”) were omitted in the current study’s version. The new scale contained 11 items (i.e., “In general, it is wrong to hit other people”) to which participants had to circle an answer that best described what they thought. Higher scores indicate greater support for aggression. The scale yielded an alpha of .82. Reliability and validity were also established in previous research (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997).

Delinquency

Youth reported their frequency of delinquent behaviors using the 23-item Juvenile Delinquency Scale–Self-Report (Tolan, 1988). This measure addresses behaviors ranging from minor delinquency (e.g., truancy, tobacco use) to illegal acts (e.g., stealing, substance use, property damage, physical aggression). Participants indicated the frequency of each behavior on a 6-point scale ranging from never (0) to five times or more (5). Participants were assured that their responses would remain confidential. This scale yielded an alpha of .83.

Internalizing

Posttraumatic stress symptoms

To measure symptoms of trauma, youth completed the 25-item Trauma Symptom Questionnaire (TSQ), which is a modified version of the Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (Briere, 1996) and the Checklist of Child Distress Symptoms (Richters & Martinez, 1990) for youth. The youth completed the questionnaire on 5 consecutive days over a period of 1 week on a 4-point scale ranging from not true at all to very true. This time sampling methodological approach was employed in order to limit recall bias (Bolger, Davis, & Rafaeli, 2003). As participants were asked to report day-by-day, they are theoretically more likely to accurately report outcomes than when using a retrospective approach (Reis & Gable, 2000). The TSQ consists of five subscales of posttraumatic stress, including Hyperarousal, Avoidance, Numbing, Dissociation, and Intrusion. Sample items include, “I felt really jumpy or scared when I heard loud noises or when someone came up behind me” and “Pretended I was somewhere else.” Summing the individual item scores on the TSQ and averaging across the five responses produced a total score for the measure. The total score demonstrated good reliability for the sample (α = .95).

Depressive symptoms

The Children Depression Inventory (Kovacs, 1985) is a 27-item self-report scale that assesses cognitive, affective, and behavioral symptoms of depression in children and adolescents. Each Children Depression Inventory item consist of three choices, ranging from 0 to 2, with each numerical increase equaling an increase in severity. Youth select the sentence that best describes them during the past 2 weeks (e.g., “I feel like crying every day,” “I feel like crying many days,” or “I feel like crying once in a while”). The item scores are combined into a total depression score. Reliability and validity were established in previous research (Craig, 1998). The total score demonstrated good reliability for the sample (α = .83).

Anxiety symptoms

The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (Spielberger, 1973) has two 20-item self-report scales that measure and differentiate between anxiety as a trait and a state. It assesses both enduring tendencies to experience anxiety (A-Trait) and temporal and situational variations in levels of perceived anxiety (A-State). Youth are asked to rate the frequency of anxiety symptoms on a scale from 1 (hardly ever) to 3 (often). Sample items include “I worry about making mistakes,” “It is hard for me to fall asleep at night,” and “I get a funny feeling in my stomach.” Higher scores indicate higher levels of anxiety symptoms. The total score demonstrated good reliability for the sample (α = .90).

Control Variable

Neighborhood stressors

Youth reported perceived level of crime and problem behavior in their neighborhood using a revised version of the Neighborhood Environment Scale (Mason, Cauce, Gonzales, Hiraga, & Grove, 1994). Mason et al. (1994) demonstrated good reliability and validity for this measure in a sample of young Black adolescents. The scale consists of 22 items on a 4-point scale ranging from never happens to happens often. Sample items include “Kids belong to street gangs” and “Violent crime with a weapon.” The measure demonstrated high internal consistency for the current sample with a Cronbach’s alpha of .93. This construct was used as a control variable in the current study.

Results

Means and standard deviations for all variables are presented in Table 1. The correlations between the independent, moderator, dependent, and control variables are also displayed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Correlations Among Variables Under Study.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	12
1. Held a gun	1
2. Someone own a gun	.37**	1
3. Gun in home	.28**	.20**	1
4. Gun in relative’s home	.36**	.36**	.52**	1
5. Trauma symptoms	−.01	.07	−.01	−.03	1
6. Depression	−.09	.15*	.10	.05	.30**	1
7. Anxiety	−.01	.18*	.09	.07	.40**	.50**	1
8. Beliefs about aggression	.14	.20**	.15*	.17*	.03	.21**	.08	1
9. Juvenile delinquency	.32**	.35**	.25**	.26**	.23**	.18*	.33**	.25**	1
12. Neighborhood stressors	.17*	.34**	.15*	.23**	.33**	.21*	.37**	.23**	.44**	1
M	1.89	1.68	1.88	1.81	4.80	6.21	10.48	8.73	6.17	19.55
SD	0.355	0.469	0.370	0.463	0.258	0.233	8.63	6.19	8.80	13.18

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

Frequencies

To gain of a better understanding of what gun exposure looks like in a sample of Black American youth residing in low-income urban areas, researchers examined the frequencies of the four main items on the gun exposure questionnaire. Due to a low-response frequency, Questions 1a and 2a involving “whose gun” were excluded from the analysis. Within the current sample, 84.9% (n = 157) said they have never held a gun. Furthermore, 67.6% of youth (n = 125) said they did not know someone other than a parent or relative who owns a gun. With regard to the presence of a gun in one’s home environment, 83.2% of youth (n = 154) do not have a gun in their home. Additionally, 68.1% of people (n = 126) said their relatives do not have a gun in their home, suggesting that knowing someone outside family who has a gun and having a relative with a gun are the most frequent points of access. These findings are depicted in Figure 1. In terms of cumulative gun exposure, 51.9% of people (n = 96) reported not being exposed to any guns across the four different conditions, 18.4% of people (n = 34) reported being exposed to guns in one condition, 13.5% (n = 25) endorsed exposure in two conditions, 10.8% (n = 20) endorsed exposure in three conditions, and 3.2% (n = 6) endorsed exposure in all four conditions. These results are presented in Figure 2.

Figure 1.

Percentage of gun exposure in four different conditions.

Figure 2.

Cumulative gun exposure across four possible conditions.

Researchers also explored what gun security looked like in households. Of those who reported exposure within one’s own home (see Figure 3), 76.7% (n = 23) said no, the gun was not loaded, and 90.0% (n = 27) said the gun was locked up. Similar responses were endorsed for guns within a relative’s home, with 69.6% of youth (n = 39) saying the gun was not loaded in the relative’s home. Furthermore, 85.7% (n = 48) said the gun was locked up in the relative’s home.

Figure 3.

The percentage of guns kept loaded or locked up in youth’s homes.

Bootstrapping Analyses

The SPSS-17 macro PROCESS (Hayes, 2012), Model 1 was used to examine the relationship between gun exposure and internalizing and externalizing outcomes and to test the potential moderating effect of gender, while controlling for the effects of neighborhood environment on these outcomes. This macro simultaneously performs both regression analyses and provides conditional indirect effects at the different values of the moderator in addition to bootstrap standard errors. Indirect effects were considered significant at p < .05 for the 95% bootstrap confidence intervals. As recommended by Mallinckrodt, Abraham, Wei, and Russell (2006), 10,000 bootstrap iterations were performed for each analysis.

Results revealed that higher total gun exposure was significantly related to both higher delinquency, β = 1.19, t(154) = 2.38, p = .02, and beliefs about aggression, β = 0.76, t(154) = 2.20, p = .03. However, no relationship was found between gun exposure and anxiety, β = −0.30, t(153) = −0.65, p = .52, and depression, β = 0.01, t(153) = 0.95, p = .34.

Gender differences emerged when examining trauma symptoms. More gun exposure was associated with less trauma symptoms, β = −0.03, t(153) = −2.26, p = .03; however, the relationship between gun exposure and trauma symptoms was found to differ based on gender, β = −0.06, t(153) = −3.03, p < .01. Among females, more gun exposure was associated with less trauma symptoms although no significant relationship emerged among males (see Figure 4). Gender was not found to make a significant difference between gun exposure and other outcomes.

Figure 4.

The relationship between total gun exposure and trauma symptoms as moderated by gender.

Forward Regression

In addition to studying the relationship between gun exposure and internalizing and externalizing outcomes, researchers examined which of the four main gun exposure questions would have the greatest impact on psychosocial outcomes among Black American youth. Using stepwise forward regression analyses, results revealed a significant positive relationship between Question 2 (“Do you know someone who owns a gun other than your parent or relative?”) and beliefs about aggression, R² = .03, F(1, 176) = 5.99, β = 0.18, p = .015; anxiety, R² = .03, F(1, 176) = 5.92, β = 0.18, p = .016; and depression, R² = .02, F(1, 177) = 4.22, β = 0.15, p = .41. Additionally, there was a significant positive relationship between delinquency and knowing someone who owns a gun (β = 0.21, p < .01) and having held a gun, β = 0.28, p < .01; R² = .17, F(1, 176) = 8.18, p < .01. In each case, more gun exposure was related to more of the construct of interest. None of the gun exposure questions were significantly related to trauma symptoms.

Discussion

Rates of Gun Exposure

The percentage of youth in the current sample who endorsed having a gun in their house (16.3%) was less than the Illinois average percentage of households (20.2%) with a firearm in 2001 (Monuteaux et al., 2015). It appears that within their own households, youth in the sample were exposed to guns to a lesser extent than the average individual in the rest of the state. However, these rates contrast with the much higher rates of youth who reported either knowing someone other than their family who owned a gun (32.4%) or that a gun was present in a relatives’ home (30.8%). These sharp discrepancies speak to the importance of taking an ecological approach when exploring the issue of gun exposure. Ecological systems theory emphasizes that children are influenced by a combination of internal characteristics and different levels of environmental factors ranging from more immediate processes such as parenting, to macro-level factors like culture (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006). In addition to their immediate family, it is important to recognize the diverse set of systems with which a child interacts, as each system has a substantial impact on the individual. This framework may be particularly salient with Black American youth due to the significant role that extended family and fictive kin (people who are considered family but are not related by biology or marriage) have in their development (Stewart, 2007). For instance, many Black American youth describe strong connections with both familial and nonfamilial older adults, with such close connections associated with better psychosocial and academic outcomes (Hurd & Sellers, 2013; Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010). Consequently, although the presence of a gun in the current sample was relatively low within the youth’s home, the high rates within relatives’ homes and among other community members, known to the youth, indicate that guns may still be very relevant in the youths’ lives. In support of these findings, close to one fifth of youth (18.8%) indicated being exposed to guns in one condition, while a larger portion of youth reported being exposed to guns in two to four conditions (28.1%). Despite around half of youth (53%) reporting no exposure to guns across any condition, these rates suggest that when youth are exposed to guns, they are often around guns in multiple conditions.

With respect to gun safety behaviors, similar high rates of guns being locked or unloaded were found in terms of guns in the youths’ homes and relatives’ homes. These storage behaviors appear significantly safer than the national averages, as only 53% of homes with firearms and children nationally had guns that were locked and unloaded (Schuster, Franke, Bastian, Sor, & Halfon, 2000). Despite the high rates regarding the presence of guns in their lives, it appears that most of the guns in the immediate environment of the youth in this sample are stored safely. However, it is important to note that the current measure of guns did not ask whether ammunition was stored separately from the guns, which can have important implications for safety.

Gun Exposure’s Relationship With Internalizing and Externalizing Symptoms

Additionally, the current study examined the relationship between total gun exposure and mental health and behavioral outcomes. Partially consistent with our hypotheses and the extant literature, findings indicated that total gun exposure is relevant for understanding externalizing symptoms but not as pertinent to internalizing symptoms. As previously discussed, environmental cues associated with violence or aggression, like guns, can increase hostile thoughts and behaviors (Bartholow et al., 2005). As these findings emerged while controlling for negative neighborhood environmental factors, it appears that the presence of guns independent of other environmental cues is associated with externalizing problems, such as delinquency and beliefs about aggression. Within the context of Black American, low-income urban communities, where a high degree of environmental stressors related to negative outcomes already prevail (Fowler, Tompsett, Braciszewski, Jacques-Tiura, & Baltes, 2009), the existence of yet another stressor, in the form of gun exposure, may be related to behavioral problems in youth. Although not examined in the current study, gun exposure may be related to delinquency and beliefs about aggression since being around guns may facilitate ideas that violence is an appropriate problem-solving solution. In many communities where danger and violence are a pressing concern, the possession of guns may be approved or encouraged as a way to provide one a sense of security (Winton, 2004). For those who choose to own them, guns may not only represent a defense from the violence around them but also represent a symbol of power (Winton, 2004). Gun ownership provides an opportunity for one to recategorize themselves from a potential victim/casualty to a potential victor/defender. These circumstances are further exacerbated by sensationalism in the media and political discourse that help promote the perceived pervasiveness of violence in a community and enforce a sense of vulnerability among community members (Winton, 2004). This heightened feeling of ever-present fear is thought to contribute to a desire for and approval of gun ownership and enforce the idea that the ability to engage a violent response is needed for one to combat the surrounding violence (Winton, 2004). Aggressive thoughts and fantasies can become important coping mechanisms in environments with high levels of violence, and over time through the modeling of such behaviors, aggression is viewed as legitimate behavior in the face of constant threats (Guerra, Huesmann, & Spindler, 2003). Gun exposure may be one way in which aggression is indirectly modeled and, therefore, be associated with higher externalizing behavior.

The lack of an observed connection between total gun exposure and depression and anxiety might be due to the presence of guns influencing particular aspects of depression and anxiety. For instance, previous studies have indicated that guns being in a household were linked to increased suicidal ideation (Bearman & Moody, 2004). Similarly, as will be discussed later, depression and anxiety may be more related to gun exposure in specific conditions rather than total gun exposure. Additionally, it may be that the relationship between gun exposure and internalizing symptoms is not as relevant to the developmental stage of the current sample. Martinez and Richters (1993) found that, in terms of psychological distress (e.g., depression, anxiety/intrusive thoughts, etc.), children aged 6 years through 10 years living in urban areas were more detrimentally affected by seeing guns or drugs at home, while older children were more affected by violence involving people they knew. These findings indicate that the impact of gun exposure (distinct from gun violence exposure) on certain internalizing symptoms may be more salient for younger youth.

Gender differences, with the exception of trauma symptoms, also did not emerge as a prominent factor in the current study. It appears that, unlike the context of gun violence exposure, mental health outcomes of boys and girls are similarly affected by the presence of guns in their lives. Unexpectedly, gun exposure was related to reduced trauma symptoms among girls. These findings may be explained by the aforementioned feeling of power that being around a gun can bring. For those who are exposed to a situation that evokes intense danger and severe distress, “a gun can become like a bank card, an equalizer” (Anderson, 1999). For instance, in a longitudinal study, students in predominately Black, urban areas of Alabama who were either exposed to violence, engaged in violent behavior, or experienced both, were 2.5 times more likely to engage in gun carrying later on compared with students who had none of these characteristics (Spano, Pridemore, & Bolland, 2012). In response to being exposed to multiple types of distressing, potentially traumatic experiences, youth are more likely to carry guns. Notably, in a study involving African American mixed gender youth (aged 12-19 years) residing in low-income urban communities, youth reported viewing girls as more vulnerable and at risk of being victims due to the greater likelihood that they would not possess a gun and had a lesser ability to defend themselves (Cobbina, Miller, & Brunson, 2008). As girls and women often lack both institutional (i.e., police) or physical alternatives for reclaiming their sense of power, the current study suggests that for those girls who are exposed to guns, the presence of guns may offer a sense of regaining control. The perception of the ability of guns to provide one with power may cause girls and women exposed to guns to experience, at least temporarily, fewer feelings of distress. Interestingly, in the current study, gun exposure was not related to decreased trauma symptoms for boys. The extant literature suggests that Black males are more likely than Black females to possess guns (Cobbina et al., 2008). However, Black males are also at greater risk for victimization and being involved in delinquent behavior (Cobbina et al., 2008). The high-risk contexts that Black males who carry guns tend to experience may diminish the intended protective effect of guns, as these males continue to experience distressing circumstances.

Mental Health and Conditions of Gun Exposure

The present study additionally examined the relationship between the individual gun measure questions and externalizing and internalizing symptoms. Question 2 (“Do you know someone that owns a gun other than your parent or relative?”) was found to be most associated with beliefs about aggression, depression, and anxiety. This question along with Question 1 (“Have you ever held a gun?”) emerged as factors most strongly associated with delinquency. As previously discussed, the consistent emergence of Question 2 may speak to the significance of other community members in the development of Black American youth. Furthermore, nonfamilial people are highly relevant to the developmental stage of youth in this sample, as early adolescence is a time when youth start to expand their social networks particularly through the increased salience of peers in their lives (Monahan & Booth-LaForce, 2015). The presence of a gun in the lives of those outside the youth’s family network appears to signal mental health difficulties, both externalizing and internalizing, for these youths. Additionally, the association between Question 1 and delinquency is consistent with previous research that has demonstrated strong relationships between gun carrying and delinquency in youth (Shetgiri et al., 2016). Both of these questions would be important to address when mental health services are being considered or offered.

Strengths and Limitations

The present study has several strengths. First, it contributes to the dearth of literature on gun exposure in urban areas that is independent of gun violence and gun carrying behaviors. Given the severe and pervasive impact of guns in urban environments, it is important to understand the general patterns of gun exposure and use in order to better illuminate this public health issue and inform the development of prevention and intervention programs. Distinguishing between gun violence, gun carrying, and general gun exposure can help tailor such programs and ensure that resources are directed to relevant factors.

A second strength of the study is the examination of gun exposure in home environments including relatives’ home environments. The majority of the gun exposure literature to date has neglected the home environment in relation to mental health concerns, and when it has examined the home, it tends to focus on the immediate family. However, given the importance of extended family in Black American communities, this method may limit the full picture of gun exposure among Black youth. The current study takes a culturally sensitive approach by including the relative’s home in an exploration of gun exposure and outcomes.

A third strength is the focus of the study on gun exposure among Black American young adolescents. Given the impulsivity, identity confusion, and peer susceptibility that accompanies early adolescence, coupled with the adversity and marginalizing circumstance of being Black in low-income urban communities, Black, young adolescents face numerous challenges to their development. The current study is able to provide more information on the specific role of gun exposure, apart from other stressful neighborhood circumstances, for a particularly vulnerable group.

Despite its many strengths, several limitations should be addressed. First, the data were only collected and analyzed cross-sectionally. Consequently, although the results provide a picture of gun exposure’s relationship with mental health and behavioral issues during eighth grade, claims cannot be made about the predictors or effects of gun exposure. Second, the current study only controlled for neighborhood stressors in the analyses. Although this includes a wide range of activities such as violent crime and gang activity, it is conceivable that other factors such as parental monitoring may confound the association between gun exposure and mental health outcomes. These measures were beyond the scope of the current study but should be considered in future analyses. Finally, the current study is limited to focusing on a sample of youth living in Chicago. Although it was the intent of the study to explore the experiences of Black youth living in this area, the location prevents conclusions from generalizing to other populations. Due to the state by state differences in gun policy and gun culture, there is wide variety in the average presence of gun exposure in households (Monuteaux et al., 2015). Given these factors, the role of gun exposure may look different than observed in the current sample when examining different regions.

Conclusions and Future Directions

While gun-related injuries and homicides are considered by many researchers to be an endemic public health threat (e.g., Christoffel, 2007), the effects of gun exposure, have been unclear. Findings from the current study describe the prevalence of gun exposure among Black American youth and gun exposure’s relationship to externalizing issues independent of other stressful circumstances. The results indicate the necessity for further studies examining the specific impact on the mere presence of guns in youth’s lives. Future studies should explore the relationships in the current study longitudinally to examine the predictive effects of gun exposure. Additionally, the degree of gun exposure in childhood and adolescence has been proposed as an important factor in gun-related injury and death (Cheng et al., 2006). Examining the impact of gun exposure on all of these constructs can provide more comprehensive information on the outcomes to which gun exposure predicts. Although many youth in eighth grade and below do not have the same access to buying guns themselves (Pelucio et al., 2011), their exposure to guns in different conditions still appears to be a factor in their development. While more research is needed, results from the current study may provide a warning to policy makers, policy advocates, and intervention developers that, in addition to gun violence and gun carrying, general gun exposure is a factor that should be accounted for when attempting to address this public health concern.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by Grant R01–MH57938 from the National Institute of Mental Health awarded to Maryse H. Richards.

References

American Public Health Association. (2016). APHA gun violence fact sheet. Retrieved from https://www.apha.org/topics-and-issues/gun-violence

Anderson

(1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York, NY: Norton.

Bartholow

B. D.

Anderson

C. A.

Carnagey

N. L.

Benjamin

A. J.

(2005). Interactive effects of life experience and situational cues on aggression: The weapons priming effect in hunters and nonhunters. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 48-60.

Bearman

P. S.

Moody

(2004). Suicide and friendships among American adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 89-95.

Bingham

Okagaki

(2012). Ethnicity and student engagement. In Christenson

Reschly

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 65-95). New York, NY: Springer Science.

Bolger

Davis

Rafaeli

(2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579-616.

Borowsky

I. W.

Ireland

Resnick

M. D.

(2009). Health status and behavioral outcomes for youth who anticipate a high likelihood of early death. Pediatrics, 124, e81-e88.

Bradford

Burns Vaughn

Barber

B. K.

(2007). When there is conflict: Interparental conflict, parent–child conflict and youth problem behaviors. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 780-805.

Briere

(1996). Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children: Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

10.

Bronfenbrenner

Morris

P. A.

(2006). The bioecological model of human development. In Damon

Lerner

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (Vol. 1, 6th ed., pp. 793-828). New York, NY: Wiley.

11.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Youth violence: Facts at a glance 2016. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/yv-datasheet.pdf

12.

Cheng

T. L.

Johnson

Wright

J. L.

Pearson-Fields

A. S.

Brenner

Schwarz

. . . Scheidt

P. C.

(2006). Assault-injured adolescents presenting to the emergency department: Causes and circumstances. Academic Emergency Medicine, 13, 610-616.

13.

Christoffel

K. K.

(2007). Firearm injuries: Epidemic then, endemic now. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 626-629.

14.

Cobbina

J. E.

Miller

Brunson

R. K.

(2008). Gender, neighborhood danger, and risk-avoidance strategies among urban African-American youths. Criminology, 46, 673-709.

15.

Congressional Research Service. (2012). Gun control legislation. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf

16.

Craig

W. M.

(1998). The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety, and aggression in elementary school children. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 123-130.

17.

Crandall

Sharp

Unger

Straus

Brasel

Hsia

Esposito

(2013). Trauma deserts: Distance from a trauma center, transport times, and mortality from gunshot wounds in Chicago. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 1103-1109.

18.

Crime in Chicago by month, 2006 to present. (2018, January 9). Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://crime.chicagotribune.com/

19.

Cunningham

P. B.

Henggeler

S. W.

Limber

S. P.

Melton

G. B.

Nation

M. A.

(2000). Patterns and correlates of gun ownership among nonmetropolitan and rural middle school students. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 432-442.

20.

Downey

Zun

Burke

Jefferson

(2013). Does gun accessibility lead to violence-related injury? Southern Medical Journal, 106, 161-172.

21.

Elsaesser

Voisin

(2015). Correlates of polyvictimization among African American youth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 3022-3042.

22.

Evans

S. E.

Davies

DiLillo

(2008). Exposure to domestic violence: A meta-analysis of child and adolescent outcomes. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 131-140.

23.

Fagan

Wright

(2011). Gender differences in the effects of exposure to intimate partner violence on adolescent violence and drug use. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35, 543-550.

24.

FBI National Press Office. (2016). FBI releases preliminary semiannual crime statistics for 2015. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-preliminary-semiannual-crime-statistics-for-2015

25.

Fessenden

Park

(2016, May 27). Chicago’s murder problem. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/18/us/chicago-murder-problem.html

26.

Finkelhor

Turner

H. A.

Shattuck

A. M.

Hamby

S. L.

(2013). Violence, crime, and abuse exposure in a national sample of children and youth: An update. JAMA Pediatrics, 167, 614-621.

27.

Fleegler

Lee

Monuteaux

Hemenway

Mannix

(2013). Firearm legislation and firearm-related fatalities in the United States. JAMA Internal Medicine, 173, 732-740.

28.

Fowler

P. J.

Tompsett

C. J.

Braciszewski

J. M.

Jacques-Tiura

A. J.

Baltes

B. B.

(2009). Community violence: A meta-analysis on the effect of exposure and mental health outcomes of children and adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 227-259.

29.

Garbarino

Bradshaw

C. P.

Vorrasi

J. A.

(2002). Mitigating the effects of gun violence on children and youth. Future of Children, 12, 72-85.

30.

Goddard

Myers

(2017). Against evidence-based oppression: Marginalized youth and the politics of risk-based assessment and intervention. Theoretical Criminology, 21, 151-167.

31.

Guerra

N. G.

Huesmann

L. R

Spindler

(2003). Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary school children. Child Development, 74, 1561-1576.

32.

Hardy

M. S.

Armstrong

F. D.

Martin

B. L.

Strawn

K. N.

(1996). A firearm safety program for children: They just can’t say no. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 17, 216-221.

33.

Hayes

A. F.

(2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e9bb/7b23993113a73ee1ff6cde5ff9a4164f946e.pdf?_ga=2.234676571.476929996.1523512534-1420361775.1523512534

34.

Hill

Duggan

Lapsley

(2012). Subjective invulnerability, risk behavior, and adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 32, 489-501.

35.

Huesmann

L. R.

Guerra

N. G.

(1997). Children’s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 408-419.

36.

Hurd

Zimmerman

(2010). Natural mentors, mental health, and risk behaviors: A longitudinal analysis of African American adolescents transitioning into adulthood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46(1-2), 36-48.

37.

Hurd

N. M.

Sellers

R. M.

(2013). Black adolescents’ relationships with natural mentors: Associations with academic engagement via social and emotional development. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 76-85.

38.

Killias

Haas

(2002). The role of weapons in violent acts: Some results of a Swiss national cohort study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 14-32.

39.

Kim

(2017). Beyond the trigger: The mental health consequences of in-home firearm access among children of gun owners. Social Science & Medicine, 203, 51-59.

40.

Klinesmith

Kasser

McAndrew

F. T.

(2006). Guns, testosterone, and aggression an experimental test of a mediational hypothesis. Psychological Science, 17, 568-571.

41.

Kovacs

(1985). The children’s depression inventory (CDI). Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 21, 995-998.

42.

Mallinckrodt

Abraham

W. T.

Wei

Russell

D. W.

(2006). Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 372-378.

43.

Martinez

Richters

J. E.

(1993). The NIMH community violence project: II. Children’s distress symptoms associated with violence exposure. Psychiatry, 56, 22-35.

44.

Mason

Cauce

A. M.

Gonzales

Hiraga

Grove

(1994). An ecological model of externalizing in African American adolescents: No family is an island. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 639-655. doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0404_12

45.

Meeus

van de Schoot

Keijsers

Schwartz

Branje

(2010). On the progression and stability of adolescent identity formation: A five-wave longitudinal study in early-to-middle and middle-to-late adolescence. Child Development, 81, 1565-1581.

46.

Monahan

K. C.

Booth-LaForce

(2015). Deflected pathways: Becoming aggressive, socially withdrawn, or prosocial with peers during the transition to adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26, 270-285. doi:10.1111/jora.12190

47.

Monuteaux

M. C.

Lee

L. K.

Hemenway

Mannix

Fleegler

E. W.

(2015). Firearm ownership and violent crime in the US: An ecologic study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 49, 207-214.

48.

Oscos-Sanchez

M. A.

Oscos-Flores

L. D.

(2015). Exposure to a firearm in the home is strongly associated with Latino adolescent violence perpetration and substance use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56, S83-S84.

49.

Pelucio

Roe

Fiechtl

Leake

Herman

Shonce

Pruitt

(2011). Assessing survey methods and gun exposure among adolescent emergency department patients. Pediatric Emergency Care, 27, 500-506.

50.

Reese

Vera

Thompson

Reyes

(2001). A qualitative investigation of perceptions of violence risk factors in low-income African American children. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 30, 161-171.

51.

Reis

H. T.

Gable

S. L.

(2000). Event-sampling and other methods for studying everyday experience. In Reis

H. T.

Judd

C. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 190-222). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

52.

Richters

J. E.

Martinez

(1990). Checklist of Children’s Distress Symptoms. Bethesda, MD: Child and Adolescent Disorders Research Branch, National Institute of Mental Health.

53.

Ruggles

Rajan

(2014). Gun possession among American youth: A discovery-based approach to understand gun violence. PLoS ONE, 9(11), E111893.

54.

Schuster

M. A.

Franke

T. M.

Bastian

A. M.

Sor

Halfon

(2000). Firearm storage patterns in US homes with children. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 588-594.

55.

Shapiro

Dorman

Welker

Clough

(1998). Youth attitudes toward guns and violence: Relations with sex, age, ethnic group, and gun exposure. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 98-108.

56.

Shetgiri

Boots

D. P.

Lin

Cheng

T. L

(2016). Predictors of weapon-related behaviors among African American, Latino, and White youth. Journal of Pediatrics, 171, 277-282.

57.

Slovak

(2002). Gun violence and children: Factors related to exposure and trauma. Health & Social Work, 27, 104-112.

58.

Slovak

Singer

(2001). Gun violence exposure and trauma among rural youth. Violence and Victims, 16, 389-400.

59.

Smith

T. W.

Son

(2015). General Social Survey final report: Trends in gun ownership, 1972-2014. Retrieved from http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSSReports/GSS_TrendsinGunOwnership_US_1972-2014.pdf

60.

Spano

Bolland

(2011). Is the Nexus of gang membership, exposure to violence, and violent behavior a key determinant of first time gun carrying for urban minority youth? Justice Quarterly, 28, 838-862.

61.

Spano

Pridemore

W. A.

Bolland

(2012). Are exposure to violence and violent behavior precursors for initiation of gun carrying for poor, urban minority youth? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 158-176.

62.

Spielberger

C. D.

(1973). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

63.

Stevens

M. M.

Gaffney

C. A.

Tosteson

T. D.

Mott

L. A.

Olson

Ahrens

M. B.

Konings

E. K

. (2001). Children and guns in a well child cohort. Preventive Medicine, 32(3), 201-206.

64.

Stewart

(2007). Who is kin? Family definition and African American families. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 15, 163-181.

65.

Tolan

(1988). Socioeconomic, family, and social stress correlates of adolescent antisocial and delinquent behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 16, 317-331.

66.

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). (2012). Annual Firearm Manufacturing and Export Reports for 2002. Retrieved from https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/data-statistics.

67.

Williamson

A. A.

Guerra

N. G.

Tynan

W. D.

(2014). The role of health and mental health care providers in gun violence prevention. Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology, 2, 88-98.

68.

Winton

(2004). Urban violence: A guide to the literature. Environment & Urbanization, 16, 165-184.

69.

Zelazo

Carlson

(2012). Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 354-360.