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.”

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams, S. 1967

“Some findings from correctional caseload research.”

Federal Probation 31: 48-57.

Bailey, W. 1966

“Correctional outcome: an evaluation of 100 reports.”

J. of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Sci. 57: 153-160.

Berleman, W. C. and T. W. Steinburn 1969

“The value and validity of delinquency prevention experiments.”

Crime & Delinquency 15: 471-477.

Braukman, C. J. , D. L. Fixsen , E. L. Phillips , and M. W. Wolf 1975

“Behavioral approaches to treatment in the crime and delinquency field.”

Criminology 13: 299-331.

Burchard, J. D. and P. T. Hartig 1976 “Behavior modification and juvenile delinquency,” in H. Leitenberg (ed.) Handbook of Behavior Modification and Behavior Therapy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Cooper, H. M. and R. Rosenthal 1980

“Statistical vs. traditional procedures for summarizing research findings.”

Psych. Bull. 87: 442-449.

Davidson, W. S. II and E. Seidman 1974

“Studies of behavior modification and juvenile delinquency: a review, methodological critique, and social perspective.”

Psych. Bull. 81: 998-1011.

Emery, R. E. and D. Marholin II 1977

“An applied behavior analysis of delinquency: the irrelevancy of relevant behavior.”

Amer. Psychologist 32: 860-873.

Fischer, J. 1973

“Is casework effective? A review.”

Social Work 18: 5-21.

10.

Fishman, R. 1977 “An evaluation of eighteen projects providing rehabilitation and diversion services,” in L. Radzinowicz and M. E. Wolfgang (eds.) Crime and Justice, (vol. 3). New York: Basic.

11.

Garrett, C. J. 1984 “Meta-analysis of the effects of institutional and community residential treatment on adjudicated delinquents.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado.

12.

Gendreau, P. and R. R. Ross 1980 “Effective correctional treatment: bibliotherapy for cynics,” in R. R. Ross and P. Gendreau (eds.) Effective Correctional Treatment. Toronto: Butterworths.

13.

Glass, G. V. , B. McGaw , and M. L. Smith 1981 Meta-analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

14.

Greenberg, P.F. 1977 “The correctional effects of corrections: a survey of evaluations,” in D. F. Greenberg (ed.) Corrections and Punishment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

15.

Kirby, B. C. 1954

“Measuring effects of treatment of criminals and delinquents.”

Sociology and Social Research 38: 368-374.

16.

Klockars, C. B. 1975

“The true limits of the effectiveness of correctional treatment.”

Prison J. 55: 53-64.

17.

Landman, J. T. and R. M. Dawes 1982

“Psychotherapy outcome: Smith and Glass' conclusions stand up under scrutiny.”

Amer. Psychologist 37: 504-516.

18.

Light, R. J. and R. V. Smith 1971

“Accumulating evidence: procedures for resolving contradictions among different research studies.”

Harvard Education Rev. 41: 429-471.

19.

Lipton, D. , R. Martinson , and J. Wilks 1975 The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment. A Survey of Treatment Evaluation Studies. New York: Praeger.

20.

Martinson, R. 1974

“What works?—questions and answers about prison reform.”

Public Interest 35: 22-54.

21.

Martinson, R. 1976

“California research at the crossroads.”

Crime & Delinquency 22: 180-191.

22.

Palmer, T. 1975

“Martinson revisited.”

J. of Research in Crime and Delinquency 12: 133-152.

23.

Palmer, T. 1978 Correctional Intervention and Research: Current Issues and Future Prospects. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

24.

Palmer, T. 1983

“The effectiveness issue today: an overview.”

Federal Probation 47, 2: 3-10

25.

Robison, J. and G. Smith 1971

“The effectiveness of correctional programs.”

Crime & Delinquency 17: 67-80.

26.

Romig, D. A. 1978 Justice for Our Children. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

27.

Ross, R. R. and P. Gendreau 1980 Effective Correctional Treatment. Toronto: Butterworths.

28.

Ross, R. R. and B. McKay 1980 “Behavioral approaches to treatment in corrections: requiem for a panacea,” In R. R. Ross and P. Gendreau, Effective Correctional Treatment. Toronto: Butterworths.

29.

Wilks, J. and R. Martinson 1976

“Is the treatment of criminal offenders really necessary?”

Federal Probation 40: 3-9.

30.

Witmer, H. L. and E. Tufts 1954 The Effectiveness of Delinquency Prevention Programs. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

31.

Wright, W. E. and M. C. Dixon 1977

“Community prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency: a review of the literature.”

J. of Research in Crime and Delinquency 14: 35-67.