Applied & Preventive Psychology 9:271-281 (2000). Cambridge University Press. Printed in the USA. Copyright © 2000 AAAPP 0962-1849/00 $9.50 Violence prevention: Program effects on urban preschool and kindergarten children SUSAN D. McMAHON, JASON WASHBURN, ERIKA D. FELIX, JEANNE YAKIN, AND GARY CHILDREY DePaul University Abstract This study compares the effectiveness of a violence prevention program with young, at-risk children in two settings. Preschool and kindergarten students, residing in Chicago public-housing developments, participated in a 28-session intervention. Knowledge, behavior problems, and social skills were assessed at pretest and posttest, based on child interviews, teacher ratings, and behavioral observations. Findings suggest that both preschool and kindergarten children demonstrated significant gains in knowledge, based on interview scores, and significant decreases in problem behaviors, based on behavioral observations; however, teacher ratings did not change significantly across time. The discrepancy in findings is explored and implications are discussed. Key words: Aggression, Program evaluation, Social skills, Urban youth, Violence prevention Deterring violence in schools has become a major focal point of our nation's agenda, as the incidence of aggression and vi- olence among youth has increased over the last several years (Fleming, 1996; Mercy & O'Carroll, 1998). Urban youth liv- ing in low-income, high-crime neighborhoods are particular- ly at high risk for aggressive behavior because of a variety of social and community stressors, including increased rates of exposure to violence (Attar, Guerra, & Tolan, 1994; Grant et al., 2000; Sampson, 1993). Exposure to violence has been linked with mental health problems (Pastore, Fisher, & Fried- man, 1996), including global distress, symptoms of depres- sion and anxiety, intrusive thinking (Kliewer, Lepore, Oskin, & Johnson, 1998), aggressive or violent behavior (Farrell & Bruce, 1997; Guerra, Huesmann, Tolan, & Van-Acker, 1995; Osofsky, Wewers, Hann,& Fick, 1993), and post-traumatic stress disorder (Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993). Given the in- creased incidence of aggressive behavior among youth and the effects of exposure to violence, there is an urgent need to examine and assess preventive and early intervention ap- proaches with children in low-income, urban, high-crime neighborhoods to stop the cycle of violence. This project was supported by the DePaul University Vincentian Endow- ment (grant # 2-27986), the DePaul University Research Council (grant # 6-26306), and the DePaul Community Mental Health Center.The authors extend appreciation to Eva Karderas for her work in interviewing children and entering data and to Eduardo Lugo for his assistance with data analysis. Send correspondence and reprint requests to: Susan D. McMahon, DePaul University, Department of Psychology, 2219 N. Kenmore, Chicago, IL 60614. E-mail: smcmahon@wppost.depaul.edu. 271 Efforts to prevent aggressive behavior have taken various forms, including mentoring programs, comprehensive health promotion programs, and tertiary prevention for violent incar- cerated youth (Drug Strategies, 1998; Reid & Eddy, 1997). Prevention efforts have increasingly focused on school set- tings, with over 150 school-based violence prevention pro- grams available (Altman, 1996). School-based violence pre- vention programs typically consist of curricula that use a variety of concepts and techniques, including anger manage- ment, empathy development, social problem-solving and ne- gotiation skills, resisting violent media messages, dealing with teasing or bullying, improving communication and so- cial skills, and peace-building activities (Drug Strategies, 1998). Although many of these programs are currently being implemented in schools, only a handful of programs have been systematically evaluated, and even fewer programs have published findings of empirical support (Altman, 1996; Centers for Disease Control, 1997). The evaluation literature on school-based violence pre- vention programs is beginning to grow for youth in middle school and high school (i.e., DuRant et al., 1996; Farrell & Meyer, 1997; Guerra & Slaby, 1990; Huesmann et al., 1996; Johnson, Johnson, Dudley, & Magnuson, 1996; Nadel, Spell- mann, Alcarez-Canino, Lausell-Bryant, & Landsberg, 1996); however, few evaluations have been conducted with young children. For example, a description of 15 model violence prevention projects included only 4 projects that targeted el- ementary students and no projects that targeted preschool students (Powell et al., 1996).