Aggression replacement training in a high school setting

Abstract

The Aggression Replacement Training (ART) program is a comprehensive intervention for aggressive juvenile delinquents incorporating three components: Structured Learning, Anger Control Training and Moral Reasoning Training (Goldstein & Click, 1987). This paper investigates the efficacy of ART within a high school setting. Eighteen significantly aggressive students were selected using the Achenbach and Edelbrook (1986) aggression scale. Students (mean age 13 years and 9 months) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: Condition 1, the entire ART program; Condition 2, the Moral Reasoning component only; and Condition 3, a no treatment condition. The dependent measures were performance on: Behaviour Incident Reports, aggressive and coping behaviours, the Kendall-Wilcox Self-Control Scale, Situation Tests, and a Sociomoral Reflections Measure. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs were used to analyse the data. Compared to the two control conditions students completing the ART program: showed a significant decrease in aggressive incidences; a significant increase in coping incidences; and acquired significantly more social skills. Students in Condition 1 improved on the Combined Kendall-Wilcox Scale for Self-Control and Impulsivity. No significant differences were noted on the Sociomoral Reflections measure. ART appears to be an effective intervention for aggressive youth within a high school setting.

Aggression replacement training (ART) for reducing antisocial behavior in adolescents and adults: A systematic review

“…A history of aggressive, violent or criminal behavior was reported for participants in three studies (Barnoski, 2004;Erickson, 2013;Jones, 1991). Further, in two studies it was stated that a subset of the participants had such a history (Danielsson, Fors, & Freij, 2011;Hatcher et al, 2008).…”

“…Both RCTs had high or unclear selection bias and a high risk of other sources of bias (Coleman et al, 1992;Jones, 1991). One of the important other sources of bias was the potential for chance imbalance between the arms of the trial due to the small number of participants.…”

“…Seven studies reported results of tests with documented psychometric properties or staff observations of social skills in youth (Coleman et al, 1992;Erickson, 2013;Goldstein et al, 1989;Gundersen & Svartdal, 2006;Koposov et al, 2014;Nodarse, 1998). Moral reasoning was explored in six trials including youths (Coleman et al, 1992;Jones, 1991;Gundersen & Svartdal, 2006;Zimmerman, 1987). All of these studies reported pre-and post-intervention measures, although the periods covered and lengths of the follow-up times differed considerably between studies.…”

“…Coleman et al (1992) found no significant differences between the ART condition and the control condition in acting-out behavior self-control, social skills and moral reasoning, see Table 1. In Jones (1991), three conditions were compared: ART, the moral-reasoning component of ART only, and a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control. The investigators report that the ART condition resulted in a significant decrease in acting-out behavioral incidents, although a one-way ANOVA of pre-test data revealed a significantly higher level of behavioral incidents in the ART condition compared to the control condition.…”

Program Evaluation Challenges: Is Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Effective?

“…Homogeneity of samples and a lack of reporting on ethnicity in early research threaten the external validity of past findings. For example, three samples consisted of predominantly white males (Kennedy, 1989;Curulla, 1991;Leeman et al, 1993), racial demographic data were not available in other studies (Goldstein et al, 1989;Jones, 1991;Coleman et al, 1992;Gundersen & Svartdal, 2006), and only four experimental ART studies included multiethnic samples (Goldstein et al, 1987(Goldstein et al, , 1994Nodarse 1998;Nugent et al, 1999). Given that minorities are overrepresented compared to whites in the delinquent population (Glick, 2003) this shortcoming limits consumers' ability to comprehend findings' implications or replicate findings (Dowden, Antonowicz & Andrews, 2003).…”