VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERSCOGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL TREATMENT FOR
YOUNG OFFENDERS
Alan W. Leschied, Ph.D. C. Psych.*
I. RATIONALE FOR APPLYINGCOGNITIVE BEHAVIOURALINTERVENTIONS WITH YOUNG
OFFENDERS
M ore than any other intervention,
Cognitive Behavioural Treatment has
garnered the greatest amount ofattention in relation to eff ective
correctional treatm ent. In North
America, CBT has become the single mostidentifiable treatment component in bothyouth and adult correctional
intervention. This chapter situates CBT
w ithin the larger sphere of effective
correctional practice, emphasizing therole of assessment, case formulation andplanning as well as its relation to othersystemic interventions. Specific aspects ofsocial learning theory as they relate to
CBT are presented along with specificexamples of CBT interventions.
A. General Orientation to CBT
Cognitive behavioural treatment (CBT)
is a phrase describing interventions thatconnect responses of a n individual’s
behaviour to the process and content of
their thinking. CBT as a generalapproach to describing psychologicalintervention became popular during theearly part of the 1970’s. With leading
researchers
suchasDonaldMeichenbaum and Michael Mahoney,p r o gr e s s in e f f e c ti ve p s yc h o l o gi c a lintervention capitalized on developmentsfrombehaviouralpsychology,
psychodynamically-oriented treatment* Professor, Faculty of Education, University ofWestern Ontario, London Ontario, CANADA

and cognitive science. The results of thisconfluence of understanding have led to,what has been called, the “fourth pillar”
of under standing in psy chologic altreatment—behavioural, person-centred
and psychodynamic, being the other threeorientations.
With respect to intervention, CBT has
been used in many applications,e xt en d in g f r o m p s yc ho s o m a t ic a lly oriented illnesses—hypertension - toemotionally based concerns - anxiety anddepression - to interpersonal development- assertiveness training. Many outcome
studies have reported the success of CBTcompared with competing interventionsof bo th a p sycho lo gica l a nd m edica lnature. While m ost of the a cad em ic
journals in clinical psychology publish
routinely on the benefits of CBT,
Cognitive Therapies is a journal dedicatede x p r e s s l y t o r e p o r ti n g p r o g r e s s indeveloping effective cognitively based
interventions.
B. Relevance to Child and Youth
Populations
CBT has shown itself to be effective
through interventions targeting youth. In
contrast to the general CBT literature,
CBT interventions with young people
need to be developmentally appropriate
given the context of the stage at whichchildren are able to show flexibility inconcept formation and ability togeneralize from one set of circumstances
to another. The balance of this chapter
will focus on interventions with young
offendersthat
co ntributetounderstanding the role that CBT plays in

43

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 59
effective correctional treatment. It will
include a review of; the major predictorsof risk, general assessment with youthful
offenders, measurement issues in thea ss e s sm e n t o f re le v a n t co gn it io ns ,ge ner al trea tm ent issue s re garding
effective correctional intervention withyouth, principles of CBT w ith young
offenders and examples of specific CBT
programmes for young offenders
1. The Major Predictors of Risk.
Andrews, Leschied and Hoge (1992)
provided an extensive summary of thecross-sectional and longitudinal
literature related to anti-social outcomesin youth. In their review, the principle

factors that accounted for prediction
included; early behavioral history, peer
associates, early a nd current family
conditions, interpersonal relationships,
personal attitudes/values/beliefs andschool-based risk factors. The group off a c t o rs su m m a r iz e d in th a t re vie w
contributed to the body of w ork that
Andrews and Bonta (1998) later referred
to as the Psychology of Criminal Conduct;a generalized term for criminogenic riskf a c to rs th a t r e fl e ct a p syc h o- s o ci a lunderstanding of the nature of criminal
conduct in general as well as pertaining
to youth in particular. The complete list
and descriptors are found in Table 1.

Table 1
Summary of Major Risk Factors for Adolescents(excerpted from Andrews, Leschied and Hoge, 1992)
FactorDescriptors

Behaviour

early generalized misconduct, aggression, a tasteof early behavioral history or risk, problem-solving
ability, egocentric.

Peer Associates

association with anti-social others, isolation frompro-social others.

Interpersonal Relationships

indifference to the opinions of others, weak affective ties.

Family Conditions

low levels of family affection/cohesiveness, low levels of supervision, inconsistent discipline

School-based risk factors

below average effort,

Attitudes, Values andBeliefs

high tolerance for deviance, rejection of the validity of the law, applies rationalizations for law violations, thinking style and content are anti-social.

Assessment of general criminogenic
risk is an important and critical first stepin understanding the nature and context
of individual youthful offenders. While
several measures of general risk havebeen developed, the Risk/Need Inventory(Hoge, Andrews and Leschied, 1995) andthe Youth Level of Service Inventory(Hoge and Andrews, 1994) are
instruments enjoying the widest use in
44

Canada. Beyond the use of a generalm e a s u re o f r i s k , p r a c t i ti o n e r s a n dadministrators may want to know moredetail about specific issues regarding
offenders and their offences—including
sp ecific a ttitudes—in order to m ake
clinical/management decisions.
Knowledge of the general literature ofrisk is critical in the development of

118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
broad-based strategies to assess
criminogenic potential in adolescents.
Following from the risk principle of caseclassification (See Andrews, Bonta &Hoge, 1990 for a more complete review of
the risk-based concept of classification),knowledge and measurement of risk can
assist in case planning and selection of
appropria te targets for service to b eeffective. Hoge and Andrews (1998) makethe po int that f o r ass essm e nt to beeffective for case planning with youngo f f e nd e rs , th e a ss e ss o r m u st m a k e
m e a n i n gf u l a ss um p t i o n s a b o u t t h egeneral level of risk to guide the intensityof intervention, and specific statements ofareas of risk to provide relevance in caseplanning and targeting for appropriate
treatment to take place. Knowledge withrespect to the major predictors of youth atrisk have led to the means by w hichassessment strategies can reflect thedegree and nature of risk that a
particular youth may be presenting.
C. Measures of General Risk
1. The Risk/Need Inventory
While several general measures of risk
with young offenders exist, in order tomeet the requirements of accuracy andfunctionality, Andrews et. al. developedth e R isk /N e e d I nve n to ry f o r u se in
Ontario to classify young offenders age
12-15 years. This assess ment an dclassification system includes a summaryof items based on the major risk factors.
Each item is weighted and scored using a
0 , 1 system b ased on file review s orinterviews with the youth or key
informant(s). Totals are then taken tor e f l e c t a n o v e r - a l l r is k s c o r e w i t hsummaries also provided for each risk
category. Informed individuals can override the total score and categorization incertain cases. Planning with respect tothe extent of supervision and specific caseplanning decisions related to targets forin te r v e n tio n c a n b e d e te rm in e d byinformation in each category. The R/NInventory has been evaluated in several
studies re la ted to pred iction ( Hoge,
Andrews & Leschied, 1996; Simourd,
Hoge, Andrews & Leschied, 1994).
2. The Youth Level of Service Inventory.
An analogous system of classification,referred to as the The Youth Level ofService Inventory is also available thatprovides summaries and classifications
for individual offenders. The YLSI is usedwith older adolescents age 17-18.
D. Some Promising Assessment
Measures for Specific Purposes
There are a variety of measures in usethat are relevant to the question(s) beinga s k e d o f t h e a s s e s s o r . P e r s o n a l i ty
assessm ent co ntinue s to be actively
pursued in relating adjustment patterns
to an individual youth’s programme need.
The B asic Personality Inventory(Jackson, 1989; Austin, Jaffe, Leschied,S m i le y a n d S a s , 1 9 8 8 ) p r o v id e s a n
assessment of youth related to factors ofdepression, psychiatric stability,interpersonal maturity and socialization.
T he M il lo n A d o le s ce n t P e rs o n a l ity
Inventory is another m easure inwidespread use. Similar to the BPI, the
MAPI provides useful information abouta w id e ra nge o f co nce rns re la te d toemotional, cognitive and behaviouraladju stm en t. Simi larly, the Ch ild/
Adolescent Behavior Checklists
developed by Thomas Achenbach and hiscolleagues are useful since theirassessment contents relate scales thatare m eaningful to overall youth
adjustment. The CBCL has forms thatcan be completed by the youth, theirparents as well as teacher rating forms.
Lastly, assessment of psychopathy withyoung offenders, while not attracting thesame degree of interest that is currently
displayed in the adult literature, has still45

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 59
generated some interest (Hare, 1991;
S imourd et .a l., 19 94 ). The Hare
Psychopathy Checklist, is the standard
m ea s ure i n t hi s a rea . O f a dd itio nal
i nt e r e st is t he u s e o f m e a s u re s f o r
investigating anxiety — the State/Trait
Anxiety Inventory (STAXI); nature off am ily ad justm ent in the use of theF a m ily A dj ustm e nt M e a sure or th e
FACES; and offense-specific measures
such as in the use of assessment withadolescent male sex offenders, The Abeland Baker Sexual Interest Card Sort andCognitions Scale.
Lastly, the choice to be made of theappropriateness of an assessment battery
w ill be dictated by the nature of thedecisions to be made. There are many
points along the continuum of juvenile
justice processing that may/will require
input relevant to the needs of both theyouth and of the justice system. These
decisions may include the decision to finda youth: not fit to stand trial, to query the
youth’s understanding of the nature of
the proceedings or to consider a youth fortransfer to ordinary court.
E. Specific Measurement Issues in
the Assessment of Cognitions
General measure s of risk andpersonality will be helpful in the overallcase planning and formulation of youth
Howeve r in leading to sp ecificprogramme formulations for cognitive
intervention, there is further necessity to
specify the style and content of thinking
that a particular youth may present. Thef o l lo w ing tw o e xa m p le s o f a tti tu d einventories are commonly used to assess
thinking styles and content.
F. Criminal Sentiments Scale
Assessors will want to address generalissues of thinking style and content thatis consistent with a pro or antisocial
orientation. The d evelopment of the46

Criminal Sentiments Scale (Simourd,1997) is a good example of such ameasure that relates attitudes to issues
relevant to youth who may be involved
with the criminal justice system.
G. Beliefs and Attitude Scale
The beliefs and attitudes scale wasdeveloped by Butler and Leschied. Whiles im il a r to th e C S S , t h e B A S h a s avocabulary geared to youth withquestions that are pertinent to issues
that relate to the major attitude
predicators of risk including tolerance
toward law violation, attitudes towardauthority and help seeking behaviour.
II. GENERAL TREATMENT ISSUESREGARDING EFFECTIVE
CORRECTIONAL INTERVENTION
WITH YOUNG OFFENDERS
Decisions with respect to CBT will bemade in the general context ofappropriate correctional interventions
that may include a comm unity or
residential context, family or individualintervention. The following se ctions
summarize the general context in which
CBT may be offered.
A. Overview of the Treatment
Literature
Similar to the assessment literature,
increasing knowledge with respect toyoung offender management andtreatment has also been witnessed overthe past decade. Progress in this area has
capitalized not only on the specific effectsof young offender programmes, but fromthe general knowledge base regardingchild and adolescent intervention. Kazdin
and Weisz (1998) recently noted in theirre view of child and ado lescentinterventions, that expressions such as
knowle dge-based , data-driv en an dempirically- supported now routinely
appear in selections made regarding

118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
trea tm ent options for sp ecific clie nt
g r o up s. K no w le d ge w it h r e s p e c t t o
successful progra mm es for co nductdisordered and anti-social youth has
progressed not only in the description of
successful components of intervention (i.e.
cognitive-behavioral) but also in themethod of service delivery (custody versus
community). Meta-analysis is the term
used to report quantitative summaries ofthe literature. It represents a significant
advancement over earlier qualitative
reviews (Wells,1 991 ). M eta-a na lysis
s ta tis ti ca lly c o m p ar e s th e ty p e s o ftreatments that are offered, to whom they
are directed and with what outcomes. The
meaningfulness of meta-analysis is only
limited by the number and quality of thestudies that are included in the review.
F o r t un a te l y, a d e q ua te q u a l it y a n dquantity of studies now exist to makeinterpretations of the tre atm ent
literature in youth justice withconfidence, although Losel (1997) has
offered up some reservations with respect
to limiting the generalizeability of suchfindings. The limitations along with the
major outcomes will be summarized in
the following section.
1. Major Findings from the Metaanalysis
M ark Li psey’s reporti ng of tw oseparate analyses (Lipsey, 1992; Lipsey &Wilson, 1997) suggested that the overall
e f f e c t s i z e l in k i n g t r e a t m e n t w i t h
reductions in re-offending lie between 2040 per cent as contrasted with notreatment comparison groups, and only
slightly less when compared to groups
receiving some type of ‘usual service’. As
stated in the Andrews, Leschied and
Hoge (1992) review, “Thanks to the metaanalyses, the evidence favouring
treatment services is now undeniable.”(p.148) Stronger effect sizes were found inth e L ip se y s tud ie s in th e f o llo w ing
va ria b les; higher risk ca ses, longe r

duration of treatment and behavioraloriented multimodal treatment with astronger emphasis on ‘sociological’ thanpsych ologica l o rientation of se rvice
delivery.
E f f e c t s i z e s a c c o u n ti n g f o r t o t a lprogramm e outcome across bothins titu tio n a l an d no n- i nst itu tio na lprogrammes suggested that the threefactors comprising the highest ranking
wer e; inter pe rson al skills training,
individual counselling and behavioral
programmes. The second grouping oflesser, yet significant contribution were
the two programme factors consisting ofmultimodal services and restitution foryouths on probation.
2. Institutional Versus NonInstitutional Placement for
Treatment
Lipsey and Wilson’s (1997) subsequentr e v ie w d is t in g u is h e d p l a c e m e n t o ftreatment, residential versus community,
in diff ere ntiating characteristics ofeffective programmes. This is a criticaldifferentiation since much of the debate
regarding effective youth justice policies
centres on the importance ofincarceration as a relevant factor incommunity safety. Lipsey and Wilson
noted in their analysis that different
co nt rib utio n s a r e m a d e f o r va rio u scomponents of service as a function of theplacement for treatment. Table 2
summarizes factors relevant for effective
programmes in institutional and noninstitutional placements.

47

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 59
Table 2
Programme Factors Contributing to
Effectiveness for Institutionalized
and Non-Institutionalized Young
OffendersInstitutional-Based Components
Interpersonal Skills
Teaching Family Model
Multiple Services
Behavioural Programmes
Individual/Group Programmes
Non-Institutional-BasedComponents
Interpersonal Skills
Individual/Group Programmes
Multiple Services
Restitution/Probation
Employment/Academic Programmes
III. GENERAL TREATMENT
APPROACHESTh e m e ta- a na lyse s hav e d ir ec te dattention to the importance ofinterventions that look at the multidetermined nature of youthful chronic
offending. Two general principles apply.
T h e f i r s t is t h a t m u c h o f y o u t h f u loffending is accounted for by the context
in which the youth experiences systems ofinfluence, the primary ones being family,
p eers and schoo l ( Hengge ler, 1 9 89 ).
Systemically-based interventions havetherefore taken on new meaning as theprediction literatu re contin ues toreinforce the importance of seeing youths
in context and treating them in theirn a t u r a l e n v ir o nm e n t s . T h e s e c o n dprinciple, again taken from the metaanalysis on prediction, reinforces theimportance of cognitions as appropriate
ta rge ts fo r interve ntion. Co gnitive behaviourally oriented interventions
h a v e s ho w n t h e m se l ve s to b e m o r e
eff ective
thantraditional
psychotherapeuticormedical48

in t e r v e n t i o n s ( G e n d r e a u, 1 9 9 8 ) . A
number of cognitive-behaviouralinterventions sensitive to client need andthe nature o f of f ending h av e be e ndeve loped. These two themes ofintervention will be discussed along withpromising approaches with youths of
pa r ticula r co nce rn, th ose b e ing se x
offender, substance abusing and violent
youths.
A. Systemically-oriented
Interventions
Both of the meta-analyses reported byAndrews (1998) and Lipsey and Wilson,(1997) suggested that effect sizes linked
to more effective outcomes werecharacteristic of programmes delivered in
the community as contrasted to thosedelivered in residence. Heneggeler (1989)
suggests in part this is accounted for by
the type and qua lity of intera ctions
adolescents experience with the social
influences that surround them. To beeffective, programmes need to be in aposition to influence those social factorsthat may in turn be interacting with aparticular youth’s competencies (e.g.
p r o b l e m - s o l vi ng s k il ls , b e li e f s a n d
attitudes). Hence, particular attention is
now being paid to interventions that
influence the systems that are consistent
with the major predictors of delinquency
risk, namely, families, peers and schools.
This section will focus on multi-systemic
therapy, an intervention withconsiderable empirical support in
reducing reoffending rates with high risk
youth.
Scott Henggeler and his colleagues at
the Family Services Research Centre at
the Medical University of South Carolina
can be credited with developing what isbeing consistently identified as one of themore promising approaches to effective
service with high risk youth. Multisystemic Therapy (MST) refers to the118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
consistent application of principles thatr ef le ct w h a t is k no w n in t he y ou ng
offender literature. While some reviewers
may suggest that MST does not represent‘anything new under the sun’, it is in themethod of service delivery that MST has
shown itself to be effective with high risk
youth. Leschied and Cuningham (1999)
summarize MST as “... a home-based,family-based,
present-oriented
therapeutic intervention using family
strengths to attenuate risk factors andimprove family relations, peer relations
and school influence”. Consistent withthe risk principle of case classification,
MST attempts to influence the major
criminogenic risk factors through theapplication of appropriate strategies in a
multi-determined, multi-modal fashion.

Behavior in Children and Adolescents by
Henggeler and his colleagues (1998).
While MST reflects interventions thathave shown themselves to be effective, it
is in the method of service delivery withina specified set of principles that MST
distinguishes itself. The nine principles
against which MST adherence ismeasured consist of the following:•••
In addition to reflecting the knowledgebase in the offender literature, MST has
been evaluated with a series ofrandomiz ed clinical tria ls tha t haveincluded appropriate follow-up periods.
Cost-savings and service utilization rates
have also served as part of the evaluation
process. In one randomized evaluation
study, Borduin, Mann, Cone, Henggeler,
F u c c i , B l a s k e a n d W i ll ia m s ( 1 9 9 5 )reported after a four year follow-up, MST
completers reflected a 22% recidivism
rate, compared to the MST nonc om p l et e rs w h o de m o nst ra t e d 4 7 % ,completers from individual counselling
reported a 71% and treatment refusers
re porte d an 88% r eo ffending r ate .
Recently the State of Washington’s (1998)
review of y ou n g offen der s ervi ces
suggested that MST was not only more
effective in reducing reoffending rates,
but also distinguished itself in being most
cost effective when compared to otherinterventions which included boot camps
and generalized prevention strategies. An
overall review of the MST approach canb e f o u nd in th e r e c e nt ly p u bl is he d
M ul tisystemic Therapy of A ntiso cia l

•
•

•
•
•

•

The primary purpose of assessment is
to understand the “fit” between theidentified problems and their broader
context.
Therapeutic
contacts
shouldemphasize the positive and should
use systemic strengths as levers forchange.
Interventions should be designed topromote responsible behaviours anddecrease irresponsible behaviour
among family members.
Interventions should be presentfocused and action-oriented, targeting
specific and well-defined problems.
Interventions should target sequencesof b eha viou rs w ithin o r b etw e enmultiple systems that maintain theidentified problems.
Interventions
shouldbedevelopmentally appropriate and fit
the developmental needs of the youth.
Interventions should be designed tore quire da ily or w ee kly ef fort byfamily members.
Intervention efficacy is evaluatedcontinuously
frommultipleperspectives with providers assuming
accountability for overcoming barriers
to successful outcomes.
Interventions should be designed topromote treatment generalizations
and long-term maintenance oftherapeutic change by empowering
care givers to address familym em b er s’ ne e d s acr o ss m ul tip lesystemic contexts.

49

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 59
B. Cognitive-BehaviouralInterventions
C o gn itiv e- b eh a v io ur a l tr ea tm e nt
(CBT) with young offenders has received
c onsid erable attention . T his ca n be
attributed to at least three influences:•••

the general literature regarding
effective interventions with children
and adolescents has been supportiveof CBT;risk factors regarding attitudes,
beliefs and values have sho wn
themselves to be particularly strongly
related to anti-social behaviour, andrecent meta-analyses have shown
CBT to be the treatment of choice
related to ef fectiveness over a nd
above the traditional influences ofpsychodynam ic, medical andbehavioural interventions.

C B T r e f e rs to in te r v e nt io n s th atconnect thoughts to behaviour. Hollin(19 90) describes it this way; “... The
cognitive-behavioural
position
acknowledges the impo rtance ofenvironmental influences while seeking
to incorporate the role of cognitions inunderstanding behaviour. Cognitions aregive n a m ed ia t io n rol e b e t w ee n t heoutside world an d overt behavior;cognitions are seen as determining whatenvironmental influences are attended to,
how they are perceived, and whether theymight affect future behavior”.
Interest in CBT has been based not
o n ly o n d i sa p p o i nt in g r e su lts f r o m
medically-based interventions (lack ofem pirical supp ort generally) andbehaviourally-based interventions (lackof support for sustainable gains andgeneralization) but as well on the general
theoretical assumptions about the socialp s yc ho l og i ca l u nd e rsta n d ing o f th e
etiological research on the development ofdelinquency. This body of theoretical

50

work suggests that the interaction of theindividual with systems that can
influe nce a ttitude s a nd su b seq ue nt
behaviour may improve the explanatory
value of the studies on prediction andassessment. Hence, the importance ofunderstanding how children/adolescents
mediate their experience may not only
assist in explaining the behaviour, but
may also contribute meaningfully in how
to alter behavioura l outcom es. Suchoutcomes can encourage youths to shift
their thinking away from attitudes that
support antisocial behaviour and towards
the development of thinking styles andco ntent that promote pro-social
behaviour. Finch, Nelson and Ott (1993)
su gg e s t th a t th e ge n e r a l e x p a n d e dinfluence of CBT in the child/adolescent
literature can be attributed to factors
such as:••••Increasing evidence that thoughtprocesses influence behaviour.
Traditional
stimulus-response
explanations cannot account for all
outcomesThought processes can account for
behavioural change
Operant
approaches
have
notprovided convincing evidence that S-R
theories
canaccountforgeneralization and maintenance.

Andrews et.al. discuss the important
aspect of clinical relevance in decision making when im portant casemanagement decisions arise. Clinically
relevant decisions can be considered as
those that link the decision to correctlyprioritize or target certain behaviours/
systems for change with the particularrisk profile of the individual. Given theimportance placed on attitudes from theprediction literature with young
offenders, targeting cognitions makes
considerable sense as an important focus
for service providers.

118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Not only has CBT made inroads in the
promotion of effective intervention withc hildr en /ad ole sce nts ge ne ra lly, but
numerous programmes now exist to train
workers in the youth corrections field in
both residential and community contexts.
Exam ples include: the Choices
P ro gra m m e d eve lo pe d by E lizabe th
Fabiano and Robert Ross that targets
general offending patterns: Aggression
R epla ce ment Tra ining develop ed b y
A rno ld Go ldstein (G o ld stein, Glick ,Reiner, Zimmerman and Coultry, 1987)
that combines psychoeducational
intervention, skill streaming and moral
education to reduce aggression in highrisk youth; and sex offender treatment
controlling inappropriate arousal throughcognitive restructuring, a programmesummarized in the work of Ryan and
La ne (1 99 1 ). C BT int ervent i ons a retypically delivered as part of an overall
strategy that frequently also includes
systems involvement through family
therapy and can be delivered either while
a you th is in the community or in
residential care.
1. Specific Concepts in CBT1
The specific aspects of CBT include aknowledge of various concepts generally
attributed to social learning theory (SLT).
The following section provides definitionsof the most relevant concepts of SLT that
relate to CBT. Following this outline,
specific examples of CBT in relation toyoung offender intervention are offered.

(i)

Fundamentals of Social Learning
TheorySocial learning theory, a theoreticalunderstanding of behaviour
popularize d thro ugh re sea rch byAlbert Bandura in the late 1950’s andearly 1960’s is a way to describe themeans by which individuals developb eh a vio ur a s a f u nc t i o n of t he irinteraction with the social influencesthat they encounter. As a result,attitud es a re consid ered lea rned
behaviours much the same way as
behaviours are considered the productof t he r e p e a te d e xp er ie n ce w ith
reinforces. In this context SLT
considers attitudes to be:•

relatively consistent ways of reacting
to a variety of contexts
the product of experience withsocializing agents (e.g. parents, peers)•(ii) Inter-relatedness of Thoughts,
Feelings And Behaviour
Not only are cognitions andbehaviours assumed to be related orli nk ed i n a m ea ni ngf ul w a y, bu t
feelings can also mediate thebidirectional effect of thoughts andbehaviour. This assumption includes:
•
•
•

1

This section is based largely on the work
completed by the author and Dr. Linda Baker ofth e C e nt r e f o r R e s e ar c h fo r Ch i l dr e n a nd
Families in the Justice System of the Family
Court Clinic. The financial support of the Ontario
Ministry of Community and Social Services isonce again gratefully acknowledged.

An increased awareness of the link
between thoughts, cognitions andbehaviour
Rewards for linking attitudes withbehaviours that are pro-social
The increasing ability to linkthoughts/attitudes and behaviour

Specific examples of applying CBTprinciples in programme development
include, social skills training, reduced
aggression and programmes targeting
sexually assaultive adolescents.
Programmes have also been found to beeffective both within the community as
well as in residential settings.

51

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 59
REFERENCES
Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J. (1998) The
psychology of criminal conduct. Second
Edition. Andersen Publishing,
Cincinnati, OH.
Andrews, D.A., Bonta, J. & Hoge, R.D.
( 1 9 9 0 ) . C la s si f i c a ti o n f o r e f f e c ti v erehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology,
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19-52.
Andrews, D.A., Leschied, A.W. & Hoge,
R.D. (1992). Rev iew of th e profile,classification and treatment literature
with young o ffenders: A soci alp sycholo gi cal app roach. M inistry o fCommunity and Social Services. Toronto,
ON.
Austin, G.A., Jaffe, P.G., Leschied, A.W.,
S m i l e y, C . & S a s , L . ( 1 9 8 6 ). F a cto r
structure and construct validity of the
Basic Personality Inventory with young
offenders. Canadian Jo urnal of
Behavioural Science, 18, 238-247.
Andrews, D.A. Effective community-based
treatment for offenders. Beyond prisonsconference. (1998). Proceedings. Queen’s
University and Correctional Services
Canada, Kingston, Ontario.
Borduin, C.M., Mann, B.J., Cone, L.T.,
Henggeler, S.W., Fucci, B.R., Blaske,
D.M. and William s, R.A. (1995).
M u ltis ystem ic tre a tme nt of ser io us
juvenile offenders: Long term preventionof criminality and violence. Journal of
C onsulting and C linical Psychology,
1995, 623, 569-578.
Finch, A.J., Nelson, W.M. & Ott, E.S.
( e d s. ) ( 1 9 9 3 ) . C o gn i t i v e - b e h a v i o r a l
procedures with children and adolescents:
A p ractica l guide. A llyn and Ba con.
Boston, MA.

52

Gendreau, P. (1998). Rational policies forreforming offenders. Presentation to theInternational Community Corrections
Association, Arlington, VA.
Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy
Checklist. MultiHealth Systems, Toronto,
ON.
Henggeler, S.W. (1989). Delinquency inadolescence. Sage Press, Newbury Park,CA.
Heng g e le r, S .W ., S cho enw a ld , S .K .,Bourduin, C.M ., Row la nd, M.D . andCunningham, P.B.(1998). Multisystemict re a tm en t o f a n ti s o ci a l b e h a vi o r i nchildren and adolescents. The Guildford
Press, New York, NY.
Hoge, R.D. & A nd re ws, D.A. (1 99 6).
Assessing the youthful offender: Issues
and technique. Plenum Press: New York,NY.
Hoge, R.D., Andrews, D.A. & Leschied,
A.W. (1995). An investigation of factors
associated with probation and custody
dispositions in a sample of juveniles.
Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 24,
279-286.
Hoge, R.D. & Andrews, D.A. (1994). The
Youth Level of Service Inventory. Carleton
University, Ottawa, ON.
Hoge, R.D., Andrews, D.A. & Leschied,
A.W. (1995). The Risk/Need Inventory.
The Ministry of Community and Social
Services, Toronto, ON.
Hollin, C.R. (1990). Cognitive-behavioral
in ter ven ti on s w it h y o ung of f end ers.
Pergamon Press.Oxford, UK.
Jackson, D. (1989). The Basic Personality
Inventory Manual. London, ON. Research
Psychologist Press.

118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
K a z d i n, A . E . & W e i sz , J .R . ( 1 9 9 8 ) .
Identifying and developing empiricallysupp orted child and adolescenttreatments. Journal of Consulting andClinical Psychology, 66,1, 19-36

Simourd, D., Hoge, R.D., Andrews, D.A.
& Leschied, A.W. (1994). An empiricallybased typology of youthful offenders.
Canadian Journal of Criminology, 36,
447-461.

Leschied, A.W. and Cunningham, A.
(1998a). Clinical trials of multisystemic
therapy with high risk phase I young
offenders, 1997 to 2001, Year end report
1997-1998. The Family Court Clinic,
London, Ontario.

Simourd, D., The criminal sentiments
scale-modified and pride in delinquency
sca le: P syc ho m e tri c p ro p e rti es a n d
construct validity of two measures ofcriminal attitudes. Criminal Justice andBehavior, 24, 52-70.

Leschied, A.W. and Cunningham, A.
(1999). Clinical trials of multi-systemic
therapy in Ontario, 1997-2001:
Evaluation update. Family Court Clinic,
London, Ontario.

Washington State Social Policy Centre. A
cost-effectiveness review of major young
offender interventions. Seattle WA.

Lipsey, M.W. ( 199 2). Juvenile
delinquency treatment: A meta-analytic
inquiry into the variability of effects. In
T.D. Cook, H. Coopwer, D.S. Corday,
Hartman, L.V.

Wells, L.E. (1991). The utility of metaanalysis in criminal justice research.
Pa p e r pr es en ted a t th e A ca d e my o f
Crim inal Justice Sciences Meetings,
Nashville, TN.

He dges, R.J . L ight, T. A. Louis & F.
M osteller (eds.) Meta-analysis: A
casebook. Russell Sage Foundation, New
York, NY.
L ips ey, M. & Wilson, D.B. (1997).
Effective intervention for serious juvenile
offenders: A synthesis of research. Russell
Sage Foundation. New York, NY.
Losel, F. (1997). The efficacy ofcorrectional treatment: A review andsynthesis of meta-analytic evaluations. In
J. McGuire (ed.) What works: Reducing
reoffending guidelines from research andpractice. John Wiley and Sons.
Chichester, UK.
Ryan, G.D. & Lane, S.L. (1991). Juvenile
sexual offending: Causes, consequences,and correcti on. Lex in g ton Books ,Lexington, MA.

53