The Associations between Structural Treatment Characteristics and Post-Treatment Functioning in Compulsory Residential Youth Care.

BACKGROUND: In 2005 a new compulsory residential treatment program was developed for adolescents in need for protection against themselves or their environment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to examine the association of structural treatment characteristics of this new residential treatment program (i.e., duration of treatment, discharge status, and group composition in terms of sex) with post-treatment functioning. Additionally, the number of pre-treatment risk factors was included in the model. METHOD: A total of 301 adolescents (174 boys, 127 girls), with a mean age at time of admittance of 15.50 (SD = 1.26) participated in this study. The number of risk factors was derived from treatment files of the adolescents at time of entrance. Six months after discharge, adolescents participated in a telephone interview to measure ten post-treatment variables indicating how well they were doing. RESULTS: The results showed that duration of treatment was related to post-treatment living situation, in that adolescents who were in treatment for shorter durations were more likely to live on their own after treatment. For discharge status, findings suggested that adolescents who were regularly discharged had more frequent contact with their family; however, they also showed higher alcohol consumption 6 months after treatment. Group composition was related to the girls' official offending, indicating that girls placed in mixed-sex groups showed significantly fewer official police contacts than did girls in girls-only treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Overall, structural treatment characteristics were hardly related to the adolescents' functioning after treatment. Suggestions for future research are discussed.

Psychopathic traits of Dutch adolescents in residential care: identifying subgroups.

The present study examined whether a sample of 214 (52.8% male, M age = 15.76, SD = 1.29) institutionalized adolescents could be classified into subgroups based on psychopathic traits. Confirmatory Factor Analyses revealed a relationship between the subscales of the Youth Psychopathic traits Inventory (YPI) and the three latent constructs of the original model on which it is based. Latent Class Analyses showed that adolescents showing psychopathic traits could be classified into three subgroups. The first group showed low scores on the grandiose/manipulative dimension, the callous/unemotional dimension, and the impulsive/irresponsible dimension (normal group). The second group scored moderate on the grandiose/manipulative dimension and the callous/unemotional dimension and high on the impulsive/irresponsible dimension (impulsive, non-psychopathic-like group). The third group scored high on all three dimensions (psychopathy-like group). The findings revealed that the impulsive, non-psychopathic like group scored significantly higher on internalizing problem behavior compared to the normal group, while the psychopathy-like and the impulsive, non-psychopathic-like group both scored higher on externalizing problem behavior compared to the normal group. Based on a self-report delinquency measure, it appeared that the psychopathy-like group had the highest delinquency rates, except for vandalism. Both the impulsive and psychopathy-like group had the highest scores on the use of soft drugs.

Personality, delinquency, and criminal recidivism.

This study explores the relationship between PEN profiles, delinquency, and recidivism in young offenders. According to Eysenck, personality is based on three basic Dimensions: Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism (PEN-model). Eysenck states that delinquents score high on all three dimensions. A group of young male offenders in a juvenile detention center in The Netherlands were studied to test Eysenck's hypothesis, which was partially confirmed. From a cluster analysis it appear that only a small group of offenders had high scores on all three PEN dimensions. Finally, it was concluded that the PEN profiles were not able to differentiate between recidivists and nonrecidivists.