|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this research conducted by Roberts and Camasso was to review the different types of treatment programs for adjudicated delinquent offenders.
METHODOLOGY:
The authors employed a quasi-experimental research design in their meta-analysis. They selected forty-six studies found in the major journals of criminal justice, criminology, and psychology for the ten-year period beginning in the winter of 1980 and ending in the spring of 1990. Studies were included in their analysis if recidivism was looked at as one of the principal outcomes of the research and if the research adhered to certain methodological guidelines. The meta-analysis included only those studies which were experimental or quasi-experimental in design and those which included the use of statistical controls, a matched group comparison or a pretest-posttest design.
The authors were interested in the independent variable of treatment program which was assessed according to treatment type (i.e., drug treatment, family therapy, employment, probation, etc.), offender type (i.e., average age of offender and whether they were firesetters, substance users, violent delinquents, sexual offenders, etc.), sample size of treatment and control groups, pretest and posttest measures, and length of follow-up period. The dependent variable in this study was the recidivism rate of program participants. The researchers were interested in which type(s) of program reduced recidivism the most effectively.
Data were analyzed using effect size (ES) measures, a common metric which was calculated from chi-square statistics, T or F-ratios, or correlation coefficients. The ES measures gave standardized numbers to compare the impact of the treatment from the different programs.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The authors found that the average age of the offender in the studies was 15.1 years. The average time between program completion and a follow-up study was 22 months. The authors pointed out that this latter figure is misleading for the range of follow-up periods was from zero months to 10 years.
The researchers found great variability in the research design of the different studies. For example, it was found that 21% had samples which were smaller than 50 while 35% had samples larger than 50 but less than 200. Regardless, the authors found that sample size had only a slight influence on ES. It was also found that more than one-third (35%) of the studies did not use any type of control or comparison group, the presence of which was noted by the authors as being the most important methodological issue influencing the ES.
The authors found that the lowest recidivism rates occurred among juveniles receiving educational/vocational treatment (6%) while the highest rate was found among those receiving drug and alcohol counseling (63.6%). Programs which included family therapy yielded strong average ES and led the authors to conclude that, while most intervention programs had only small positive consequences, those with the most promising results came from interventions which included group therapy or family therapy. The type of offender showing the most improvement in the meta-analysis was the typical drug user, who did "better--in terms of recidivism--than 74% of users who do not receive treatment" (p 436). There was little variation with respect to program setting (whether the program was community-based, school-based, or took place in detention, a group-home, through residential treatment or in a correction facility).
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors recommended that juvenile justice administrators replicate the family counseling programs discussed in the articles they reviewed in their respective jurisdictions.
(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
Juvenile Offender
Juvenile Treatment
Juvenile Crime
Juvenile Delinquency
Juvenile Violence
Treatment Program
Treatment Effectiveness Evaluation
Offender Recidivism
Recidivism Prevention
Program Effectiveness
Program Evaluation
Delinquency Intervention
Delinquency Prevention
Delinquency Treatment
Intervention Program
Prevention Program
Meta-Analysis
Violence Intervention
Violence Prevention
Violence Treatment
Crime Intervention
Crime Prevention
Crime Treatment
Offender Treatment
03-05
Language: en |