Peer group interventions, widely used in schools and institutional settings, attempt to create a prosocial group climate, group controls on antisocial behavior, and supports for conventional attitudes and behaviors. Guided Group Interaction (GGI) and Positive Peer Culture (PPC) are two programs within this intervention approach designed to restructure peer interactions with the intent of increasing conformity to prosocial norms.
Overall, the empirical evaluations of these programs are inconsistent; some evaluations yield no effect, others yield beneficial effects, and still others yield adverse effects. For instance, in the Provo experiment (Empey & Erikson, 1974) in one set of comparison conditions GGI treatment youth (who otherwise would have been incarcerated) were compared to incarcerated youth and found to have significantly fewer arrests after treatment. Conversely, an evaluation of a derivative of GGI, the Peer Culture Development (PCD) program, yielded an adverse effect including more drug use and more serious delinquency (Gottfredson, 1987). There are still other evaluations of peer group-based interventions that yield no significant effect.There is some evidence that these types of programs help maintain or restore institutional order. For instance, some evaluation reports of schools in which these programs operated indicate that schools became safer over time, school-wide reports of negative peer influence went down, and school-wide belief in conventional rules went up. Therefore, these programs may have valuable environmental effects.
Overall, however, the adverse effect of some peer-based interventions is a serious warning sign for this type of intervention. When implemented, these interventions should be applied only in an experimental context because their beneficial nature and efficacy has not been consistently demonstrated.
CAFETY NOTE: Given the wide variation of what PPC looks like in practice, rather than in theory, CAFETY questions the efficacy of this practice, particularly in unreguated facilities. We have heard a number of complaints coming from youth at facilites using PPC that this practice amounts to little more than an extenstion of authoritariansim on the higher up (more obedient) youth by adults through a system of rigid system of rewards and punishment- rather than a promoting of any type of positivity, growth or community, as the name implies.
References:
Dishion, T.J., & Andrews, D.W. (1995). Preventing Escalation in Problem Behaviors with High-Risk Young Adolescents: Immediate and 1 Year Outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(4), 538-548.
Empey, L.T., & Erikson, M.L. (1974). The Provo Experiment: Evaluating Community Control of Delinquency. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Gibbs, J.C., Potter, G.B., Barriga, A.Q., & Liau, A.K. (1996). Developing the Helping Skills and Prosocial Motivation of Aggressive Adolescents in Peer Group Programs. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1(3), 283-305.
Gottfredson D.C. (1987). Peer Group Interventions to Reduce the Risk of Delinquent Behavior: A Selective Review and a New Evaluation. Criminology, 25(3), 671-714.
Knight, D. (1970). The Marshall Program Assessment of a Short-Term Institutionalized Treatment Program. Part II: Amenability to Confrontive Peer Group Treatment. (Report No. 59). Sacramento, CA: California Youth Authority.
Leeman, L.W., Gibbs, J.C., & Fuller, D. (1993). Evaluation of a Multi-Component Group Treatment Program for Juvenile Delinquents. Aggressive Behavior, 19, 281-292.
Pilnick, S., Allen R.F., Dubin, H.N., Youtz, A.C., Treat, R.V., White, J., Rose, F.O., & Habas, S. (1967). From Delinquency to Freedom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. 016-244). Newark, NJ: Newark State College, Laboratory for Applied Behavioral Sciences.
Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1997). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
Stephenson, R.M., & Scarpetti, F.R. (1969). Essexfields: A Non-Residential Experiment in Group Centered Rehabilitation of Delinquents. American Journal of Corrections, 13, 12-18.
Tolan, P., & Guerra, N. (1994). What Works in Reducing Adolescent Violence: An Empirical Review of the Field. (CSPV-001). Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
