Beliefs about Conflict – NYC Youth Violence Survey

Abstract

The Beliefs about Conflict—NYC Youth Violence Survey scale is an integral, specialized assessment instrument designed to evaluate the cognitive and normative factors that underlie aggressive behavior and responses to confrontation among adolescents. Developed as a subscale of the broader New York City Youth Violence Survey, this tool specifically measures an individual’s personal attitudes regarding physical conflict, the perceived effectiveness and justification of using weapons or threats in confrontational scenarios, and the critical role of familial beliefs in shaping decisions about fighting and weapon carrying. The scale provides crucial insights into violence-supportive beliefs among high school students.

Keywords

Adolescent Psychology, Youth Violence, Conflict Beliefs, Weapon Attitudes, Conflict Resolution, Delinquency, Violence-Supportive Norms, CDC, Self-Report Scales.

Authors

Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Purpose

The primary mandate of the larger New York City Youth Violence Survey (1993), in which the Beliefs about Conflict scale is nested, was to establish a foundational understanding regarding the prevalence, underlying causes, and potential prevention strategies for youth violence among high school students in a major urban setting. This particular subscale serves a vital function by providing quantifiable data on the cognitive mechanisms—specifically the beliefs and normative attitudes—that ultimately determine an adolescent’s propensity to engage in or actively avoid physical altercations.

The instrument allows researchers and public health officials to ascertain whether surveyed students perceive violence as a necessary or effective means of self-protection or conflict resolution. By contrasting these beliefs with non-violent alternatives, such as apologizing or de-escalation strategies like walking away, the survey helped identify high-risk cognitive profiles. The original data, gathered from over 1,000 students, highlighted a critical finding: while overt violence was generally not condoned, many felt violence was justified and necessary when they perceived themselves to be threatened.

Construct

The Beliefs about Conflict scale is fundamentally designed to measure the psychological construct of Violence-Supportive Norms and Beliefs. This construct encompasses the cognitive justifications, rationalizations, and normative acceptance of aggression and violence, particularly in response to provocation or perceived threat. The scale is structured to investigate two core dimensions of these beliefs.

The first dimension assesses personal beliefs concerning the perceived efficacy of aggressive actions, which includes the utility of retaliation, hitting back, or the strategic use of weapons. The second dimension explores the adolescent’s perception of their immediate social environment, specifically their family’s endorsement or tolerance of violent responses to conflict. By examining these dimensions, the instrument effectively measures the perceived utility of conflict escalation (e.g., threatening others or carrying weapons) versus de-escalation techniques (e.g., apologizing or retreating). A higher summed score on this index is indicative of a strong endorsement of beliefs that support aggressive and potentially violent attitudes, suggesting poor conflict management skills.

Validity

As part of a large-scale epidemiological survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Beliefs about Conflict subscale was developed with an emphasis on rigorous content validity. This ensures that the instrument’s items comprehensively and accurately sample the domain of conflict-related beliefs and weapon attitudes that are relevant to urban adolescents and predictors of subsequent behavior.

Furthermore, the scale demonstrates high face validity. The questions directly address real-world scenarios involving physical confrontation, the carrying and use of weapons, and the influence of familial expectations regarding fighting. These are all established, direct correlates of delinquency and antisocial behavior within the target population, confirming the instrument’s utility for public health surveillance and research applications.

Reliability

Although specific internal consistency coefficients, such as Cronbach’s Alpha, are often detailed only within the full technical reports of the NYC Youth Violence Survey, high internal reliability is generally presumed for instruments utilized in major public health surveillance and research initiatives by the CDC. The scoring methodology supports this assumption, as items 2 through 9 are specifically aggregated to form a single index score.

This aggregation approach implies that these eight items successfully measure a unified latent construct related to violence-supportive norms and poor conflict resolution beliefs. The unified index allows researchers to reliably compare overall levels of violence justification across different demographic groups within the adolescent population.

Factor Analysis

Formal, detailed factor analysis results for this specific subscale are not provided in the primary source material. However, based on the content and structure of the items, the instrument is hypothesized to possess a two-factor structure reflecting distinct sources of influence and types of beliefs regarding conflict engagement.

The potential factors suggested by the item content are:

• Beliefs regarding Self-Efficacy of Aggression/Avoidance (Items 2-5): These items focus on the adolescent’s personal assessment of whether aggressive tactics (threats, weapons) or de-escalation strategies (apologizing, avoiding) are effective means of avoiding physical conflict.
• Perceived Familial Endorsement of Violence and Weapon Use (Items 6-9): These items assess the perceived normative pressure or expectation from the family unit regarding retaliation and the use of weapons for self-defense.

It is important to note that Item 1 is structured as a contextual item—a multiple-choice question determining the primary factor influencing the decision to fight (e.g., peer pressure, fear of injury)—and is typically excluded from the overall calculated conflict belief index score.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Epidemiological Scale Index

Format: The instrument utilizes a mixed format. Item 1 is a multiple-choice question, while items 2 through 9 follow a structured Likert-type scale format.

Language Available: English (Developed within the context of the New York City school system).

Population Group: High School Students (Adolescents).

Age Group: Students typically enrolled in grades 9-12.

Population Details: The survey was administered to over 1,000 New York City high school students, specifically targeting urban youth exposed to potential risks of youth violence.

Test Methodology: The items (2-9) are typically aggregated to form a single index of conflict resolution beliefs. Scoring involves assigning numerical values: Yes = 3, Don’t know = 2, and No = 1. A critical step in the scoring process is that Items 3 and 5 must be reverse coded, as they represent non-violent conflict avoidance strategies. The final index score is calculated by summing the responses across all eight items, yielding a possible range of 8 to 24 points. Higher total scores signify a greater endorsement of violence-supportive norms and poor conflict management beliefs.

Keywords

Adolescent development, Urban violence, Weapon attitudes, Conflict beliefs, Family influence, Self-defense, Public health surveillance, Delinquency, Aggression.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Institutional Authorship)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Institutional Authorship)

Correspondence Address: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH), Atlanta, GA.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions and Fees: The Beliefs about Conflict subscale is considered part of the public domain literature, having been developed and published by the CDC as part of a public health initiative. No fees are generally noted for its use in academic research or public health monitoring applications.

Test Year (Source Publication): 1993 (Included in the New York City Youth Violence Survey documentation).

The original PDF compendium containing this instrument, titled Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools, can be downloaded here: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/YV_Compendium.pdf

Another accessible resource is found here: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED486261.pdf

Reference’s

Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH), Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. New York City Youth Violence Survey. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 1993.

Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Atlanta, GA: CDC.

Items of the Beliefs about Conflict – NYC Youth Violence Survey

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Suppose someone was trying to start a physical fight with you. Which one of the following is most important in deciding whether you would get in a physical fight?

• a. What your friends would think
• b. What your parents would think
• c. Whether you would get into trouble at school
• d. Whether you would get hurt
• e. Other

2. Threatening to use a weapon is an effective way to avoid a physical fight.

3. Avoiding or walking away from someone who wants to fight you is an effective way to avoid a physical fight.

4. Carrying a weapon is an effective way to avoid a physical fight.

5. Apologizing (saying you’re sorry) is an effective way to avoid a physical fight.

6. If someone hit me first, my family would want me to hit them back.

7. If someone attacked me, my family would want me to defend myself even if it meant using a weapon.

8. If I was going to be in a physical fight, I’d feel safer if I had a knife.

9. If I was going to be in a physical fight, I’d feel safer if I had a handgun.