U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

OctOber 2008 

Girls 

Study Group 

Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency 

J. Robert Flores, Administrator 

The Girls Study Group—Charting the Way 

to Delinquency Prevention for Girls 

By Margaret A. Zahn, Stephanie R. Hawkins, Janet Chiancone, 

and Ariel Whitworth 

J

uvenile delinquency can become a In the 1990s, a surge of girls’ arrests 

pathway to adult offending. Delin- brought female juvenile crimes to 

quency experts search for ways to the country’s attention. Girls’ rates of 

counter delinquency before it starts, arrest for some crimes increased faster 

providing intervention for juveniles in than boys’ rates of arrest. By 2004, girls 

high-risk situations—such as those with accounted for 30 percent of all juvenile 

severe economic disadvantages or living arrests, but delinquency experts did not 

in high-crime neighborhoods. know whether these trends reflected 

changes in girls’ behavior or changes 

However, the majority of juveniles in arrest patterns. The juvenile justice arrested are male, which means that a field was struggling to understand how n n n good deal of research on juvenile delin­ best to respond to the needs of the girls quents has been performed on a mostly entering the system. Access OJJDP male population that does not account 

for girls’ and boys’ differences. Despite To determine the reason behind these 

publications online at much research on the causes of boys’ increasing arrest rates, the Office of Juvedelinquency, few studies have examined nile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp which girls become delinquent or why. (OJJDP) convened the Girls Study Group 

Additionally, intervention and treat- (see “About the Girls Study Group”). 

n n n ment programs have been traditionally The group sponsored a series of studies 

designed with boys in mind, and little is to gain a better understanding of girls’ 

known about how well girls respond to involvement in delinquency and guide 

these interventions. the development, testing, and dissemination of strategies that would reduce 

Office of Justice Programs Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov 
Girls Study Group 

incidents of delinquency and violence 

among girls. 

The Girls Study Group (GSG) wanted 

to know— 

n	 Which girls become delinquent? 

n	 What factors protect girls from 

delinquency? 

n	 What factors put girls at risk for 

delinquency? 

n	 What pathways lead to girls’ 

delinquency? 

n	 What programs are most effective 

in preventing girls’ delinquency? 

n	 How should the criminal justice 

system respond to girls’ 

delinquency? 

The series of studies outlined in this 

Bulletin describe the ways in which 

the group worked to understand and 

respond to girls’ delinquency. Using 

a combination of literature reviews, 

dataset analysis, and program and 

instrument reviews, they conducted 

a series of studies (each outlined in 

detail in forthcoming OJJDP Bulletins). These studies should shed light 

on why girls become delinquent, and 

provide a research foundation for the 

juvenile justice community to consider what treatment and intervention programs are most effective for 

girls. These studies include: 

1.	 Violence by Teenage Girls: 

Trends and Context. This 

Bulletin describes recent 

trends in girls’ offending and 

examines the settings in which 

girls commit crimes. 

2.	 Causes and Correlates of Girls’ 

Delinquency. This Bulletin 

examines the personal, family, 

peer, school, and community 

factors that can lead to 


delinquency.
 

3.	 Resilient Girls—Factors that 

Protect Against Delinquency. 

This Bulletin examines whether 

four factors—a caring adult, 

school connectedness, school 

success, and religiosity—can 

protect girls from delinquency. 

4.	 Suitability of Assessment 

Instruments for Delinquent 

Girls. This Bulletin 

determines whether current 

risk-assessment and treatmentfocused instruments are 

appropriate for use with girls. 

It also provides guidance to 

practitioners on how to select 

instruments for use. 

5.	 Girls’ Delinquency Programs— 

An Evidence-Based Review. 

This Bulletin reviews girls’ 

delinquency programs and 

determines whether they 

effectively intervene in 

delinquency trajectories. 

6.	 Developmental Sequences of 

Girls’ Delinquent Behavior. 

This Bulletin investigates 

the different patterns of 

delinquent behaviors that 

girls become involved in, and 

provides insight into the life 

pathways that lead to girls’ 

delinquent behavior. 

This document will provide highlights of the findings that are outlined 

in detail in the Bulletins described 

above. Most are forthcoming and will 

be available through the Juvenile 

Justice Clearinghouse (http://www. 

fsu.edu/~crimdo/jjclearinghouse/ 

jjclearinghouse.html) and published 

on the OJJDP (http://ojjdp.ncjrs. 

org) and Girls Study Group (http:// 

girlsstudygroup.rti.org) Web sites. 

Dr. Margaret A. Zahn, Principal Investigator, 

Girls Study Group (2004–March 2008) 

Senior Research Scientist, RTI International; 

Professor, North Carolina State University 

Dr. Stephanie r. Hawkins, Principal 

Investigator, Girls Study Group (April 

2008–Present) 

Research Clinical Psychologist, RTI International 

Dr. robert Agnew, Professor, Department of 

Sociology, Emory University 

Dr. elizabeth cauffman, Assistant Professor, 

Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, 

University of California–Irvine 

Dr. Meda chesney-Lind, Professor, Women’s 

Studies Program, University of Hawaii–Manoa 

Dr. Gayle Dakof, Associate Research Professor, 

Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, 

University of Miami 

Dr. Del elliott, Director, Center for the Study and 

Prevention of Violence, University of Colorado 

Dr. barry Feld, Professor, School of Law, 

University of Minnesota 

Dr. Diana Fishbein, Director, Transdisciplinary 

Behavioral Science Program, RTI International 

Dr. Peggy Giordano, Professor of Sociology, 

Center for Family and Demographic Research, 

Bowling Green State University 

Dr. candace Kruttschnitt, Professor, 

Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota 

Dr. Jody Miller, Associate Professor, 

Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 

University of Missouri–St. Louis 

Dr. Merry Morash, Professor, School of 

Criminal Justice, Michigan State University 

Dr. Darrell Steffensmeier, Professor, Department of Sociology, Pennsylvania State University 

Ms. Giovanna taormina, Executive Director, 

Girls Circle Association 

Dr. Donna-Marie Winn, Senior Research 

Scientist, Center for Social Demography and 

Ethnography, Duke University 

Girls 

Study Group Members 

2 
Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency 

Violence by Teenage Girls: 

Trends and Context 

The upswing in girls’ violence in the 

late 20th century had many people in 

the juvenile justice community concerned. They wanted to know what 

factors influenced girls’ offending, and 

what kinds of programs and policies 

could reduce girls’ violence. 

To answer these questions, OJJDP 

convened the Girls Study Group. 

The Group’s initial research project 

examined rates of girls’ arrests, delinquency, and victimization. Researchers examined arrest data from the 

FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, delinquency surveys from the Monitoring 

the Future study, and victimization 

surveys from the Bureau of Justice 

Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey. 

This research resulted in the Trends 

and Context Bulletin, which provides 

answers to a number of questions: 

How have girls’ and boys’ arrest rates 

increased in the past decade? 

n	 Girls account for a smaller proportion of overall juvenile arrests than 

boys, but arrest patterns for both 

groups have diverged over the past 

decade. Between 1996 and 2005, 

overall arrests decreased for both 

groups. However, this decrease 

was greater for boys than girls. 

n	 Notably, between 1996 and 2005, 

girls’ arrests for simple assault 

increased 24 percent. 

Are girls actually committing more 

crimes? 

n	 Despite increasing arrest rates in 

the past decade, self-report data 

suggest that girls’ behavior has not 

changed. In fact, self-report data 

suggest girls’ and boys’ assault 

rates have dropped in recent years. 

What would explain the increasing 

arrest rates for girls? 

Arrest laws and changes in law 

enforcement policy appear to have 

had more of an impact on arrest rates 

than changes in girls’ behavior. Possible explanations for this include: 

n	 Changes in local law enforcement 

policies that lowered the threshold 

for reporting assaults or classifying 

assaults as aggravated. 

n	 Some status offenses involving a 

domestic dispute between a girl 

and her parent or sibling could 

now be classified as simple assault 

and could result in arrest. This sort 

of arrest is an unintended consequence of “mandatory arrest” laws 

in cases of domestic violence. 

n	 Schools’ zero-tolerance policies 

toward youth violence may have 

increased police referral for fights 

involving girls. 

To test some of the possible explanations outlined above, the Girls Study 

Group conducted a special analysis 

that looked at local mandatory and 

pro-arrest policies to determine if 

there were indications that these had 

an impact on the increasing number 

of girls’ arrests. Their findings indicate that mandatory and pro-arrest 

policies increased the likelihood of 

arrest for both girls and boys, but the 

effects appear stronger for girls. This 

may be explained by the fact that 

family conflict accounts for a larger 

proportion of girls’ offending than of 

boys’ offending. 1 

Causes and Correlates of 

Girls’ Delinquency 

Girls’ delinquency has become an 

increasing dilemma in recent years, 

in part because of higher arrest rates, 

and in part because little research to 

date has focused on female juvenile 

About the Girls Study Group 

In 2004, OJJDP convened the Girls Study Group, an interdisciplinary group of scholars and practitioners who would work together to develop a comprehensive research 

foundation for understanding and responding to girls’ involvement in delinquency. 

Through a competitive process, RTI International was selected to lead the Girls Study 

Group Project. 

The group includes experts from the fields of sociology, psychology, criminology, 

and gender studies, as well as legal practitioners and girls’ program development 

coordinators. 

The Girls Study Group research consists of— 

n Reviewing literature on girls’ delinquency. 

n Analyzing secondary datasets. 

n Assessing programs that target female delinquents. 

n Reviewing risk assessment and treatment-focused instruments for delinquent 

girls. 

For more information about the Girls Study Group, see http://girlsstudygroup.rti.org. 

3 
Girls Study Group
 

delinquents. By 2004, females made 

up 25 percent of all juvenile arrests 

for aggravated assault, and 33 percent 

of juvenile arrests for other assaults. 

So why do some girls become delinquent? A great deal of research has 

examined the factors involved in 

male delinquency, but the factors 

involved in female delinquency 

remained largely unknown. 

To understand the causes of female 

delinquency, the Girls Study Group 

reviewed more than 2,300 social science articles and book chapters that 

examine factors involved in delinquent behavior for girls ages 11 to 18. 

They also examined factors that protect girls from becoming delinquent. 

They found that while certain factors 

predict or prevent delinquency in 

both sexes, a number of factors influence girls’ behavior more strongly 

than boys’ behavior. 

The factors that equally increase the 

risk of delinquency for both sexes 

include— 

n	 The family’s dynamics (i.e., how 

parents supervise and monitor a 

child, family history of criminal 

behavior, child maltreatment). 

n	 A child’s involvement in school. 

n	 The neighborhood a child lives 

in (e.g., poverty level, crime rate, 

employment rate). 

n	 The level of availability of 

community-based programs. 

Some factors increase or decrease a 

girl’s risk of delinquency more than a 

boy’s, including— 

n	 Early puberty. Early puberty 

increases girls’ risk for delinquency, particularly if they come from 

disadvantaged neighborhoods 

and have dysfunctional families. 

This disparity between biological 

and social maturity can lead to 

increased conflict with parents or 

negative associations with older 

boys or men. 

n	 Sexual abuse or maltreatment. 

Compared to boys, girls experience more sexual victimization 

overall, including sexual assaults, 

rapes, and sexual harassment. 

However, all types of maltreatment 

(sexual, physical, and neglect) can 

increase the risk of delinquency 

for both sexes. 

n	 Depression and anxiety. Depression and anxiety disorders have 

been associated with delinquency. 

Girls receive these diagnoses more 

frequently than boys. 

n	 Romantic partners. When a 

youth’s boyfriend or girlfriend 

commits a crime, he or she may 

also engage in delinquent behavior. For less serious crimes, girls 

are influenced more by their 

boyfriends than boys by their girlfriends. For serious crimes, they 

are equally affected. 

Resilient Girls—Factors 

That Protect Against 

Delinquency 

Some children manage to achieve 

success despite the difficulties they 

encounter in life. This ability to positively adapt to negative situations is 

called resilience. Positive experiences 

in life can strengthen a child’s ability 

to become resilient to the difficult 

situations—abuse, neglect, poverty, 

witnessing violence—that can lead to 

delinquency. 

An investigation by the Girls Study 

Group examined whether experiencing protective factors during 

adolescence could keep girls from 

offending. These protective factors 

included— 

n	 Support from a caring adult. 

n	 Success in school—as measured 

by grade point average. 

n	 School connectedness—a positive 

perception of the school environment and positive interactions 

with people at school. 

n	 Religiosity—how important religion was to the girl. 

The researchers analyzed self-report 

surveys from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. 

They found: 

n	 Caring adult. Girls who had a caring adult in their lives during adolescence were less likely to commit 

status or property offenses, sell 

drugs, join gangs, or commit simple or aggravated assault during 

adolescence. They also were less 

likely to commit simple assault as 

young adults. 

n	 School connectedness. Girls who 

experienced school connectedness 

were not protected or at increased 

risk for delinquency during adolescence and young adulthood, 

with one exception—girls who 

experienced school connectedness 

during adolescence were more 

likely to become involved in aggravated assault in young adulthood. 

n	 School success. Girls who experienced success in school during 

adolescence committed fewer status and property offenses and were 

less likely to join gangs in adolescence. School success helped 

protect them from involvement in 

simple and aggravated assault in 

adolescence and young adulthood. 

However, these girls were more 

likely to commit property offenses 

in young adulthood. 

4 
Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency 

n	 Religiosity. 2 Girls who placed a 

high importance on religion during adolescence were less likely to 

sell drugs in early adolescence. 

Researchers additionally examined 

the interaction between childhood 

risk factors and protective factors 

during adolescence on a child’s propensity toward delinquent behavior. 

Although some of the protective 

factors helped girls not to engage in 

delinquent behavior, others could 

not mitigate the influence of risk 

factors that girls had endured since 

childhood. Their findings highlight 

the importance of considering girls’ 

life histories when developing interventions for girls at high risk for 

delinquency. 

Suitability of Assessment 

Instruments for Delinquent 

Girls 

When girls are arrested, referred to 

court for delinquent behavior, held in 

a secure facility, or released from confinement, juvenile justice practitioners need a way to examine the risks 

that these girls pose to those around 

them and the community at large. 

They also must determine how to 

identify the girls’ treatment needs and 

make appropriate processing decisions (e.g., adjudication, detention). 

Practitioners in the juvenile justice 

system typically use standardized 

instruments to make such decisions. These instruments help to 

systematize decisionmaking criteria 

across the juvenile justice system 

and make the decision process more 

consistent and objective. A number 

of instruments have been developed 

for screening and assessing at-risk 

and justice-involved youth, but many 

have not taken gender into consideration in their development.3 

A group of researchers in the Girls 

Study Group reviewed 143 risk 

assessment and treatment-focused 

instruments, and examined whether 

they could appropriately determine 

youths’ risks and needs. They wanted 

to know if the instruments had favorable gender-based performance, 

which includes— 

n	 Gender-based instrument development (e.g., gender-specific 

items, scoring, or norms). 

n	 Favorable gender-based analysis 

(e.g., research findings show it 

is equally effective for girls and 

boys). 

The analysis examined instruments 

in four categories: 

n	 Risk and risk/needs assessment 

instruments. 

n	 Global needs assessment 

instruments.4 

n	 Substance abuse instruments. 

n	 Mental health instruments. 

In this Bulletin, the authors list those 

instruments in each category with 

favorable gender-based performance. 

Overall, out of 143 instruments examined, 73 instruments had favorable gender-based performance. 

Of these 73 instruments, 28 offered 

gender-based instrument development, 25 had favorable gender-based 

analysis, and 20 met both criteria. 

The authors report that mental 

health instruments were most 

sensitive to gender differences. Many 

instruments did not have information on gender-based performance, 

and some were less favorable for 

girls. 

Practitioners choosing an instrument 

for assessment in their community 

should consider the instrument’s 

purpose, gender performance, cost, 

and local validation. 

The Bulletin also provides detail on 

what practitioners should consider 

when selecting and administering 

instruments. It describes how to 

access further information about the 

many instruments reviewed. 

Girls’ Delinquency 

Programs—An 

Evidence-Based Review 

Many States and communities design 

programs to prevent and treat female 

delinquency. However, researchers 

are unsure how effective these programs are. To examine how effectively 

these programs work, the Girls Study 

Group reviewed 26 promising and 

model programs in the Blueprints for 

Violence Prevention5 database and 

completed a nationwide review of 61 

girls’ delinquency programs. 

The research team reviewed the 61 

girls’ delinquency programs using 

the Office of Justice Programs’ What 

Works Repository, and classified 

them based on evidence of their 

effectiveness. The classification 

framework that the authors used 

places programs in one of six levels of 

effectiveness: 

n	 Effective. Effective programs have 

an experimental research design 

(i.e., a randomized controlled trial) 

that demonstrates a significant 

and sustained effect. The program 

should have been externally replicated at least once, with an implementation team and site separate 

from the original study. 

n	 Effective with reservation. These 

programs have an experimental 

research design that demonstrates 

5 
Girls Study Group
 

a significant and sustained effect. 

The program should have at least 

one successful replication. Reservations occur either because 

the program has only an internal 

replication, or because it has an 

external replication with modest 

results. 

n	 Promising. These programs have 

either— 

n	 An experimental design without 

a successful replication. 

n	 A prospective, quasiexperimental research design 

(i.e., with no random assignment) that uses well-matched 

comparison groups. These programs have significant and 

sustained effects. 

n	 Inconclusive evidence. These 

programs may have adequately 

rigorous research designs, but not 

sustained effects. Or they may 

have contradictory findings and 

not enough evidence demonstrating that the program is effective or 

ineffective. 

n	 Insufficient evidence. These programs have a quasi-experimental 

design that lacks sufficient methodological rigor or a pre-post 

test design,6 or involve a purely 

descriptive evaluation.7 

n	 Ineffective. These programs 

have an experimental or quasiexperimental research design that 

failed to demonstrate a significant 

effect in an internal study or in a 

replication. 

The nationwide review of girls’ delinquency programs found that— 

n	 Only 17 of the 61 programs cataloged had published evaluations. 

n	 No programs could be rated effective, effective with reservation, or 

ineffective. 

n	 Most programs could be rated as 

having insufficient evidence. 

Two key findings from the review of 

girls’ delinquency programs were that 

more evaluations are needed and 

many of these programs are no longer 

in existence, which suggests a lack of 

program sustainability. 

The review of programs in the Blueprints for Violence Prevention database found that out of 26 promising 

and model programs, only 8 program 

evaluations analyzed whether program outcomes differed for boys and 

girls. However, 23 of these programs 

were equally effective for boys and 

girls. The programs targeted multiple 

risk factors for delinquency, had 

treatment plans that focused on the 

individual participant’s needs, and 

developed connections between the 

program participants and resources 

in the community.8 

Developmental Sequences 

of Girls’ Delinquent 

Behavior 

As girls develop, their experiences 

and interactions impact their decisions and behavior. Some of these 

experiences and interactions may 

contribute to positive developmental 

outcomes and others may support 

involvement in negative behaviors. 

The Girls Study Group explored the 

possibility that distinct developmental pathways could influence girls’ 

delinquent behaviors. The resulting 

Bulletin may help researchers develop programs or policies that stop 

female delinquency before it starts. 

To investigate the developmental 

pathways that lead to delinquency, 

the Girls Study Group analyzed data 

from two longitudinal studies of girls 

between ages 7 and 17—the Denver 

Youth Study,9 which included 807 

girls and the Fast Track Project,10 

which included 317 girls. The authors 

examined the lifetime prevalence of 

the types of delinquent behaviors 

forwhich girls were involved, including running away, truancy, public 

disorderliness, minor assault,11 minor 

property offense, serious property 

offense, serious assault, drug sales, 

alcohol use, and drug use; and the 

developmental sequences of delinquent behavior followed by different 

groups of girls over the 7–17 age 

period. 

The authors found that girls followed 

different developmental sequences. 

No one sequence or pathway of 

delinquent behaviors applied to a 

majority of girls. Additionally, a sizable proportion of girls were involved 

in delinquent offenses before middle 

school. Girls involved in more serious 

offending tended to return to a lower 

level of status or public disorder 

offending or returned to a nondelinquent status after a short time. 

Discussion 

The research conducted by the 

Girls Study Group has yielded very 

important information for OJJDP and 

the juvenile justice field. Some of 

the findings have confirmed earlier 

research and anecdotal information, 

while other findings have contradicted many of the long-held beliefs 

about how girls become delinquent 

and how best to address their needs. 

One of the first findings—and in 

some ways the most surprising 

6 
Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency 

finding—is that girls are not more 

violent than in previous years. The 

comparative analysis of official FBI 

data to self-report data revealed that, 

in fact, a change in how the juvenile 

justice system is responding to girls’ 

behavior is largely responsible for the 

increased number of girls entering 

the system. Another surprising finding is that the increase in girls’ arrests 

appears to be, in part, an unintended 

result of relatively new mandatory 

or pro-arrest policies put in place to 

protect victims of domestic violence. 

These are good policies, and necessary to protect victims. However, this 

unexpected outcome highlights the 

need to work with law enforcement 

to identify appropriate responses to 

conflict between girls and their family members, and for communities 

to support and provide families with 

access to family strengthening and 

mediation programs that provide 

intervention (rather than arrest). 

Another key finding of the study 

group is that girls and boys experience many of the same delinquency 

risk factors. Although some risk factors are more gender sensitive, in 

general, focusing on general risk and 

protective factors for all youth seems 

a worthwhile effort. When it comes 

to providing intervention programming, some unique factors should be 

considered for girls. As with all delinquency prevention and intervention 

efforts, however, the focus should be 

on the individual youth and her specific needs and strengths. This is why 

using the appropriate risk assessment tools is important, whether the 

youth is a girl or a boy. 

Perhaps the most significant finding 

of the Girls Study Group is that there 

continues to be a lack of reliable, 

accurate, and comprehensive information about good prevention and 

intervention programming for girls. 

Clearly, a concerted effort is needed 

to address the lack of evidence-based 

programs for the juvenile justice field, 

and the lack of programming for girls 

specifically. It is troubling that of all 

the girls’ programs reviewed by the 

Girls Study Group, the majority of 

them were rated “insufficient” evidence and had not been evaluated 

to the degree that they could be considered “effective.” More troubling is 

the fact that many of these programs 

do not have the resources to conduct 

rigorous evaluations. 

In moving ahead, the Girls Study 

Group findings will provide OJJDP 

with the foundation needed to move 

ahead on a comprehensive program of information dissemination, 

training, technical assistance, and 

programming regarding girls’ delinquency prevention and intervention. 

The findings of the group may assist 

States and communities in developing their own efforts to address girls’ 

delinquency. 

Endnotes 

1.	 Strom, K., T. Warner, L. Tichavsky, 

and M. Zahn (in development). 

Policing daughters: The role of 

domestic violence arrest policies 

in child-parent conflicts. 

2.	 Religiosity describes how important religion is to someone. 

In this study, answers to three 

questions—the frequency of 

praying, the frequency of attending religious events, and the girls’ 

perception of the importance of 

religion—defined girls’ religiosity. 

3.	 For instance, they may have been 

developed using a primarily male 

population. 

4.	 These instruments provide a 

broad-based assessment of areas 

that may need followup. 

5.	 See the Blueprints for Violence 

Prevention Web site at http:// 

www.colorado.edu/cspv/ 

blueprints/. The review of Blueprints for Violence Prevention 

programs was completed in July 

2006. Updates to program ratings 

may have been added to the database since this date. 

6.	 A pre-post design measures program outcomes by comparing 

perceptions or behaviors at the 

end of a program (i.e., postprogram) to some measurement 

before the program begins (i.e., 

pre-program). 

7.	 A purely descriptive design does 

not have rigorous methodology. 

The focus of descriptive research 

is to provide an accurate narrative 

of what is occurring. 

8.	 These connections can serve as 

a support mechanism for 

participants. 

9.	 For more information about the 

Denver Youth Study, see: 

http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/programs/ 

ProgSummary.asp?pi=19 and 

http://www.casanet.org/library/ 

delinquency/youth-svy.htm. 

10. See the following three studies: 

1) Conduct Problems Prevention 

Research Group. 1992. A developmental and clinical model 

for the prevention of conduct 

disorders: The FAST Track program. Development and Psychopathology 4:509–527. 

7 
PRESORTED STANDARD
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

DOJ/OJJDP
 

PERmIT NO. G–91
 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention *NCJ~223434*

Washington, DC 20531 

Official Business 

Penalty for Private Use $300 

Girls Study Group NcJ 223434 

2) Conduct Problems Prevention 

Research Group. 2000. Merg- Acknowledgments 

ing universal and indicated Margaret A. Zahn was a Principal Scientist at RTI International and a professor at North Carolina 

prevention programs: The Fast State University during her Girls Study Group directorship, and is currently Acting Deputy DirecTrack model. Addictive Behav­ tor of Research and Evaluation at the National Institute of Justice. 

iors 25:913–927. 

Stephanie R. Hawkins is a Research Clinical Psychologist with RTI International. 

3) Conduct Problems Prevention 

Research Group. 2007. Fast Janet Chiancone is a Research Coordinator at OJJDP. 

Track randomized controlled Ariel Whitworth is a Communications Editor with the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. 

trial to prevent externalizing 

psychiatric disorders: Findings This bulletin (reprinted April 2009) reflects updates from the research team. 

from grades 3 to 9. Journal of 

the American Academy of Child 

and Adolescent Psychiatry 

This Bulletin was prepared under cooperative agreement number 2004–JF–FX–K001 from the Office of The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice 

46:1250–1262. Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), Programs, which also includes the Bureau 

U.S. Department of Justice. of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of Justice 

11. Denver Youth Study only. Points of view or opinions expressed in this document 

Statistics; the Community Capacity Development 

Office; the National Institute of Justice; the 

are those of the authors and do not necessarily rep- Office for Victims of Crime; and the Office of Sex 

Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, resent the official position or policies of OJJDP or the Registering, and Tracking (SMART). 

U.S. Department of Justice.