4.6 Article

Peer Stressors and Gender Differences in Adolescents' Mental Health: The TRAILS Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT HEALTH
卷 46, 期 5, 页码 444-450

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.10.002

关键词

Peer stressors; Mental health; Adolescents; Gender

资金

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research NWO (Medical Research Council) [GB-MW 940-38-011, 175.010.2003.005]
  2. ZonMW Brainpower [100-001-004]
  3. ZonMw Risk Behavior and Dependence [60-60600-98-018, 60-60600-97-118]
  4. ZonMw Culture and Health [261-98-710]
  5. Social Sciences Council [GB-MaGW 480-01-006, GB-MaGW 480-07-001, GB-MaGW 457-03-018, GB-MaGW 452-04-314, GB-MaGW 452-06-004]
  6. Sophia Foundation for Medical Research [301, 393]
  7. Dutch Ministry of Justice (WODC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This study tested two hypotheses about gender-specific mental health effects of peer stressors during early adolescence: (1) boys and girls are sensitive to different types of peer stressors, and (2) peer stress is associated with different mental health problems in boys and girls. Methods: These two hypotheses were tested in a prospective large population cohort of 2,084 Dutch young adolescents. Internalizing and externalizing problems were measured at baseline and follow-up, whereas stressful life events in the period between baseline and follow-up were measured retrospectively at follow-up. We performed the analyses with two types of peer stressors; victimization at school and relationship losses. Results: Relationship losses were more strongly associated with internalizing and externalizing problems in girls than boys, supporting the first hypothesis. Peer victimization at school was also associated with both types of mental health problems, but equally strong in boys and girls. Conclusions: Peer stress is unlikely to be associated with different mental health problems in boys and girls. Instead, boys and girls are more likely to be susceptible to different types of peer stressors. (C) 2010 Society for Adolescent Medicine. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据