THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS OF A COGNITIVE-BEHAVIOURAL TREATMENT WITH JUVENILE OFFENDERS

AbstractSeveral treatment evaluations have highlighted the effectiveness of cognitivebehavioural programmes with both youth and adult offenders. This paper describes the application and assessment of a cognitivebehavioural treatment (adapted to Spanish from Ross and Fabiano's Reasoning & Rehabilitation Programme) with juvenile offenders serving community orders in an educational measure called in Spanish 'libertad vigilada' (similar to parole). The intervention comprised six different therapeutic components: self-control, cognitive restructuring, problem solving, social skills/assertiveness, values/empathy, and relapse prevention. Treatment effectiveness was tested using a quasi-experimental design involving two groups and pre/post evaluation. The results show that the programme was effective (with low to moderate effect sizes) in improving participants' social skills and self-esteem, as well as in reducing their aggressiveness. However, the intervention had no positive influence on empathy, cognitive distortions or impulsiveness. These results are in line with those of many other correctional studies, in which the treatment applied had a significant but partial effect on participants.Keywords: juvenile offenders; correctional treatment; cognitive-behavioural programmes; Reasoning & Rehabilitation; effectiveness assessment.ResumenDiferentes estudios han puesto de manifiesto la eficacia de los programas cognitivo-conductuales aplicados como tratamiento en delincuentes adultos y jovenes. Este trabajo describe la aplicacion y evaluacion de un tratamiento cognitivo-conductual (una adaptacion del programa "Razonamiento y Rehabilitacion" de Ross y Fabiano), aplicado a delincuentes juveniles que cumplen sus sanciones en condiciones de libertad vigilada y en contextos comunitarios. El programa de intervencion incluia seis componentes terapeuticos: autocontrol, reestructuracion cognitiva, resolucion de problemas, habilidades sociales / asertividad, valores/empatia y la prevencion de recaidas. La efectividad del tratamiento se evaluo mediante un diseno cuasiexperimental en dos grupos y se realizo una evaluacion pre / post-tratamiento. Los resultados muestran que el programa fue efectivo (con una magnitud del tamano del efecto entre baja y moderada) en la mejora de las habilidades sociales de los participantes y la autoestima, asi como en la reduccion de su agresividad. Sin embargo, la intervencion no tuvo influencia positiva en la empatia, las distorsiones cognitivas y la impulsividad. Estos resultados estan en linea con muchos otros estudios analogos, en los que el tratamiento aplicado tuvo un efecto significativo, aunque parcial, en los participantes.Palabras clave: delincuentes juveniles; tratamiento penitenciario; programas cognitivoconductuales, Razonamiento y Rehabilitacion, evaluacion de la eficacia.IntroductionMost current psychological treatments with youth and adult offenders are based on the social learning theory of delinquent behaviour, coupled with a cognitivebehavioural model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Hollin, 2006; McGuire, 2006; Moore, 2011; Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Smith, & Porter, 2003). Social learning theory asserts that antisocial behaviour is learned by means of the differential association with offenders, the imitation of them, the acquisition of anti-social definitions or beliefs, and the differential reinforcement of criminal values and acts (Akers, 2009; Yarbrough, Jones, Sullivan, Sellers, & Cochran, 2011). In relation to this theory, the cognitivebehavioural model of treatment usually involves a combined intervention that addresses the thinking, emotions and social skills of juvenile offenders. It has been shown to be the most effective approach in this field (Day, 2009; Echeburua, Fernandez-Montalvo, & Amor, 2006; Lipsey, 2009; Piquero, Jennings, & Farrington, 2009; Redondo, 2008; Ross & Fontao, 2010). Currently the most widely-accepted theory of offender rehabilitation is the riskneed- responsivity model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), which distinguishes between static and dynamic risk factors for crime. …