POSITIVE PEER CULTURE AND TOKEN ECONOMY - AN EVALUATION OF THE MISSOURI DIVISION OF YOUTH SERVICES' TREATMENT PROGRAMS.

• NCJ Number: 43031
• Author(s): J R HEPBURN
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 159 pages
• Grant Number(s): 75-ED-07-0003
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice; Missouri Division of Corrections
• Corporate Author: Missouri Governor's Cmtte for Children and Youth
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

AN EVALUATION OF THE TREATMENT PROGRAMS OF THE MISSOURI DIVISION OF YOUTH SERVICES IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE STATE IS REPORTED.

Abstract

THE EVALUATION STUDY MEASURED TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF THE JUVENILE GROUP HOMES, INSTITUTIONS, AND PARK CAMPS. POSITIVE PEER CULTURE (PPC) WAS FOUND TO BE THE METHOD MOST OFTEN USED IN GROUP HOME AND INSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT. ALSO INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW WERE BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION AND GUIDED GROUP INTERACTION (GGI). AS A FORERUNNER TO PPC, GGI IS SIMILAR IN CONCEPT AND OPERATION. PPC TREATMENT APPROACH DEFINES DELINQUENCY WITHIN A DEVIANT SUBCULTURE CONTEXT FROM WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL RECEIVES REWARDS AND SANCTIONS. SANCTIONS ARE PLACED ON BEHAVIOR THAT IS NONCONFORMING TO THE GROUP, WHEREAS 'NORMAL' BEHAVIOR IS REWARDED. THE GOAL OF PPC IS SUBSTITUTING POSITIVE VALUES FOR NEGATIVE VALUES THROUGH PEER GROUP PRESSURE. THE CENTRAL QUESTION IN THE EVALUATION OF PPC AND TOKEN ECONOMY (ALSO CONCENTRATING ON ATTITUDE CHANGE) WAS WHICH FACTORS ACCOUNTED FOR THE OBSERVED CHANGE, RATHER THAN HOW EFFECTIVE WAS THE PROGRAM. THE ANALYSIS WAS CONCERNED WITH: THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG ANTECEDENT FACTORS (RACE, AGE, OFFENSE, TIME IN TREATMENT, COURT CONTACTS, TYPE OF FACILITY); INTERMEDIATE PROGRAM GOALS (GROUP EXPERIENCE, POSITIVE IMPACT, SOCIAL CLIMATE, PPC ACHIEVED); AND PROGRAM IMPACT (CRITICAL INDICATORS, SELF-ESTEEM, LAW, POLICE). THE DATA OBTAINED, WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED IN TABLES, ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: DO YOUTHS WHO UNDERGO THE TREATMENT PROGRAM EXHIBIT A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE FOUR MEASURES OF PROGRAM IMPACT?; IS THE DEGREE OF THE PROGRAM IMPACT RELATED TO THE ANTECEDENT FACTORS?; DOES THE DEGREE OF PROGRAM IMPACT VARY ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE PROGRAM ACHIEVES THE INTERMEDIATE GOALS?; AND DOES THE RELATION BETWEEN PROGRAM GOALS AND PROGRAM IMPACT VARY ACCORDING TO THE ANTECEDENT FACTORS? APPENDIX A CONTAINS A REVIEW OF TREATMENT PROGRAMS SIMILAR TO THOSE USED BY THE DIVISION OF YOUTH SERVICES. APPENDIX B OUTLINES THE SURVEY INSTRUMENTS USED IN THE EVALUATION.