Challenges in the Assessment of Aggression in High-Risk Youth: Testing the Fit of the Form-Function Aggression Measure

Abstract

Recent efforts have focused on disentangling the forms (e.g., overt and relational) and functions (e.g., instrumental and reactive) of aggression. The Form-Function Aggression Measure (FFAM; Little, Jones, Henrich, & Hawley, 2003) shows promise in this regard; however, it is a new measure and its psychometric properties across different populations are unknown. The current study tested the underlying structure of the FFAM using confirmatory factor analysis in male and female high-risk adolescents (n= 381). Results indicated that none of the models tested demonstrated an acceptable fit in either males or females. However, a 6-factor model comprised of pure-overt, reactive-overt, instrumental-overt, pure-relational, reactive-relational, and instrumental-relational subtypes provided an improved fit relative to other models in both males and females. A multi-form, multi-function model equivalent to the model proposed by Little and colleagues (2003) also evidenced a relatively improved fit, highlighting the utility of disentangling form from function when examining aggression. Implications and challenges for assessing the forms and functions of aggression among high-risk adolescents are discussed.