Effects of Residential Treatment on Adjudicated Delinquents: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Recent trends toward a more punitive approach to juvenile crime have been heavily influenced by a body of review literature that reports that the traditional treatment approach is ineffective. The opinion that “nothing works” is largely based on reviews of the treatment literature. These reviews generally fail to document the amount of change associated with treatment. A meta-analysis of the primary research literature produced since 1960 was undertaken to assess the amount of change associated with various treatments of adjudicated delinquents. There were 111 studies identified that used a comparison group or pre-post design. Results indicated that treatment of adjudicated delinquents resulted in a positive change of .37 standard deviations. No consistent evidence on the relative efficacy of behavioral versus psychodynamic approaches was found. Recidivism was modestly reduced; institutional adjustment, psychological adjustment, and academic performance were all improved following treatment. The results of the meta-analysis suggest that treatment of adjudicated delinquents in an institutional or community residential setting does “work.”

Deterrent Effect of Curfew Enforcement: Operation Nightwatch in St. Louis, 2003-2005

“…Several literature reviews and meta-analyses draw this conclusion, stating that a change in the offender's thinking must take place for behavior change to occur (Greenwood, 2002;Mihalic, Irwin, Elliott, Fagan, and Hansen, 2001;MacKenzie, 2000;Izzo and Ross, 1990;Andrews 1990, Ross andFabiano, 1985;Garrett, 1985). In several cases this conclusion is quite strong, for example, Izzo and Ross (1990) found that programs containing a cognitive element were twice as effective as those that did not.…”

“…For both adults and juveniles, confidence in treatment and rehabilitation began high, but unintended outcomes and a subsequent lack of faith in the system prompted critics to pronounce, "nothing works" (Martinson, 1974). Not all researchers accepted this proclamation, however, and several studies have shown that under the correct conditions, treatment and rehabilitation can have positive effects on reducing delinquency (Lipsey, 1992;Izzo and Ross, 1990;Gendreau and Ross, 1987;Garrett, 1985). Research has identified several of these conditions that provide effective treatment of juveniles, with ensuing reductions in violence and delinquency.…”

“…Several studies indicate treatment in a community setting is more desirable than treatment in an institutional setting (Greenwood, 2002;Krisberg, et al, 1995;Lipsey, 1992;Izzo and Ross, 1990;Gendreau and Ross, 1987). The meta analyses conducted by Lipsey (1992) and Garrett (1985) both note the success of community based treatment. Lipsey (1992) reports that positive effects were larger when juveniles were in a community rather than institutional setting.…”

Formulating an Integrated Intervention Programme: Reshaping the Brain-Behaviour Functioning of Children in Conflict with Law in India

“…Research in this domain have provided various evidence based strategies to deal with Juvenile delinquency, which highly focuses on approaches involving Family Therapy Group Therapy has also been carried out in various groups of Children in Conflict with Law [41,42]. Social skills training modules are quite effective as well [43][44][45][46]. Some studies have focused on the application of certain Behaviour Therapy techniques [47][48][49].…”

A journey beyond the bars: Participants' experiences of psychological treatment in a prison setting

“…The consensus amongst more contemporary penologists and psychologists (e.g. Andrews, 1995;Andrews, Zinger, Hodge, Gendreau & Cullen, 1990;Cann, Falshaw, Nugent & Friendship, 2003;Dowden & Andrews, 1999;Falshaw, Friendship, Travers & Nugent, 2003;Garrett, 1985;Hollin & Palmer, 2009;Izzo & Ross, 1990;Lipsey, 1992;Lipsey, Chapman & Landenberger, 2001;Lipton, Martinson & Wilks, 1975;McGuire & Priestley, 1995;Polaschek et al (2005); Tong & Farrington, 2006;Wexler, Falkin &Lipton, 1990 andLab, 1989) is, that through the correct identification and targeting of an offender"s specific criminogenic (offence related) psychological determinants, and the implementation of appropriately targeted cognitive behavioural interventions, the likelihood of that offender reducing their proclivity for antisocial conduct is significantly increased.…”