Fighting – High-Risk Behavioral Assessment

Abstract

The Fighting—High-Risk Behavioral Assessment is a specialized, interview-based psychological instrument developed to systematically quantify and evaluate the frequency and intensity of aggressive and violent behaviors among children and adolescents. This assessment tool is designed to capture a broad spectrum of conflict resolution styles, escalating from non-physical behaviors, such as verbal altercations (“yelling” fights), through physical aggression (e.g., punching and kicking), up to and including the most critical high-risk behaviors involving the use of deadly weapons (knives or guns) in self-defense scenarios.

The instrument is essential for mental health professionals and researchers working with youth who display high-risk behaviors or who reside in environments where violence is highly prevalent. By thoroughly documenting an individual’s personal history of involvement in and exposure to aggressive acts, the scale serves as a critical diagnostic and screening tool. The resulting data helps to quickly identify specific risk factors that necessitate immediate clinical intervention, such as tailored counseling, specialized anger management programs, or other forms of therapeutic support.

Keywords

Fighting behavior, high-risk behavior, youth violence, aggression, behavioral assessment, conflict resolution, weapon use, risk assessment, juvenile delinquency, adolescent psychology, structured interview.

Authors

Dolan S.

Purpose

The core objective of the Fighting—High-Risk Behavioral Assessment is to precisely measure the extent and severity of aggressive and potentially life-threatening behaviors demonstrated by children and adolescents. It functions as a structured interview guide, ensuring a systematic and consistent method for gauging an individual’s direct participation in fighting, alongside their passive exposure to violent acts within their peer group and community environment.

Specifically, the instrument is engineered to quantify the frequency of aggressive acts across a danger continuum. These acts are categorized into three primary levels: verbal conflicts, non-lethal physical altercations (punching or kicking), and lethal aggression involving weapons such as knives or guns. This methodical frequency mapping provides researchers and clinicians with a detailed, nuanced understanding of emerging behavioral patterns, which is vital for designing and implementing effective, individualized intervention strategies.

Construct

The scale is designed to measure the psychological construct of Behavioral Aggression and Exposure to Violence. It achieves operationalization of this complex construct by examining distinct dimensions of conflict engagement and exposure:

• Verbal Aggression: This dimension assesses the frequency of engaging in non-physical “yelling” fights as a primary method of conflict resolution.
• Physical Aggression (Non-Lethal): This component measures involvement in fights that require physical contact, such as punching or kicking, often framed by the respondent as acts of self-defense or mutual combat.
• Lethal Aggression/Weapon Use: Crucially, this dimension quantifies the respondent’s exposure to or direct participation in fights where lethal weapons (knives or guns) were utilized for self-defense, signaling involvement in extremely high-risk environments and behaviors.
• Victimization/Helplessness: The instrument also includes items that gauge the respondent’s experience of being unable to defend themselves during frightening or threatening situations, which provides essential context for the overall risk profile and potential trauma exposure.

Furthermore, the assessment indirectly explores underlying psychological vulnerabilities, including deficient coping skills, the normalization of violence as a conflict resolution mechanism, and exposure to environmental risk factors inherent in their surroundings, such as peer group norms or substance use.

Validity

While comprehensive, detailed psychometric documentation concerning the scale’s validation process—including measures of criterion validity and construct validity—is primarily housed within the original 1989 doctoral dissertation by Dolan, the scale’s subsequent adoption is a strong indicator of its utility. Its notable inclusion in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) authoritative compendium, titled Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths, suggests that the instrument possesses substantial utility and sufficient face validity for its intended purpose.

The scale is widely accepted for use in both clinical and research settings focused on the assessment and prevention of youth violence. Although specific statistical validation reports are not typically contained in the public compendium entry, its consistent application in epidemiological studies reinforces its perceived effectiveness in measuring severe behavioral risk factors.

Reliability

Specific quantitative calculations for reliability metrics, such as internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha) or test-retest reliability over time, are not publicly documented in the CDC compendium entry. However, the reliability of the Fighting—High-Risk Behavioral Assessment is heavily supported by its methodological design.

Given that the scale focuses on sensitive, high-risk behaviors, the reliability of the data collected through the one-on-one interview format depends significantly on the interviewer’s ability to establish strong rapport and adhere strictly to the structured methodology. The consistent structure of the assessment, which separates items into “A” (occurrence) and “B” (frequency) response categories, is specifically implemented to ensure systematic, reliable data collection across diverse participants and interviewers.

Factor Analysis

The source material does not provide specific results from any formal factor analysis conducted on the Fighting—High-Risk Behavioral Assessment. However, based on the scale’s design, a typical factor analysis would be performed to confirm the underlying structure of the aggressive behaviors being measured. Such an analysis would likely attempt to determine if the scale items cluster into distinct, meaningful factors that represent different modes of aggression (e.g., verbal, non-lethal physical, or lethal weapon use) or if all items load onto a single, overarching dimension of general aggressive or high-risk behavior.

Instrument

Test Type: Behavioral Assessment / Structured Interview Schedule

Format: The assessment utilizes a structured, one-on-one interview format. It requires the respondent to provide verbal responses, often including open-ended answers for certain items, such as detailing the reasons or motivations for fighting.

Language Available: English (The original research context and development were US-based).

Population Group: Youths / Adolescents and Children.

Age Group: 8-18 years old.

Population Details: The scale is administered to students within the specified age range, primarily for the purpose of assessing their exposure to and direct engagement in aggressive and violent behaviors within their daily lives.

Test Methodology: Scoring the assessment involves a two-step process. First, an occurrence score is determined by summing the number of ‘Yes’ responses provided to the “A” items (occurrence questions). Second, for individuals who report at least one occurrence, a frequency score is calculated by averaging the numerical scores of the corresponding “B” items, which are scaled as: Rarely = 1 (1-3/year), Occasionally = 2 (1-2/month), and Regularly = 3 (daily or 1-2/week). A high total final score is indicative of a significant level of exposure to aggressive behavior or high rates of participation in violence.

Keywords

Dolan S., youth risk, behavioral screening, aggression scale, psychological interview, violence prevention, high-risk youth, structured assessment, CDC compendium, conflict behavior.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in the source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in the source material.

Correspondence Address: Dolan S., University of Chicago, Department of Psychology, Chicago, IL (Affiliation at time of original publication).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1989 (Based on the date of the original doctoral dissertation).

Permissions and Fee: Information regarding current usage permissions, licensing requirements, or associated fees is not provided in the source entry. Researchers and mental health professionals seeking to utilize the scale should proactively contact the author, Dolan S., or the University of Chicago Department of Psychology for current licensing and usage terms, as the instrument was originally published as part of a doctoral dissertation.

The scale is publicly cited within a governmental resource compendium, confirming its status as a recognized research tool in the field of youth violence prevention. The original PDF compilation document containing the complete instrument can be downloaded here: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/YV_Compendium.pdf.

Reference’s

• Dolan S. Doctoral Dissertation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Department of Psychology, 1989.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Atlanta, GA: CDC; 2008. (Instrument located on pages 193-194).

Items of the Fighting – High-Risk Behavioral Assessment

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

1	A. Why do you think people fight?  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . .
	B. Have you seen others get into a “yelling” fight where they only used their words and didn’t hit? ■ Yes ■ No
	C. How often? Rarely (1-3/year) ‚ Occasionally (1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
2	A. Have your friends gotten into “yelling” fights? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
3	3. A. Have you gotten into “yelling” fights? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
	C. Why do you get into these yelling fights? . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . .
4	A. Have you seen others get into fights where they had to punch or kick to defend themselves? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
5	5. A. Have you seen your friends get into fights where they had to punch or kick to defend themselves? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
6	A. Have you gotten into fights where you had to punch or kick to defend yourself? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
7	A. Have you seen others get into fights where they had to use a knife or gun to defend themselves? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
8	A. Have you seen your friends get into fights where they had to use a knife or gun to defend themselves? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
9	A. Have you gotten into fights where you had to use a knife or gun to defend yourself? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)
10	A. Have you ever been in a situation where you were scared and couldn’t defend yourself? ■ Yes ■ No
	B. How often? Rarely(1-3/year)‚ Occasionally(1-2/month)‚ Regularly (daily or 1-2/week)