(PS6-32) Youth Profiles of Delinquent Behavior Are Differentially Associated with CU Traits, Emotion Regulation, and Contextual Risk

Engagement in delinquent behavior is associated with several negative sequelae, including lower financial and educational attainment, co-occurring psychopathology, and substance abuse. Though a considerable amount of research has explored patterns of delinquent behavior more broadly (e.g., violent vs. nonviolent), less is known about patterns of delinquent behavior on a granular level and viable intervention targets that may confer risk or resilience for engagement in such behaviors. In fact, there is a dearth of research exploring how specific delinquent behaviors hang together, and factors that may influence engagement in these behaviors across contexts (e.g., school, home, community). Thus, the present study used latent modeling techniques to identify patterns of delinquent behaviors among a community-based sample. Participants were youth (N=2294, 46.8% female, ages 11-12 years) from the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development Social Development Substudy. Youth completed the Self-Report of Delinquency (SRD) measure comprised of 48 items delineating delinquent behaviors across contexts. Frequency analyses were used to determine which of the 48 items were endorsed above an a priori threshold (i.e., >3%); in total, 22 items (e.g., suspended, destroyed property, taken money, hit students, graffiti) met threshold criteria and, thus, were included in a latent class analysis to identify profiles of youth delinquent behavior. Further, to externally validate profiles that emerged, caregivers reported on (a) youth callous-unemotional (CU) traits using items from the Inventory of Callous Unemotional Traits, and (b) negative neighborhood perceptions (e.g., lack of efficacy and disorder scales), while youth reported on their emotion regulation (ER) using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Using a variety of indices (BIC, AIC, BLRT, entropy) and theoretical considerations, a 4-profile model demonstrated best fit of the data. These 4 profiles were (1) General Delinquent Behaviors (GD; n=133), characterized by elevated scores in all domains, but most notably bullying, vandalism, theft, and other criminal behavior; (2) Delinquency confined to School Setting (SS; n=390), characterized by disciplinary action (e.g., suspension, detention, sent home) and aggression towards students; (3) Violation of Rules and Familial Expectations (VFE; n=378), characterized by cheating on assignments, destruction of family property, theft from family, and aggression towards siblings; and (4) Typically Developing (TD; n=1518), characterized by scores below the sample means on all variables. Profiles differed on CU traits (GD, SS > VFE >TD), negative neighborhood perceptions (GD, SS > VFE, TD), and poor ER (GD > SS; VFE > TD). Thus, patterns of youth delinquency that differ in frequency and type can be meaningfully indexed and are differentially related to individual and contextual risk factors. These findings indicate (1) risk factors for delinquent behavior that may warrant preventive intervention efforts and (2) viable and amenable intervention targets, such as skill acquisition to improve ER or CBT to address CU traits, among youth who exhibit emerging delinquent behavior across contexts.