Abilities associated with adjudicative competence were assessed among 927 adolescents in juvenile detention facilities and community settings. Adolescents' abilities were compared to those of 466 young adults in jails and in the community. Participants at 4 locations across the United States completed a standardized measure of abilities relevant for competence to stand trial (the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication) as well as a new procedure for assessing psychosocial influences on legal decisions often required of defendants (MacArthur Judgment Evaluation). Youths aged 15 and younger performed more poorly than young adults, with a greater proportion manifesting a level of impairment consistent with that of persons found incompetent to stand trial. Adolescents also tended more often than young adults to make choices (e.g., about plea agreements) that reflected compliance with authority, as well as influences of psychosocial immaturity. Implications of these results for policy and practice are discussed, with an emphasis on the development of legal standards that recognize immaturity as a potential predicate of incompetence to stand trial.

Abilities associated with adjudicative competence were assessed among 927 adolescents in juvenile detention facilities and community settings. Adolescents' abilities were compared to those of 466 young adults in jails and in the community. Participants at four locations across the United States completed a standardized measure of abilities relevant for competence to stand trial (the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication) as well as a new procedure for assessing psychosocial influences on legal decisions often required of defendants (MacArthur Judgment Evaluation). Youths aged 15 and younger performed more poorly than did young adults, with a greater proportion manifesting a level of impairment consistent with that of persons found incompetent to stand trial. Adolescents also tended more often than young adults to make choices (e.g., about plea agreements) that reflected compliance with authority, as well as influences of psychosocial immaturity. Implications of these results for policy and practice are discussed, with an emphasis on the development of legal standards that recognize immaturity as a potential predicate of incompetence to stand trial.

Principles of adolescent development have accelerated positive changes to the juvenile justice system. These changes have been most pronounced in reducing reliance on incarceration and in approaches to sentencing of youth tried as adults. While juvenile probation has made some developmentally friendly adjustments, it remains an area that is fertile for reform. Many of the principles and goals in this paper have been endorsed by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), which “supports and is committed to juvenile probation systems that conform to the latest knowledge of adolescent development and adolescent brain science,” and which “recommends that courts cease imposing ‘conditions of probation’ and instead support probation departments’ developing, with families and youth, individualized case plans that set expectations and goals.” NCJFCJ's July, 2017 resolution in support of developmentally appropriate juvenile probation services built on earlier NCJFCJ policies. From the time NCJFCJ adopted Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines in 2005, those policies have grown increasingly robust.

Researchers of strategy and performance relationships in entrepreneurial firms fall into three groups: those who view strategy as stable (planned) and slowly evolving; those who view strategy as dynamic (emerging) and rapidly changing (Slevin & Covin, 1997); and a third who view strategy as being somewhat more dynamic than the planned view and somewhat more static than the emerging view .Many management studies assume strategic stability or at least very slowly changing, perhaps static, conditions and in their analyses assign strategic typologies to the results of their research (Miles & Snow, 1978). Because these studies were performed at a point-in-time there were inconsistent findings reported in the literature (Dess, Gupta, Hennart, & Hill, 1995). Further, these studies primarily aggregated a large number of firm responses across industries, which often resulted in inconsistent findings, especially if the industry mix changed from study to study.While the desire of social science researchers to provide generalizable, accurate and simple-to-perform studies (Dess, Ireland, & Hitt, 1990) is commendable, many strategies are relatively dynamic. The results are not generalizable or simple to analyze (Teach, Schwartz, & Jay, 1998). Further, modifications of conventional statistical techniques that include measures of central tendency, measures of dispersion, hypothesis testing, and correlations that are used to test a model's efficacy (Alonso, Gillin, & Bygrave, 1991), do not adequately describe the stochastic processes of entrepreneurs' firms and their environments.How should statistical techniques be used to analyze relationships between entrepreneurial firms' strategies and performance? This research note suggests a two-part answer to this question: utilize industry-specific empirical data and longitudinal regression methodology. PROPOSALSThe following two proposals are elucidated with the use of empirical data: Proposal 1: Study entrepreneurial firms one industry at a time.