Delinquency Prevention Through Parent Training: Results and Issues from Work in Progress

Hawkins, J. David; Catalano, Richard F.; Jones, Gwen E.; Fine, David R.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-7029-5_8

Cited by 32 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Drop out rates of up to 50% are not uncommon (Hawkins et al 1987;Irvine et al 1999). Especially prone to drop out are families with older children who exhibit more severe antisocial behavior and academic failure, poorer or stressed families having fewer resources and social supports, highly dysfunctional families, and mentally-ill parents (Kazdin 2005;WebsterStratton 1985).…”

Section: Challenges In Implementing Parent-training Programsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Training the Parents of Juvenile Offenders: State of the Art and Recommendations for Service Delivery

Mulford

Redding

2007

J Child Fam Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parent training is consistently highlighted as one of the most effective means of preventing delinquency and treating young children with conduct problems, and it has proven to be one of the most cost-effective interventions for doing so. There is, however, far less evidence supporting the efficacy of parent-training programs with adolescents and juvenile offenders. Nonetheless, it still seems to be one of the more promising methods for treating the behavior problems of adolescent delinquents, especially when used in conjunction with other carefully selected program components. We begin with an overview of parent training, highlighting the key components of successful programs. Research on the efficacy of parent training in the treatment of behavior problems among children and adolescents is discussed, particularly the differential impact of parental-training programs with specific groups of youths and families. We then discuss the ways in which parent training has been combined with other interventions in the treatment of delinquency. We conclude with a discussion of the problems encountered in implementing parent training, including recommendations for meeting the unique challenges of effective program implementation.

show abstract

Section: Challenges In Implementing Parent-training Programsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Training the Parents of Juvenile Offenders: State of the Art and Recommendations for Service Delivery

Mulford

Redding

2007

J Child Fam Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Seattle Social Development Project (SSDP) is a school-based intervention program that was developed by David Hawkins and Richard Catalano of the University of Washington in Seattle in the early 1980s (Hawkins et al 1987). 2 The initial experimental design of the SSDP evaluation focused on 1st grade students from eight Seattle elementary schools.…”

Section: Seattle Social Development Project (Ssdp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Drug and violence prevention: Rediscovering the critical rational dimension of evaluation research

Gorman

2005

J Exp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following criticism of government-funded drug prevention activities of the early 1990s, a spate of Bbest practice^or Bscience-based^lists of alcohol, drug and violence prevention programs have been produced by federal agencies in recent years. The writings of Donald T. Campbell on validity have had a profound influence on the development of the methodological quality scales that have been utilized in the review processes used to generate these lists. Implicit in this approach to the identification of science-based prevention programs is the idea that science is equivalent to research methodology and study design. Following Karl Popper and Campbell, I contend that, while certain designs are clearly better than others in dealing with threats to internal validity and allow for better generalization of results beyond the study population, utilization of these designs in and of itself is not sufficient to designate an evaluation study as Bscientific.^Nor can the accumulation of data from such studies be used to proclaim an entire area of research a Bscience,^as has occurred with the field of so-called Bprevention science.R ather, the fundamental criterion by which to judge the scientific status of a theory is falsifiability. If the field of drug and violence prevention is truly a science, then it should be subjecting its predictions about the effects of intervention programs to genuinely critical tests and not attempting to verify these hypotheses. It is argued that it has failed to do this, and two specific examples of prevention programs that appear on a number of science-based lists of prevention programs are discussed.

show abstract

“…The participants in this study are 808 individuals who participated in the Seattle Social Development Project (SSDP) (Abbott et al, 1998;Hawkins et al, 1987Hawkins et al, , 1991Hawkins et al, , 1997Peterson et al, 1994). These participants were recruited in the fall of 1985 from all fifth-grade students attending 18 Seattle elementary schools serving high-crime neighborhoods (n = 1,053).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood and adolescent predictors of alcohol abuse and dependence in young adulthood.

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.Objective: To provide a comprehensive examination of childhood and adolescent predictors of alcohol abuse and dependence at age 21, theoretically guided by the social development model. Method: Data were taken from an ethnically diverse urban sample of 808 students (51% male), surveyed at age 10 and followed prospectively to age 21 in 1996. Potential predictors of alcohol abuse and dependence at age 21 were measured at ages 10, 14 and 16. Relationships between these predictors and alcohol abuse and dependence were examined at each age, to assess changes in their patterns of prediction over time. Results: Strong bonding to school, close parental monitoring of children and clearly defined family rules for behavior, appropriate parental rewards for good behaviors, high level of refusal skills and strong belief in the moral order predicted a lower risk for alcohol abuse and dependence at age 21. Of these, strong bonding to school consistently predicted lower alcohol abuse and dependence from all three ages (10, 14 and 16). By contrast, youths who had a higher risk of alcohol abuse and dependence at age 21 engaged in more problem behaviors, had more opportunities to be involved with antisocial individuals and spent more time with and were more bonded to those individuals, viewed fewer negative consequences from antisocial behaviors and held more favorable views on alcohol use. Of these, prior problem behaviors and antisocial opportunities and involvements at ages 10, 14 and 16 consistently predicted alcohol abuse and dependence at age 21. Conclusions: These important malleable predictors, identifiable as early as age 10, provide potential intervention targets for the prevention of alcohol abuse and dependence in early adulthood. (J. Stud. Alcohol 62: [754][755][756][757][758][759][760][761][762] 2001)

show abstract

Delinquency Prevention Through Parent Training: Results and Issues from Work in Progress

Cited by 32 publications

References 14 publications

Training the Parents of Juvenile Offenders: State of the Art and Recommendations for Service Delivery

Training the Parents of Juvenile Offenders: State of the Art and Recommendations for Service Delivery

Drug and violence prevention: Rediscovering the critical rational dimension of evaluation research

Childhood and adolescent predictors of alcohol abuse and dependence in young adulthood.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About