Expert versus Youth Raters on Measuring Social and Therapeutic Climate in Secure Juvenile Placement

• NCJ Number: 307648
• Journal: Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Volume: 50 Issue: 2: Dated: 2022 Pages: 221-230
• Author(s): SC Walker ; AS Bishop; H Schmidt; TG Lee ; JA Indermark
• Date Published: 2022
• Length: 10 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2012-IJ-CX-0040
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)

Annotation

This study examining the concurrent validity and item functioning of corresponding youth and expert ratings of social and therapeutic climate found that the reliability of expert ratings of therapeutic climate exceeds the reliability of youth ratings, whereas reliability for other indicators of social climate are roughly equal between rater types.

Abstract

This study examined the concurrent validity and item functioning of corresponding youth and expert ratings of social and therapeutic climate across multiple sites in a state-wide juvenile residential setting (n = 225 paired observations). Results suggest that the reliability of expert ratings of therapeutic climate exceeds the reliability of youth ratings, whereas reliability for other indicators of social climate are roughly equal between rater types. In addition, youth and expert ratings had weak concurrent validity. Implications for the use of youth versus expertly trained raters for measuring social and therapeutic environment are discussed. Growing concern about the use of incarceration is driving significant reform in juvenile legal system decision-making and is likely to have a substantial impact on the role residential options play in the future continuum of care. It appears inevitable that surviving institutions or alternative residential models will be increasingly scrutinized for their impact on youth development. While rehabilitative models focused on youth development are a promising and growing part of residential institutions, few tools are available to measure quality. For institutions to sustain a focus on quality assessment, programs should use an organized and specified treatment model`` against which staff behavior can be assessed. (Published Abstract Provided)