research methods for juvenile delinquency

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Corrections
• Crime, Media, and Popular Culture
• Criminal Behavior
• Criminological Theory
• Critical Criminology
• Geography of Crime
• International Crime
• Juvenile Justice
• Prevention/Public Policy
• Race, Ethnicity, and Crime
• Research Methods
• Victimology/Criminal Victimization
• White Collar Crime
• Women, Crime, and Justice
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Juvenile delinquency in an international context.

• Katharina Neissl Katharina Neissl School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Northeastern University
•  and  Simon S. Singer Simon S. Singer School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Northeastern University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.567
• Published online: 30 June 2020

Juvenile delinquency is a global phenomenon, and interest in comparative studies of juvenile offending and society’s reaction to it has been steadily growing, despite the inherent difficulties of comparing juvenile justice processes across different regions. Both adolescence and the concept of juvenile delinquency are social constructs that vary by time and place. To know what constitutes a juvenile, or a delinquent act, requires detailed knowledge of a jurisdiction’s social, political, cultural, and legal history. International data in the form of officially recorded contact of juveniles with formal institutions are scarce, and they are often limited in their use for direct comparisons, due to divergent definitions and recording practices, or coverage of geographical regions. The United Nations Surveys on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (UN-CTS) have the widest geographical reach, but lack transparency of definitions or verification. The World Prison Brief by the Institute for Policy Research at Birkbeck University of London provides prison trends around the globe, but only offers one indicator of juvenile imprisonment. The Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics (SPACE) and the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics collect data on a range of custodial and non-custodial measures, and include detailed notes on national definitions, but are limited to Europe. The largest self-report study of youth is the International Self-Report Delinquency (ISRD) study, which is currently in its third wave that includes 40 countries across the globe.

Since 1990 the United Nations has developed international conventions, rules, and guidelines that govern the rights of children, particularly as they relate to juvenile justice, and these guidelines have shaped, and continue to shape, juvenile justice processes across the globe. Almost all regions in the world have provisions to treat juveniles violating the law differently from adults, but they do so in a multitude of ways. Not all countries have separate systems for juveniles and adults, and in some regions of the world informal reactions to juvenile law-breaking dominate, or coexist with formal juvenile justice institutions. Juvenile justice systems are often categorized according to their founding philosophies, between the poles of a welfare and protection approach on one extreme, and a crime control and justice approach on the other. However, such classifications mask important differences between countries, and can only be seen as broad generalizations. In order to capture the intricacies of existing systems, and compare them between jurisdictions, a localized approach to juvenile justice is needed. It is not sufficient to describe which legal orientations or traditions inform a system, but rather it is necessary to examine how these traditions (as well as global trends and pressures) are interpreted by local juvenile justice administrators. Comparative juvenile justice research that can contribute to public debates and to achieving better outcomes for juveniles across the globe needs to be localized, pay special attention to the specific cultural, legal, and historical context of the jurisdiction studied, and differentiate between the law in theory and the law in practice.

• juvenile justice
• juvenile delinquency
• comparative criminology
• globalization
• international criminology

You do not currently have access to this article

Please login to access the full content.

Access to the full content requires a subscription

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Criminology and Criminal Justice. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 30 April 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|195.216.135.184]
• 195.216.135.184

Character limit 500 /500

• Study Protocol
• Open access
• Published: 15 February 2024

Effectiveness, working mechanisms, and implementation of youth-initiated mentoring for juvenile delinquents: a multiple-methods study protocol

• Angelique Boering   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0005-9289-5677 1 ,
• Annabeth P. Groenman 1 ,
• Levi van Dam 1 , 2 , 3 &
• Geertjan Overbeek 1  

Health & Justice volume  12 , Article number:  5 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

851 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The societal costs associated with juvenile delinquency and reoffending are high, emphasising the need for effective prevention strategies. A promising approach is Youth-Initiated Mentoring (YIM). In YIM, professionals support youths in selecting a non-parental adult from within their social network as their mentor. However, until now, little (quasi-)experimental research has been conducted on YIM in the field of juvenile delinquency. We will examine the effectiveness, working mechanisms, and implementation of YIM as a selective prevention strategy for juvenile delinquents.

This multiple-methods study consists of a quasi-experimental trial and a qualitative study. In the quasi-experimental trial, we aim to include 300 juvenile offenders referred to Halt, a Dutch juvenile justice system organisation which offers youths a diversion program. In the Netherlands, all juvenile offenders between 12 and 18 years old are referred to Halt, where they must complete the Halt intervention. Youths will be non-randomly assigned to region-matched non-YIM-trained and YIM-trained Halt professionals implementing Care as Usual (CAU, i.e., the Halt intervention) or CAU plus YIM, respectively. Despite non-random allocation, this approach may yield comparable conditions regarding (1) the characteristics of professionals delivering the intervention and (2) case type and severity. Youth and caregiver(s) self-report data will be collected at pre-and post-test and a 6-month follow-up and complemented with official Halt records data. Multilevel analyses will test whether youths following CAU plus YIM show a stronger increase in resilience factors and a stronger decline in the need for formal support and delinquency than youths following CAU. In the qualitative study, we will organise focus group interviews with YIM-trained professionals to explore boosters and barriers experienced by professionals during the implementation of YIM.

The proposed study will help identify the effectiveness of YIM in strengthening resilience factors and possibly decreasing juvenile delinquency. In addition, it may offer insights into how and for whom YIM works. Finally, this study can help strengthen the implementation of YIM in the future.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.Gov (# NCT05555472). Registered 7 September 2022. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05555472?cond=Youth+Initiated+Mentoring&draw=2&rank=1 .

Introduction

Juvenile delinquency, defined as participating in unlawful behaviour as a minor or individual under statutory age, is highly prevalent during adolescence. In 2020, one-third of Dutch adolescents (36.6%) reported having committed at least one crime over the past year (Van der Laan & Beerthuizen, 2021 ), varying from vandalism to shoplifting to more severe forms of delinquency, such as fighting and threatening others with a weapon. Even though the development of adolescent delinquency follows an age-crime curve, with an upsurge and peak at 17 and a decline thereafter (Moffitt, 1993 ), about 34–45% of juvenile delinquents reoffends (Beerthuizen & Prop, 2021 ; Youth Justice Board, 2022 ). Moreover, the societal costs associated with juvenile delinquency and reoffending are high. Specifically, taking victim costs, criminal justice costs (e.g., police, legal aid, interventions), and loss of societal productivity into account, the costs associated with engaging in a lifelong criminal career may range from $1.7 to $5.3 million per person (e.g., Cohen, 1998 ; Cohen & Piquero, 2009 ; Koegl & Day, 2018 ), and the costs for reoffending by minors can go up to £1.5 billion (Newton et al., 2019 ). Over the past decades, the trend of “harsh” penal measures has strained governmental budgets while it has failed to reduce reoffending (Andrews & Bonta, 2010 ). Evidence suggests that early prevention efforts to avert criminal careers are more cost-effective than punitive measures (Welsh & Farrington, 2011 , 2012 ). Consequently, it is crucial to intervene at an early stage of adolescents’ potential criminal careers and of utmost importance to develop interventions to prevent more persistent and violent patterns of delinquent behaviour.

Building effective interventions and prevention programs depends on identifying individual, familial and environmental risk factors linked to heightened delinquent behaviour (Farrington & Welsh, 2007 ; Nation et al., 2003 ). Several known key dynamic risk factors for reoffending, also known as criminogenic needs , are pro-criminal attitudes, aggressive behaviour, alcohol and drug use, education and employment, leisure and recreation, antisocial peers, and familial risk factors (e.g., Andrews & Bonta, 2010 ; Assink et al., 2015 ). Interventions targeting these criminogenic needs are believed to be most effective in reducing reoffending (Andrews & Bonta, 2010 ; Seigle et al., 2014 ). Thus, when turning to action-oriented prevention, one should primarily focus on strengthening factors that build resilience and, in turn, desistance against delinquent behaviour, such as increasing involvement with education, employment, leisure, or recreation and building positive relationships with family, peers and others within the social network (e.g., Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005 ; Seigle et al., 2014 ; Stagner & Lansing, 2009 ; Ward & Stewart, 2003 ; Zimmerman, 2013 ). Theoretically, Youth-Initiated Mentoring (YIM) is a promising approach for preventing reoffending because it directly or indirectly strengthens several of these factors (Van Dam & Schwartz, 2020 ; Schwartz et al., 2013 ).

• Youth-initiated mentoring

YIM is a novel and innovative approach to natural or informal mentoring (Van Dam & Schwartz, 2020 ; Schwartz et al., 2013 ). In contrast to formal mentoring programs, where youth are matched to non-parental adults who volunteer within a non-professional context, such as a school or community program (Raposa et al., 2019 ), informal mentoring programs focus on involving a non-parental adult from within the adolescents’ social network, someone with whom the relationship already naturally exists. In YIM, youth have the autonomy to choose their natural mentor and to initiate the mentoring relationship by asking the natural mentor to be their ‘YIM’. Professionals support this entire procedure of identifying, nominating, and officially positioning the YIM. The function of the YIM is twofold: being a confidant and ally for the youth and a partner to caregivers and professionals (Schwartz et al., 2013 ). In addition, the YIM is closely involved in shaping the support around the adolescents’ needs. Most importantly, the approach capitalises on the strengths and expertise of formal and informal support systems (Van Dam & Verhulst, 2016 ).

Strengthening natural mentor-mentee relationships alongside professional involvement has three main benefits over matched mentor-mentee relationships: it is more accessible, durable and empowers the social network. First, it is estimated that about 63–86% of youth can identify a natural mentor (e.g., Dang, 2012 ; Erickson et al., 2009 ; Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010 ; Tucker et al., 2019 ; Van Dam et al., 2017 ). This relatively large accessibility could counteract delays typically experienced in formal mentoring due to a larger need and interest in these programs than available volunteer mentors (Raposa et al., 2017 ; Spencer et al., 2019 ; Tucker et al., 2019 ). Second, evidence suggests that youth-initiated relationships are more durable than matched relationships, which increases the likelihood of positive youth outcomes (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2013 ; Grossman & Rhodes, 2002 ; Spencer et al., 2016 ). Approximately 74% of all informal mentors are still involved in the youths’ lives after two years (Van Dam et al., 2017 ), which could be explained by youths choosing their mentor, contributing to a better mentor-mentee match (Tucker et al., 2019 ). In contrast, matched mentors and mentees often struggle to form meaningful connections, causing the relationship to end prematurely (e.g., (Grossman et al., 2012 ; Grossman & Rhodes, 2002 ). Moreover, youth –particularly those in the juvenile justice system– may be more open to involving a mentor they know and trust (Spencer et al., 2019 ). Third, strengthening the social network empowers families. Parents who feel supported by their social network experience lower levels of parenting stress and engage in more positive parenting practices, such as monitoring and effective parenting (e.g., Ayala-Nunes et al., 2017 ; Ghazarian & Roche, 2010 ; McConnell et al., 2011 ; Taylor et al., 2015 ). Consequently, this and the youths’ perception of feeling supported might impact the youths’ behaviour, such as displaying less externalising and delinquent behaviour (e.g., Ghazarian & Roche, 2010 ; Hagen et al., 2005 ; Hatch et al., 2020 ; Wight et al., 2006 ). Thus, YIM has clear benefits over formal mentoring and has the potential to buffer against the development of juvenile delinquency.

Youth-initiated mentoring for juvenile delinquents

YIM might be particularly well-suited for adolescents in the juvenile justice system (Spencer et al., 2019 ) because it relies heavily on three basic human needs that could be linked to the development of delinquent behaviour. Specifically, YIM has its theoretical underpinnings in the self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ), which holds that motivation to learn and develop occurs when an individual fulfils these three basic human needs: the need for autonomy, the need for relatedness, and the need for competence. These needs can be linked to several criminological theories on why youths engage in delinquent behaviour (Moffitt, 1993 ; Hirschi, 2017 ; Agnew, 2001 , 2017 ). The overall assumption is that when these needs are met, delinquency in youth dissipates or decreases.

The need for autonomy implies that one feels the need to be a self-governing agent, the “desire to self-organize experience and behavior and to have activity be concordant with one’s integrated sense of self” (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , p. 231). Both dual taxonomy theory (Moffitt, 1993 ) and strain theory (Agnew, 2001 , 2017 ) argue that adolescents’ lack of perceived autonomy encourages delinquent behaviour. During adolescence, adolescents experience a mismatch between their desired and actual autonomy. The strain theory suggests that this ‘strain’ leads to frustration, leading individuals to cope with delinquent behaviour (Agnew, 2001 , 2017 ). Empirical research supports the relationship between the need for autonomy and delinquency (e.g., Brezina, 2008 ; Van Petegem et al., 2015 ; Chen, 2010 ). YIM addresses this need for autonomy by letting the adolescent choose and ask their mentor themselves and working on self-concordant goals (i.e., goals aligned with one’s integrated sense of self) (Ruig & Van Dam, 2021 ).

The need for relatedness refers to how an individual experiences a sense of belonging and connections with important others (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). The social control theory states that stronger bonds with society prevent individuals from engaging in delinquent behaviour (Hirschi, 2017 ). These bonds express themselves in four factors: (1) attachment (i.e., connections with significant others), (2) involvement (i.e., engagement in prosocial activities); (3) commitment (i.e., degree of connection to society), and (4) beliefs (i.e., the value someone places on the norms and values of the society). YIM enhances attachment and commitment by strengthening relationships with an important person from the social network. YIM might, therefore, impact youths’ degree of perceived social support and their perceived mattering by the active agreement and commitment of this significant other to be their mentor. YIM might also increase involvement because involvement in free-time activities, such as hobbies, organisations or clubs, and religious services, has been linked to an increased likelihood of having a natural mentor (Thompson & Greeson, 2017 ). The YIM could function as a role model for engaging in these prosocial activities as well as prosocial behaviours, but also in cultivating prosocial beliefs. Thus, YIM is likely to increase relatedness, which could lead to a decrease in delinquent behaviour.

The need for competence implies that an individual feels capable and effective in their behaviour (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). The social learning theory of crime states that both conforming and deviant behaviour can be stimulated via social interactions, modelling, and reinforcement of the displayed behaviour (Akers, 2002 ). Specifically, the probability of engaging in delinquent behaviour increases when individuals associate with deviant or criminal individuals who either engage in criminal behaviour or have a pro-criminal attitude. Conversely, if one associates with individuals who display prosocial behaviour, one’s behaviour will likely shift in that direction (Akers, 2002 ). While more of an indirect effect, mentors might model and reinforce adolescents’ need for competence. The YIM could be a role model by providing guidance, sharing moral beliefs and skills, and reinforcing the youths’ self-esteem and prosocial behaviour. Research indicates that youths view their natural mentor as a “powerful role model” (Greeson et al., 2015 ; Spencer et al., 2016 ). In addition, YIM actively supports youths’ competence because youths are perceived and considered competent by professionals when choosing their mentors. Consequently, they feel competent to approach someone when help is needed in future situations (Van Dam & Verhulst, 2016 ; Ruig & Van Dam, 2021 ). To conclude, YIM might potentially, directly and indirectly, strengthen factors that build resilience and, in turn, desistance against delinquent behaviour.

Effectiveness of youth-initiated mentoring

Even though YIM is relatively new and rigorous research on the approach has been limited, YIM has been identified as a promising strategy for the future of youth mentoring (Cavell et al., 2021 ). A recent scoping review on YIM identified nine peer-reviewed studies on the outcomes of YIM (Dantzer & Perry, 2022 ). YIM has been shown to impact positive youth outcomes, like improved psychological well-being, strengthened relationships, achievement of educational and occupational goals, and strengthened partnerships to support youth adjusting to independent living. These positive outcomes were observed in various vulnerable groups, such as youths who dropped out of high school, youths from multi-problem families receiving youth care, youths at risk for out-of-home-placement, and youths in foster care (e.g., Koper et al., 2021 ; Schwartz et al., 2013 ; Spencer et al., 2018 ; Van Dam et al., 2017 ). However, it should be noted that no strong conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness of YIM, as seven out of nine studies adopted a qualitative study design, and none adopted a (quasi-)experimental study design. Moreover, the review only included studies explicitly using the term ‘Youth-Initiated Mentoring’. Noteworthy is that authors identified other studies on youth mentoring approaches that emphasise youths’ voice and choice of a mentor (e.g., C.A.R.E. or Connected Scholars) (Dantzer & Perry, 2022 ). A recent meta-analysis that included YIM and these similar approaches demonstrated that these approaches showed greater positive effect sizes on positive youth outcomes, such as academic functioning and social-emotional development, compared to formal mentoring approaches or the mere presence of a natural mentor (Van Dam et al., 2021 ).

Regarding delinquency, however, the findings of (similar) YIM approaches have been mixed. Some evidence suggests a decrease in the likelihood of conviction and engagement in delinquent activities (Millenky et al., 2010 ; Schwartz et al., 2013 ). At the same time, other studies indicate that these similar approaches have no impact on officially registered and self-reported delinquency nor delinquency-related outcomes, such as cognitive distortions, aggressive behaviour, substance use, and parenting behaviours (James et al., 2016 ; de Vries et al., 2017 ; De Vries et al., 2018 ). In conclusion, there is a need for (quasi-)experimental studies on the effectiveness of YIM in the field of juvenile delinquency. This offers the opportunity to determine whether YIM effectively or strengthens resilience factors and halts or reduces juvenile delinquency.

The present study

Even though YIM seems particularly well-suited for use in a population of juvenile delinquents; currently, little is known about its effectiveness in the field of juvenile delinquency. Moreover, knowledge of mediators and moderators of potential YIM effects has yet to be documented. In addition, gaining insight into professionals’ experience implementing YIM is essential. In our multiple-methods multi-informant study, we will target these three main questions about the effectiveness (“Does YIM work?”), possible working mechanisms (“How does YIM work? And for whom does YIM work?”) and the implementation process (“What are boosters and barriers in the implementation of YIM?”). Our quasi-experimental trial will answer the first two questions, and our qualitative study will answer the last.

Concerning effectiveness, we expect that YIM will strengthen youth resilience factors, such as perceived social support and social resourcefulness ( primary outcomes ), relatedness to others, autonomy, and competence. Moreover, we expect YIM to contribute to halting or decreasing the need for (formal) support and self-reported delinquency ( secondary outcomes ). Concerning the working mechanisms of YIM, we expect that an increase in resilience factors mediates the effect of halting or decreasing the need for (formal) support and self-reported delinquency. Furthermore, the impact of YIM will be larger for some individuals than for others, based on moderators such as demographic factors, psychosocial problems, mentor-mentee relationship quality (e.g., type of support, frequency of contact, relationship duration, (non)kin), peer network quality, parental monitoring, and treatment characteristics (i.e., Halt intervention characteristics and YIM characteristics). Also, see Fig.  1 for a pictorial depiction of the theoretical model. Finally, concerning the implementation of YIM, we will explore the boosters and barriers that facilitate or prevent its successful implementation. We intend to explore boosters and barriers within three domains: the innovation domain (i.e., characteristics of the innovation being implemented: YIM), the individuals’ domain (i.e., characteristics of individuals receiving the innovation: youth and caregivers, and characteristics of individuals delivering the innovation: Halt professionals) and the inner setting domain (i.e., characteristics of the setting in which the innovation is being implemented: Halt) (Damschroder et al., 2009 , 2022 ; Fleuren et al., 2014 ).

Theoretical model of YIM: outcomes, mediators, and moderators

Methods and design

Aims and setting.

Our main aim is to examine whether YIM strengthens resilience factors, such as perceived social support and social resourcefulness, in delinquent youth. To do so, we will study YIM at Halt, a Dutch juvenile justice system organisation which offers youths a diversion program subsidised by the Ministry of Justice and Security. In the Netherlands, all juvenile offenders (12 to 18 years) are referred to Halt after committing relatively minor offences or crimes (Wolthuis & Stentoumi, 2023 ). Common offences and crimes include public intoxication, extreme school absenteeism, shoplifting and vandalism. Halt has the nationwide task of providing these youths with a tailored intervention aimed at preventing reoffending and increasing future opportunities (Halt, n.d.). Mainly, Halt works with first- and second-time offenders who remain in the community. Working with 15,000 youths yearly, Halt has a unique position to identify youths (and families) in vulnerable circumstances. These youths are guided towards the necessary formal support systems, such as youth care organisations or addiction treatment centres. Since 2019, 36 Halt professionals (15% of all Halt professionals) have been trained in YIM, allowing YIM-trained professionals to strengthen the informal support system by involving a non-parental adult from the youth’s social network. The Halt program is implemented throughout the Netherlands, but the organisation is organised into four central regions: (1) North-Holland-Centre, (2) North-East, (3) South, and (4) West. Each region has sub-teams supervised by a region manager, and within each region, multiple professionals have been trained in YIM. Of all YIM-trained professionals, 31 (86%) have agreed to collaborate with the YIM-Halt trial. More details on the content of the Halt intervention can be found under “Conditions” > “Care as Usual (CAU) condition”. The quasi-experimental trial (Study 1) and the qualitative study (Study 2) will be performed at Halt and are presented below.

Study 1: quasi-experimental trial

In this quasi-experimental design, youth referred to Halt are non-randomly allocated to either a non-YIM-trained Halt professional implementing Care as Usual (CAU; N professionals = 31) or a YIM-trained Halt professional implementing CAU plus YIM ( N professionals = 31). Even though Halt’s distribution office allocates youth cases to professionals independent of case type and severity, they consider professionals’ workload within each region. This could lead to unequal distribution of youth cases over conditions. To ensure comparable conditions, the two groups of professionals are matched on educational level and region. Thus, despite non-random allocation, we expect similar conditions regarding (1) professionals’ characteristics and (2) case type and severity. Adolescents are our primary informants, but caregiver(s) of youths are also approached. This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05555472).

Co-creation

This study has been co-created with Halt professionals, policy officers, and management. They have been closely involved in decision-making concerning integrating the study into their regular working activities and giving their practical view on possible outcomes selected by the researchers based on previous research and the theory of YIM.

Study sample

Across both conditions, we aim to include 300 juvenile offenders who are (1) between 12 and 18 years old, (2) referred to Halt by either the police, a prosecutor, a special investigating officer, or a school attendance officer, and (3) required to follow a minimum of three meetings at Halt. Thus, so-called ‘shortened cases’, with only 1 or 2 meetings, will be excluded from participation beyond the first measurement (see Fig.  2 ).

Our primary outcome, with which we will assess the main intervention effect of YIM on perceived social support and social resourcefulness, will be measured with the Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS), respectively the subscales ‘Perceived Social Support’ and ‘Support Seeking’ (Schwarzer & Schulz, 2003 ). All youth and caregiver(s)’ outcomes and measurement points are depicted in Table  1 . In Table  2 , an overview of measures administered to Halt professionals is presented.

Recruitment

Non-YIM-trained Halt professionals will recruit participants for the CAU condition, and YIM-trained professionals will recruit participants for the CAU plus YIM condition. Professionals in both conditions explicitly invite minors (and their caregivers) to participate in research to improve the Halt intervention. This is done verbally during the preliminary conversation when the youth is first registered at Halt and by sending a flyer with core information about the study immediately after this preliminary conversation. A QR-code or link on this flyer refers youth (and their caregivers) to an online consent form (categories: 12–15 years, 16 + years, caregivers). Participants can voluntarily sign up for the study via this route.

Participant flow through the study

Care as Usual (CAU) condition. Participants ( N  = 150) will follow the regular Halt intervention implemented by non-YIM-trained Halt professionals, also referred to as Care as Usual. Aside from inviting youth to participate, professionals are instructed to follow their regular working activities. During the initial meeting, the content and duration of the Halt intervention (in hours and the number of meetings) are determined by a compulsory screening and risk assessment (i.e., Halt-SI) and the nature of the offence. Tailored to the youths’ needs, the professional then selects activities from five different modules: (1) reflection on one’s behaviour, (2) parental involvement, (3) social skills training, (4) victim-offender reconciliation, and (5) future opportunities. For example, activities in the module ‘social skills training’ are ‘modeling’ and ‘dealing with peer pressure’. It is important to note that victim-offender reconciliation is compulsory for all youth (e.g., writing an apology letter to the victim or providing restitution). After selecting activities, the professional draws up an official contract with agreements on the course of the intervention—signed by the youth. The youth then proceeds to fulfil the activities selected by the professional. Some activities can be done at home, such as writing an apology letter, while others are practised during an intervention meeting with a professional, such as social skills training. Importantly, professionals discuss the completion of each activity with the youth. During the closing meeting, the intervention is completed positively if the youth has complied with all agreements made at the start of the trajectory (Wolthuis & Stentoumi, 2023 ). If deemed necessary, youth are referred to formal support. The aim is to complete CAU within 100 days. The number of meetings with the professional can vary from one to six, with a minimum intensity of 1 h and a maximum intensity of 20 h. On average, youths follow three meetings: an initial meeting, an intervention meeting, and a closing meeting. The initial meeting is in person, while other meetings can be in person or online. Eighty-five per cent of caregivers are present during the initial and closing meetings and provide support where necessary.

CAU plus YIM condition. Participants ( N  = 150) will follow the regular Halt intervention described above in combination with YIM, which can be selected as an activity from the module ‘future opportunities’. If selected, it replaces other Halt activities. During the initial meeting of Halt, professionals in this condition help all youth to identify a mentor by asking the YIM question (i.e., “Who in your environment (an adult, aside from your caregiver(s)) can you turn to if necessary?”). If at least three meetings are necessary, professionals explain what YIM entails and support youth by using the network or YIM assignment, which helps to gain insight into the youth’s network. A positive or negative reaction of the youth can follow. A minimum of four (online) meetings are integrated into Halt’s regular working activities if the youth has identified and nominated a YIM. The first meeting is a conversation between the Halt professional and the YIM. They discuss the reaction of the YIM to being asked by the youth, the help needed by the youth, the YIM’s expectations for the trajectory and the role of the professional. The professional explains that the mentor and the youth have the autonomy to form the trajectory to the youth’s needs and the mentor’s possibilities. The mentor will function as a confidant and ally to the youth in various situations (e.g., listening to the youth or supporting the youth with schoolwork). Mentors are not trained because, in YIM, it is believed that the YIM has all the knowledge and tools to support the youth. The professional has a facilitating role, meaning that they initiate the mentoring trajectory and, if necessary, can be reached for support on the YIM’s initiative. The second meeting officially positions the “YIM”. The youth, caregivers, YIM, and professional discuss each other’s expectations, formulate goals, agree on the support frequency, and plan the evaluation meeting. Thus, the type and frequency of support may vary over youth cases. The mentor can partner with caregiver(s) and professionals by making agreements regarding specific goals (e.g., ensuring a youth goes to school in the case of extreme school absenteeism). Again, the professional takes a facilitating and supportive role. In the third meeting, the professional and the YIM have interim contact to discuss the trajectory and if they can proceed with the evaluation meeting. If this is not the case, they plan another interim contact moment. However, if this is the case, the fourth meeting is a joint evaluative meeting during which the youth, caregivers, YIM, and professional evaluate the goals and agreements made at the start of the trajectory. They also discuss how to proceed and whether it is possible to end Halt’s involvement. If so, this also functions as a closing meeting. Similar to CAU, the completion of Halt is evaluated by the Halt professional, while the completion of YIM is evaluated by all parties (i.e., youth, caregiver(s), YIM and professional). Moreover, the aim is to complete CAU plus YIM within 100 days. Importantly, because YIM meetings are integrated into Halt’s regular working procedures and replace other Halt activities, we expect the same number of meetings between the youth and the professional. However, extra meetings between the youth and their YIM are not uncommon, and the YIM often remains involved after Halt’s involvement has ended.

Data collection and procedure

Both recruitment and data collection started on September 1st, 2022. Recruitment will stop after 15 months because researchers strive to complete pre- and post-tests within 18 months. Follow-up measurements can occur up to 24 months after the start of the data collection. Participants will be asked to fill out three questionnaires: before the initial meeting (baseline), 100 days after baseline (post-test), and nine months after baseline (follow-up). After giving consent via the flyer, participants will automatically be referred to the first online questionnaire and instructed to complete it before their initial meeting at Halt. After that, researchers will approach eligible participants for post-test and follow-up measurements (see Fig.  2 ). All questionnaires will be administered in Dutch and will take approximately 30 min to complete. Participants will receive €7,50 per completed questionnaire; when they complete all questionnaires, they may win AirPods (€130).

Complementary to the questionnaires, we will receive pseudonymised youth case data from Halt’s registration system. Professionals in both conditions will register the characteristics of the Halt intervention (e.g., number of meetings, type of crime) and the risk assessment (i.e., Halt-SI) per youth case. In the CAU plus YIM condition, professionals will additionally register characteristics of YIM (e.g., the reaction of youth to YIM, caregivers’ approval of YIM, and the youth’s relation to the YIM (e.g., uncle, grandmother)). Most importantly, professionals will report the steps they have taken to implement YIM: (1) the YIM question was asked (“Who, an adult aside from your caregiver(s), can you turn to if necessary?”), (2) steps were taken to support youth in identifying and nominating a YIM, such as the network or YIM assignment, and (3) a YIM was positioned in an official meeting with all parties. Note that the third level of implementation is only possible if youths can identify and nominate a mentor.

Data analyses

First, for both the effect analyses on the different outcome variables and moderator and mediator analyses, we will perform multiple regression analyses with baseline levels of the outcome variable as a covariate and condition as a predictor variable. Second, to correct for the clustering of participants within regions and within Halt professionals, the regression analyses will be performed in a multilevel model with the participant as level 1, the professional as level 2, and the region as level 3 cluster variables. Third, to correct for multiple testing, we will implement a Benjamini Hochberg False Detection Rate (FDR; (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995 ) correction on the p-values for the respective outcome tests. Fourth, to test for the similarity between conditions, we will compare the two groups of Halt professionals and both conditions on several characteristics (e.g., demographic factors, professionals’ educational level, or youths’ psychological problems). If differences are detected between conditions, we will use propensity score matching (PSM) techniques (Caliendo & Kopeinig, 2008 ) to match participants in the CAU plus YIM condition to participants in the CAU condition. Lastly, we will implement the Intention-to-Treat (ITT) principle for handling missing data on post-test and follow-up measurements (Detry & Lewis, 2014 ; Yeatts & Martin, 2015 ). Thus, we will analyse all missing data of participants according to their assigned condition, regardless of whether the intervention was received or completed (Detry & Lewis, 2014 ; Yeatts & Martin, 2015 ). Missing data points will be estimated by performing Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) methods. We will consider the percentage of missing data and patterns of missing data (e.g., missing completely at random) (Bennett, 2001 ; Schulz & Grimes, 2002 ).

Power Analysis. To assess the sample size per condition for the primary and secondary outcomes, we performed an a priori power analysis in G*Power 3.1 (Faul et al., 2009 ). To attain a power level of 0.80 with a significance level of α = 0.05, a total sample size of N  = 100 is necessary to detect a small effect size ( f  = 0.10) in a linear multiple regression analysis. Meta-analyses that explored the effects of formal mentoring programs on delinquent behaviour and reoffending revealed small overall effects, both d  = 0.21 (~ f = 0.10) (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007 ; Tolan et al., 2014 ). For moderator and mediator analysis, a larger sample size is required. We performed a priori power analysis a Monte Carlo Power Analysis (Schoemann et al., 2017 , p. 384). For a simple trivariate correlation, a total sample size of N  = 150 is necessary to attain a power level of 0.80 with a significance level of α = 0.05. This would indicate N  = 75 per condition. However, we aim to include N  = 150 per condition because (1) we will also include time as a factor in the moderator and mediation models, and (2) we expect relatively high drop-out rates of over 20% (e.g., drop-out at post-test or follow-up measurements) (Furlan et al., 2009 ).

Study 2: qualitative study

This study aims to gain insight into the implementation process of YIM. To do so, we will conduct focus group interviews with YIM-trained Halt professionals during regularly scheduled supervision meetings. We will first conduct a large focus group, followed by three smaller focus groups. The large focus group aims to gain an in-depth understanding of the implementation of YIM in a specific youth case, while the small focus groups aim to gain insight into boosters and barriers in the implementation process of YIM at Halt. If necessary, we will conduct additional focus groups or individual interviews (i.e., significant variations exist between focus groups).

Study sample, recruitment, and data collection

At Halt, 36 professionals are trained in YIM, of which 31 will recruit data for our trial. We will approach YIM-trained Halt professionals during regularly scheduled supervision meetings. All YIM-trained Halt professionals who want to participate in the study will participate in the large focus group, followed by a smaller focus group consisting of 6 to 9 participants (Finch et al., 2014 ). If individual interviews or additional focus groups need to be conducted, researchers will adopt similar recruitment strategies or approach Halt professionals for individual interviews.

We will develop a discussion format for both types of focus groups (Finch et al., 2014 ). Based on observations and literature, the format will contain questions within three domains of the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR): the innovation domain (i.e., characteristics of the innovation being implemented: YIM), the individuals’ domain (i.e., characteristics of individuals receiving the innovation: youth and caregivers, and characteristics of individuals delivering the innovation: Halt professionals) and the inner setting domain (i.e., characteristics of the setting in which the innovation is being implemented: Halt) (Damschroder et al., 2009 , 2022 ; Fleuren et al., 2014 ). For example, “What aspects do you find easy (or difficult) in the implementation of YIM?” or “How do you experience the organisational support to implement YIM?”.

Professionals will be informed about the qualitative study and must consent if they want to participate. Each participant will follow the large focus group, followed by a smaller one. In the large focus group, we will recreate a reflecting team model (Van Dam, 2007 ; Chang, 2010 ): in the inner circle, participants will engage in structured discussion about a Halt professional’s prior youth case ( N  = 6–9), and in the outer circle, four smaller circles ( N  = 3–5) will observe the discussion through a specific perspective: (1) the youth; (2) caregivers or YIMs; (3) Halt professional; or (4) Halt. Afterwards, the different perspectives will be discussed in plenary, and all participants will be encouraged to share their thoughts and perspectives. In the smaller focus groups, structured discussions with Halt professionals will be activated via think-pair-share techniques (Lyman, 1981 ). First, participants will be instructed to think about the posed question; second, they will be asked to discuss this question in pairs and to write down their answers; and third, the pairs will be asked to share their findings in the group, after which a discussion will be initiated. This technique encourages individual participation, makes discussions more productive, and improves the quality of the responses (Kagan, 1994 ). The researchers will collect the pair forms, and participants will be thanked and asked whether they have any additional thoughts to share.

Focus groups (and possible individual interviews) will be recorded, and these audio files will be transcribed. To identify patterns of themes in the data, we will follow a multi-step thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2006 ). We will perform the six steps of the approach: familiarise with the data, generate initial codes, search for themes, review the themes, define and name the themes, and report on the identified themes. We will use inductive coding strategies for the initial codes, after which we will perform deductive coding strategies based on the CFIR (Damschroder et al., 2009 , 2022 ).

With this study on YIM, a new examination is initiated in the field of youth mentoring for delinquent behaviour. Research on YIM remains limited; thus, we aim to contribute to the further understanding of the effectiveness of YIM as a selective prevention strategy for juvenile delinquency. To do so, we will perform a quasi-experimental trial simultaneously targeting youth resilience and delinquency outcomes and a qualitative study in which professionals will evaluate their experiences with implementing YIM. Moreover, examining how and for whom the YIM works may help to inform a tailored approach when introducing YIM in the field of juvenile delinquency.

The current study has three main strengths. First, we will examine the effectiveness and not the efficacy of YIM. The interventions (i.e., CAU and CAU plus YIM) are implemented under real-life circumstances, allowing us to study the performance of YIM in daily practice rather than the performance under ideal and controlled circumstances (Singal et al., 2014 ). Thus, the study has high ecological validity (Andrade, 2018 ). Second, the study is designed in co-creation with Halt professionals, policy officers and management. Real-life circumstances were the starting point of this co-created study: “How can we integrate the study into professionals’ regular working activities?”. Joint-decision making has contributed to the seamless integration of the study into professionals’ working activities and increased their involvement in and support for the study. Third, the study will focus on both resilience and delinquency outcomes. Even though we will examine whether YIM is effective as a selective prevention strategy for juvenile delinquency, we will also focus on youth resilience factors in delinquent youth. By including outcomes relevant to positive youth development, we consider adolescents’ developmental trajectories. By strengthening the social network, YIM might build resilience (Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005 ; Seigle et al., 2014 ; Stagner & Lansing, 2009 ; Ward & Stewart, 2003 ; Zimmerman, 2013 ) and, in turn, desistance against juvenile delinquency. Therefore, it is crucial to include these measurements pertinent to youth development.

It is also crucial to mention three potential challenges. First, allocating youths to either condition (i.e., to a non-YIM-trained or YIM-trained professional) is non-random. Random allocation is impossible because Halt’s distribution office considers professionals’ workload. This might lead to an unequal division of youth cases over conditions and, thus, less comparable conditions. Differences between conditions could then possibly be explained by confounding factors instead of the effects of YIM, such as differences in the severity of the youth case (Flannelly et al., 2018 ). To ensure comparable conditions, we will match professionals in the CAU plus YIM condition within each region to professionals in the CAU condition. Nevertheless, we must be cautious of drawing causal inferences. We will also address other confounding factors between conditions, such as differences in the number of sessions or types of activities. Second, baseline and post-test measurements will occur without the knowledge of the implementation level of YIM in the CAU plus YIM condition. We will assess three levels of implementation steps taken by a professional: (1) the YIM question was asked, (2) steps were taken to support youth in identifying and nominating a YIM, and (3) a YIM was positioned in an official meeting. External factors can influence these steps, such as a youth not being able to identify or nominate a YIM. If this is the case, it is impossible to position a YIM. We will, however, instruct professionals to explain and motivate YIM in all youth cases, possibly leading to the positioning of a YIM. Overall, we expect that all cases will at least have the second level of implementation. However, due to the natural course of YIM, we cannot rule out natural variation in the level of implementation. Because this might impact the findings, we will consider these implementation levels in our analyses. Moreover, these implementation levels will allow us to explore whether different elements of YIM affect the approach’s effectiveness. Third, all participants will voluntarily sign up for the study, potentially leading to a selective pool of more intrinsically motivated participants. Even though Halt has a broad population, with varying degrees of problems and different types and severity of offences and crimes, the registered group might not entirely represent the Halt population. Potentially, youth with more severe problems might be missed. This would, however, apply to both conditions – if this were to be the case. Hence, to appeal to the entire population at Halt, we will offer a monetary contribution per completed questionnaire and the chance to win the grand prize, namely AirPods. Fourth, a challenge in the focus group interviews is that being in a group, people might not feel comfortable enough to share their true perspectives and opinions on working with the innovation. Moreover, some individuals could be more dominant in the conversation than others, which might discourage some individuals from actively participating. To encourage active participation and a comfortable environment, we will perform think-pair-share techniques (Kagan, 1994 ; Lyman, 1981 ) in a neutral environment without the involvement of YIM and Halt management.

Halt’s population consists of 15,000 juvenile minors each year. Including a representative population of Halt allows for studying how and for whom YIM might work. This knowledge would benefit (Halt) professionals in decision-making on how and when to implement YIM. At the same time, youths who benefit from the approach can be specifically targeted, leading to a tailored approach. Suppose YIM is an effective addition to Halt’s short-term intervention. In that case, YIM can be further implemented within their intervention and potentially more widely within the juvenile justice system, such as juvenile detention centres, even outside the Netherlands. Insight into factors that facilitate or prevent YIM implementation yields specific strategies that impact these boosters or negate these barriers. These challenges and strategies can be considered and adopted by others who aim to implement YIM or a new intervention embedded within an organisation. Overall, this study will contribute to knowledge on whether YIM is a suitable informal mentoring approach for youth within the juvenile delinquency field. Moreover, information on which program elements of YIM work can further strengthen informal mentoring approaches.

This study will investigate the effectiveness of YIM for juvenile delinquents. Subsequently, this study will be able to answer questions considering the working mechanisms and possible boosters and barriers experienced in implementation processes. In conclusion, we will contribute to a further understanding of informal mentoring approaches as a selective prevention strategy within the juvenile delinquency field.

Data availability

Halt organises access to the sample; data will be collected by the author(s). All authors have access to the datasets. After signing a confidentiality agreement, research assistants or students working on the project have access to pseudonymised data. The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to sensitivity and confidentiality. Still, they are available from the corresponding author on a reasonable request via a secured access repository after completing the study.

Abbreviations

Care as Usual

Care as Usual plus Youth-Initiated Mentoring

False Detection Rate

Intention-to-Treat

Propensity Score Matching

Quick Response Code

Youth-Initiated Mentor or Youth-Initiated Mentoring

Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38 (4), 319–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038004001 .

Agnew, R. (2017). General Strain Theory: Current status and directions for further research. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wright, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking Stock (1st ed., pp. 101–123). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315130620-4 .

Akers, R. L. (2002). A social learning theory of crime. In S. Cote (Ed.), Criminological theories: Bridging the past to the future . Sage Publications.

Andrade, C. (2018). Internal, external, and ecological validity in research design, conduct, and evaluation. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine , 40 (5), 498–499. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_334_18 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology Public Policy and Law , 16 (1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018362 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Assink, M., van der Put, C. E., Hoeve, M., de Vries, S. L. A., Stams, G. J. J. M., & Oort, F. J. (2015). Risk factors for persistent delinquent behavior among juveniles: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review , 42 , 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.08.002 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ayala-Nunes, L., Nunes, C., & Lemos, I. (2017). Social support and parenting stress in at-risk Portuguese families. Journal of Social Work , 17 (2), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017316640200 .

Beerthuizen, M., & Prop, L. (2021). Resocialisatie en recidive. In A. M. Van der Laan, M. G. C. J. Beerthuizen, & N. C. Boot, Monitor Jeugdcrimintaliteit 2020. Ontwikkelingen in de jeugdcriminaliteit in de eerste twee decennia van deze eeuw (pp. 108–129). Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC). https://repository.wodc.nl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12832/3058/Cahier%202021-09-volledige-tekst.pdf?sequence=11&isAllowed=y

Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) , 57 (1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x .

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Bennett, D. A. (2001). How can I deal with missing data in my study? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health , 25 (5), 464–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842X.2001.tb00294.x .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa .

Brezina, T. (2008). Recognition denial, need for autonomy, and youth violence. New Directions for Youth Development , 2008 (119), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.276 .

Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys , 22 (1), 31–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x .

Cavell, T. A., Spencer, R., & McQuillin, S. D. (2021). Back to the future: Mentoring as means and end in promoting child mental health. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology , 50 (2), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2021.1875327 

Chang, J. (2010). The reflecting team: A training method for family counselors. The Family Journal , 18 (1), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480709357731 .

Chen, X. (2010). Desire for autonomy and adolescent delinquency: A latent growth curve analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior , 37 (9), 989–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810367481 .

Cohen, M. A. (1998). The monetary value of saving a high-risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 14 (1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023092324459 .

Cohen, M. A., & Piquero, A. R. (2009). New evidence on the monetary value of saving a high risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 25 (1), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-008-9057-3 .

Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science , 4 (1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 .

Damschroder, L. J., Reardon, C. M., Widerquist, M. A. O., & Lowery, J. (2022). The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implementation Science , 17 (1), 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0 .

Dang, M. (2012). Exploring protective processes among homeless youth: The role of natural mentors. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering , 3-B , 1882.

Google Scholar  

Dantzer, B., & Perry, N. E. (2022). Advancing and mobilizing knowledge about youth-initiated mentoring through community-based participatory research: A scoping review. Youth , 2 (4), 587–609. https://doi.org/10.3390/youth2040042 .

de Ruig, S., & Van Dam, L. (Eds.). (2021). Circulaire Zorg: Van JIM-aanpak naar een nieuwe kijk op jeugdhulpverlening . Boom Psychologie.

De Vries, S. L. A., Hoeve, M., Wibbelink, C. J. M., Asscher, J. J., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2017). A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of the youth crime prevention program ‘New perspectives’ (NP): Post-treatment changes and moderator effects. Children and Youth Services Review , 413–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.10.011 .

De Vries, S. L. A., Hoeve, M., Asscher, J. J., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2018). The long-term effects of the youth crime prevention program New Perspectives on delinquency and recidivism. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology , 62 (12), 3639–3661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17751161 .

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry , 11 (4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 .

Detry, M. A., & Lewis, R. J. (2014). The Intention-to-Treat principle: How to assess the true effect of choosing a medical treatment. Journal of the American Medical Association , 312 (1), 85. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.7523 .

Erickson, L. D., McDonald, S., & Elder, G. H. (2009). Informal mentors and education: Complementary or compensatory resources? Sociology of Education , 82 (4), 344–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/003804070908200403 .

Farrington, D., & Welsh, B. (2007). Saving children from a life of crime: Early risk factors and effective interventions . Oxford University Press.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods , 41 (4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 .

Fergus, S., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk. Annual Review of Public Health , 26 (1), 399–419. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144357 .

Ferwerda, H. B. (Ed.). (2006). Halt: Het alternatief? De effecten van Halt beschreven . Boom Juridische Uitgevers [u.a.].

Finch, H., Lewis, J., & Turley, C. (2014). Focus groups. In J. Ritchie, J. Lewis, C. McNaughton Nicholls, & R. Ormston (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (Second edition, Vol. 8, pp. 211–239). Sage.

Flannelly, K. J., Flannelly, L. T., & Jankowski, K. R. B. (2018). Threats to the internal validity of experimental and quasi-experimental research in healthcare. Journal of Health Care Chaplaincy , 24 (3), 107–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/08854726.2017.1421019 .

Fleuren, M. A. H., Paulussen, T. G. W. M., Van Dommelen, P., & Van Buuren, S. (2014). Towards a measurement instrument for determinants of innovations. International Journal for Quality in Health Care , 26 (5), 501–510. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzu060 .

Furlan, A. D., Pennick, V., Bombardier, C., & van Tulder, M. (2009). 2009 updated Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine , 34 (18), 1929–1941. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b1c99f .

Ghazarian, S. R., & Roche, K. M. (2010). Social support and low-Income, urban mothers: Longitudinal associations with adolescent delinquency. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 39 (9), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9544-3 .

Greeson, J. K., Thompson, A. E., Ali, S., & Wenger, R. S. (2015). It’s good to know that you got somebody that’s not going anywhere: Attitudes and beliefs of older youth in foster care about child welfare-based natural mentoring. Children and Youth Services Review , 48 , 140–149.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.12.015 .

Grossman, J. B., & Rhodes, J. E. (2002). The test of Time: Predictors and effects of Duration in Youth Mentoring relationships. American Journal of Community Psychology , 30 (2), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014680827552 .

Grossman, J. B., Chan, C. S., Schwartz, S. E. O., & Rhodes, J. E. (2012). The test of time in school-based mentoring: The role of relationship duration and re-matching on academic outcomes. American Journal of Community Psychology , 49 (1–2), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-011-9435-0 .

Hagen, K. A., Myers, B. J., & Mackintosh, V. H. (2005). Hope, social support, and behavioral problems in at-risk children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 75 (2), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/0002-9432.75.2.211 .

Hatch, V., Swerbenski, H., & Gray, S. A. O. (2020). Family social support buffers the intergenerational association of maternal adverse childhood experiences and preschoolers’ externalizing behavior. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 90 (4), 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000451 .

Hirschi, T. (2017). Causes of Delinquency (1st ed.). Routledge.

Hurd, N., & Zimmerman, M. (2010). Natural mentors, mental health, and risk behaviors: A longitudinal analysis of African American adolescents transitioning into adulthood. American Journal of Community Psychology , 46 (1–2), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9325-x .

James, C., Asscher, J. J., Stams, G. J. J. M., & van der Laan, P. H. (2016). The effectiveness of aftercare for juvenile and young adult offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology , 60 (10), 1159–1184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X15576884 .

Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2007). A rapid evidence assessment of the impact of mentoring on re-offending: A summary . Home Office.

Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning . Kagan.

Koegl, C. J., & Day, D. M. (2018). The monetary costs of crime for a sample of offenders in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice , 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2018-0017.r2 .

Koper, N., Creemers, H. E., Van Dam, L., Stams, G. J. J. M., & Branje, S. (2021). Needs of youth and parents from multi-problem families in the search for youth-initiated mentors. Youth & Society , 0044118X2110582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X211058217 .

Lyman, F. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion. In A. S. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest (pp. 109–113). University of Maryland College of Education.

McConnell, D., Breitkreuz, R., & Savage, A. (2011). From financial hardship to child difficulties: Main and moderating effects of perceived social support. Child: Care Health and Development , 37 (5), 679–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2010.01185.x .

Millenky, M., Bloom, D., & Dillon, C. (2010). Making the transition: Interim results of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe evaluation . MDRC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED514652.pdf .

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review , 100 (4), 674–701. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674 .

Nation, M., Crusto, C., Wandersman, A., Kumpfer, K. L., Seybolt, D., Morrissey-Kane, E., & Davino, K. (2003). What works in prevention: Principles of effective prevention programs. American Psychologist , 58 (6–7), 449–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.449 .

Newton, A., May, X., Eames, S., & Ahmad, M. (2019). Economic and social costs of reoffending (Ministry of Justice Analytical Series, pp. 1–45) [Analytical report]. Ministry of Justice; ISBN: 978-1-84099-887-0. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/814650/economic-social-costs-reoffending.pdf .

Raposa, E. B., Dietz, N., & Rhodes, J. E. (2017). Trends in volunteer mentoring in the United States: Analysis of a decade of census survey data. American Journal of Community Psychology , 59 (1–2), 3–14.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12117 .

Raposa, E. B., Rhodes, J., Stams, G. J. J. M., Card, N., Burton, S., Schwartz, S., Sykes, L. A. Y., Kanchewa, S., Kupersmidt, J., & Hussain, S. (2019). The effects of youth mentoring programs: A meta-analysis of outcome studies. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 48 (3), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00982-8 .

Schoemann, A. M., Boulton, A. J., & Short, S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science , 8 (4), 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617715068 .

Schulz, K. F., & Grimes, D. A. (2002). Sample size slippages in randomised trials: Exclusions and the lost and wayward. The Lancet , 359 (9308), 781–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07882-0 .

Schwartz, S. E. O., Rhodes, J. E., Spencer, R., & Grossman, J. B. (2013). Youth Initiated Mentoring: Investigating a new approach to working with vulnerable adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology , 52 (1–2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-013-9585-3 .

Schwarzer, R., & Schulz, U. (2003). Unterstützung Bei Der Krankheitsbewältigung. Die Berliner Social Support Skalen (BSSS). Social Support in Coping with Illness: The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS) , 49 , 73–82.

Seigle, E., Walsh, N., & Weber, J. (2014). Core Principles for Reducing Recidivism and Improving Other Outcomes for Youth in the Juvenile Justice System . Council of State Governments Justice Center. https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Juvenile-Justice-White-Paper-with-Appendices-1-1.pdf .

Singal, A. G., Higgins, P. D. R., & Waljee, A. K. (2014). A primer on effectiveness and efficacy trials. Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology , 5 (1), e45. https://doi.org/10.1038/ctg.2013.13 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Spencer, R., Tugenberg, T., Ocean, M., Schwartz, S. E. O., & Rhodes, J. E. (2016). Somebody who was on my side’: A qualitative examination of youth initiated mentoring. Youth & Society , 48 (3), 402–424.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X13495053 .

Spencer, R., Drew, A. L., Gowdy, G., & Horn, J. P. (2018). ‘A positive guiding hand’: A qualitative examination of youth-initiated mentoring and the promotion of interdependence among foster care youth. Children and Youth Services Review , 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.06.038 .

Spencer, R., Gowdy, G., Drew, A. L., & Rhodes, J. E. (2019). Who knows me the best and can encourage me the most?’: Matching and early relationship development in youth-initiated mentoring relationships with system-involved youth. Journal of Adolescent Research , 34 (1), 3–29.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558418755686 .

Stagner, M. W., & Lansing, J. (2009). Progress toward a prevention perspective. Preventing Child Maltreatment (FALL 2009) , 19 (2), 19–38.  https://www.jstor.org/stable/27795046 .

Taylor, Z. E., Conger, R. D., Robins, R. W., & Widaman, K. F. (2015). Parenting practices and perceived social support: Longitudinal relations with the social competence of mexican-origin children. Journal of Latina/o Psychology , 3 (4), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/lat0000038 .

Thompson, A. E., & Greeson, J. K. P. (2017). Prosocial activities and natural mentoring among youth at risk of aging out of foster care. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research , 8 (3), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1086/693119 .

Tolan, P. H., Henry, D. B., Schoeny, M. S., Lovegrove, P., & Nichols, E. (2014). Mentoring programs to affect delinquency and associated outcomes of youth at risk: A comprehensive meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 10 (2), 179–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-013-9181-4 .

Tucker, S., Meloy, M., Napolitano, L., Storrod, M. L., & Curtis, K. (2019). Mentoring vulnerable youth in one of America’s most dangerous cities: From violent streets to University classrooms. Youth Justice , 19 (3), 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225419886931 .

Van Dam, L. (2007). Het ‘reflecting team’-intervisiemodel: Oplossingsgerichte intervisie: De focus op het resultaat. Supervisie en Coaching , 24 (3), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03079843 .

Van Dam, L., & Schwartz, S. (2020). Cultivation of natural mentors to strengthen resiliency in youth: A program theory of Youth Initiated Mentoring (YIM). Journal of Social Intervention: Theory and Practice , 29 (1), 3. https://doi.org/10.18352/jsi.623 .

Van Dam, L., & Verhulst, S. (2016). De JIM-aanpak: Het alternatief voor uithuisplaatsing van jongeren . Boom.

Van Dam, L., Neels, S., de Winter, M., Branje, S., Wijsbroek, S., Hutschemaekers, G., Dekker, A., Sekreve, A., Zwaanswijk, M., Wissink, I., & Stams, G. J. (2017). Youth Initiated Mentors: Do they offer an alternative for out-of-home placement in youth care? British Journal of Social Work , 47 (6), 1764–1780. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcx092 .

Van Dam, L., Blom, D., Kara, E., Assink, M., Stams, G. J., Schwartz, S., & Rhodes, J. (2021). Youth Initiated Mentoring: A meta-analytic study of a hybrid approach to youth mentoring. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 50 (2), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01336-5 .

Van der Laan, A. M., & Beerthuizen, M. G. C. J. (2021). Zelfgerapporteerd daderschap. In A. M. Van der Laan, M. G. C. J. Beerthuizen, & N. C. Boot, Monitor Jeugdcrimintaliteit 2020. Ontwikkelingen in de jeugdcriminaliteit in de eerste twee decennia van deze eeuw. (pp. 39–64). Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC). https://repository.wodc.nl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12832/3058/Cahier%202021-09-volledige-tekst.pdf?sequence=11&isAllowed=y

Van der Laan, A. M., & Blom, M. (2006). WODC-monitor zelfgerapporteerde jeugdcriminaliteit. Meting 2005; documentatie boek steekproefverantwoording, veldwerk, enquête en vergelijking met eerdere metingen (Memorandum 2006-04, pp. 1–88). WODC. http://hdl.handle.net/20500.12832/882 .

Van Petegem, S., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., & Beyers, W. (2015). Rebels with a cause? Adolescent defiance from the perspective of Reactance theory and Self-determination theory. Child Development , 86 (3), 903–918. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12355 .

Ward, T., & Stewart, C. A. (2003). The treatment of sex offenders: Risk management and good lives. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice , 34 (4), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.34.4.353 .

Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). The benefits and costs of early prevention compared with imprisonment: Toward evidence-based policy. The Prison Journal , 91 (3_suppl), 120S–137S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885511415236 .

Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2012). Science, politics, and crime prevention: Toward a new crime policy. Journal of Criminal Justice , 40 (2), 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2012.01.008 .

Wight, R. G., Botticello, A. L., & Aneshensel, C. S. (2006). Socioeconomic context, social support, and adolescent mental health: A multilevel investigation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 35 (1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9009-2 .

Wolthuis, A., & Stentoumi, I. (2023). Restorative Justice Practices for Children in Contact with the Law in the Netherlands & Greece (Joint Rapid Needs Assessment).

Yeatts, S. D., & Martin, R. H. What is missing from my missing data plan?, https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.007984 (2015).

Youth Justice Board (2022). Youth Justice Statistics 2020/21 . Ministry of Justice. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-justice-statistics-2020-to-2021 .

Zimmerman, M. A. (2013). Resiliency theory: A strengths-based approach to research and practice for adolescent health. Health Education & Behavior , 40 (4), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113493782 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the pleasant and fruitful collaboration with Halt (management, policy officers, and professionals) and the Dutch YIM foundation. Co-creation with these parties has been crucial to design a study aligned with the practice. We especially appreciate the openness of youths, parents and YIMs who share their experiences with us.

This project is part of and subsidised by the ZonMw Program “What works for youth?” in the subsidy round “What works in the timely identification and support of children and families in vulnerable circumstances?” (#74413101). The mission of this program is to increase and apply knowledge about what works in prevention, education and youth care for children and families. ZonMw was not involved in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Research Institute Child Development and Education, Preventive Youth Care Programme Group, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127, 1018WS, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Angelique Boering, Annabeth P. Groenman, Levi van Dam & Geertjan Overbeek

Dutch YIM Foundation, Amersfoort, the Netherlands

Levi van Dam

Levvel Academic Centre for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Funding for this study was acquired by LvD and Halt. All authors were involved in the design of the study. AB is responsible for coordinating the study (i.e., data collection and processing); APG supervises the study process on a weekly basis; GJO and LvD are involved in monthly supervision. This manuscript was written by AB in close collaboration with APG, GJO and LvD. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angelique Boering .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study is being conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and is approved by the Ethics Review Board (ERB) of the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) at the Research Institute of Child Development and Education (RICDE) at the University of Amsterdam (UvA). The reference number is 2022-CDE-14,529. To participate in this study, informed consent will be obtained from all participants. For participants under 16 years old, informed consent will be obtained from a parent or guardian.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

LvD developed an educational program for professionals to learn about the scientific and practical background of youth-initiated mentoring. All other authors (AB, APG, and GJO) declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Boering, A., Groenman, A.P., van Dam, L. et al. Effectiveness, working mechanisms, and implementation of youth-initiated mentoring for juvenile delinquents: a multiple-methods study protocol. Health Justice 12 , 5 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-024-00258-9

Download citation

Received : 03 April 2023

Accepted : 19 January 2024

Published : 15 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-024-00258-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Informal mentoring
• Juvenile delinquency
• Selective prevention

Health & Justice

ISSN: 2194-7899

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Five Things About Juvenile Delinquency Intervention and Treatment

Juvenile delinquency intervention and treatment programs have the broad goals of preventing crime and reducing recidivism by providing treatment and services to youth who have committed crimes.

The five statements below are based on practices and programs rated by CrimeSolutions. [1]

1. Juvenile awareness programs may be ineffective and potentially harmful.

Juvenile awareness programs — like Scared Straight — involve organized visits to adult prison facilities for adjudicated youth and youth at risk of adjudication. Based on the review and rating by CrimeSolutions of two meta-analyses of existing research , youth participating in these types of programs were more likely to commit offenses in the future than adjudicated youth and youth at risk of adjudication who did not. Consequently, recidivism rates were, on average, higher for participants compared to juveniles who went through regular case processing.

The results suggest that not only are juvenile awareness programs ineffective at deterring youth from committing crimes, but youth exposed to them are more likely to commit offenses in the future.

Read the practice profile Juvenile Awareness Programs (Scared Straight) to learn more.

2. Cognitive behavioral therapy can effectively reduce aggression in children and adolescents.

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a problem-focused, therapeutic approach that attempts to help people identify and change the dysfunctional beliefs, thoughts, and patterns that contribute to their problem behaviors. CBT programs are delivered in various settings, including juvenile detention facilities. Based on the review and rating by CrimeSolutions of two meta-analyses of existing research , a variant of CBT focused specifically on children and adolescents who have anger-related problems is effective for reducing aggression and anger expression, and for improving self-control, problem-solving, and social competencies.

Read the practice profile Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anger-Related Problems in Children and Adolescents to learn more.

3. Multisystemic therapy for juveniles reduces recidivism, rearrests, and the total number of days incarcerated.

Multisystemic therapy is a family- and community-based treatment program for adolescents with criminal offense histories and serious antisocial, delinquent, and other problem behaviors. Based on the review and rating by CrimeSolutions of three randomized controlled trials (each evaluating a program in a different state), the program effectively reduced rearrests and number of days incarcerated.

Read the program profile Multisystemic Therapy to learn more.

4. Intensive supervision of juveniles — the conditions of which may vary — has not been found to reduce recidivism.

This practice consists of increased supervision and control of youth on probation in the community, compared with those on traditional community supervision. Intensive supervision programs have three primary features: 1) smaller caseloads for juvenile probation officers, 2) more frequent face-to-face contacts, and 3) strict conditions of compliance with stiffer penalties for violations. Other conditions may vary, but they can include electronic monitoring, drug/urinalysis testing, and participation in programming (such as tutoring, counseling, or job training). Based on the review and rating by CrimeSolutions of three meta-analyses of existing research , the practice does not reduce recidivism.

Read the practice profile Juvenile Intensive Supervision Programs to learn more.

5. Incarceration-based therapeutic communities for juveniles with substance use disorders have not been found to reduce recidivism after release.

Incarceration-based therapeutic communities employ a comprehensive, residential drug-treatment program model for youth in a detention facility who have substance use disorders. Therapeutic communities are designed to foster changes in attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors related to substance use and to reduce subsequent criminal offending. Based on the review and rating by CrimeSolutions of two meta-analyses of existing research , incarceration-based therapeutic communities have not been found to reduce recidivism after release for those who participate.

Read the practice profile Incarceration-Based Therapeutic Communities for Juveniles to learn more.

[note 1] As defined by CrimeSolutions, a practice is a general category of programs, strategies, or procedures that share similar characteristics with regard to the issues they address and how they address them. Practice profiles tell us about the average results from multiple evaluations of similar programs, strategies, or procedures. A program is a specific set of activities carried out according to guidelines to achieve a defined purpose. Program profiles on CrimeSolutions tell us whether a specific program was found to achieve its goals when it was carefully evaluated.

Practice ratings do not take into account variations in implementation or other program-specific factors which may impact the effectiveness of a specific program. Practices may be rated differently on outcomes not included here.

CrimeSolutions helps practitioners and policymakers understand what works in justice-related programs and practices. CrimeSolutions is funded by the National Institute of Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). Programs and practices profiles related to juveniles also appear on OJJDP’s Model Programs Guide .

Cite this Article

Read more about:, nij's "five things" series.

Find more titles in NIJ's "Five Things" series . 

FHSU Scholars Repository

Home > Graduate School > OSSP > SACAD > Vol. 2024 (2024)

The relationship between parenting practices and juvenile delinquency

Megan E. Bechtold , Fort Hays State University Follow April Terry , Fort Hays State University Follow

Delinquency may take on many definitions, but the most widely accepted definition is a minor crime committed by a young person, generally under the age of 18. Youth may also deal with legal trouble in response to status offending. These are behaviors that are age-based and would not be charged if committed by an adult. Examples include truancy, running away, drinking alcohol and using tobacco, and being incorrigible. Offending is a term that can be used to describe the actions of adults and youth, with definitions extending beyond just a “minor” crime (e.g., homicides and rapes). Many factors may contribute to delinquency, status offending, and criminal offending, with parenting and parental attachment commonly cited amongst correctional research. Studies show that parental attachment and parenting styles have a direct effect on youth and their subsequent delinquent or offending behavior(s). This poster outlines the research on associations between parenting styles and justice system involvement as well as policy implications.

Faculty Advisor

April Terry

Department/Program

Criminal Justice

Submission Type

in-person poster

Copyright the Author(s)

Recommended Citation

Bechtold, Megan E. and Terry, April (2024) "The relationship between parenting practices and juvenile delinquency," SACAD: John Heinrichs Scholarly and Creative Activity Days : Vol. 2024, Article 67. Available at: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/sacad/vol2024/iss2024/67

Since April 27, 2024

Included in

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Commons

• About SACAD
• SACAD Online Exhibit
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Search the Site

Advanced Search

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Talking Truancy and Other Status Offenses: Strategies for Prevention and Intervention

Review the YouTube Terms of Service and the Google Privacy Policy

This webinar, hosted by the National District Attorney’s Association on April 23, 2024, provided practical and creative strategies for keeping kids in school and out of court. Presenters discussed research on causes of chronic absenteeism, the role of schools and juvenile courts in truancy prevention and intervention, and models/trends involving local prosecutors and probation offices in responding to truancy and other status offenses. Panelists provided examples of evidence-based programs and practices that effectively reduce absenteeism. 

Questions concerning this webinar may be directed to the OJJDP TTA Help Desk at [email protected] . 

OJJDP does not provide certificates of attendance to individuals who view webinar recordings on OJJDP's YouTube channel or Multimedia web page.

Disclaimer:

Opinions or points of view expressed in these recordings represent those of the speakers and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Any commercial products and manufacturers discussed in these recordings are presented for informational purposes only and do not constitute product approval or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Justice.

• OJJDP FY 2023 Family Treatment Court Program Solicitation Webinar
• Raising the Bar on Juvenile Reentry Ways Agency Directors Use Data
• Raising the Bar on Juvenile Reentry Ways Probation Officers Use Data Webinar

Juvenile Delinquency Treatment and Prevention: A Literature Review

• Original Paper
• Published: 09 March 2014
• Volume 85 , pages 295–301, ( 2014 )

Cite this article

• Jessica May 1 ,
• Kristina Osmond 2 &
• Stephen Billick 3  

10k Accesses

18 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

In the last three decades there has been ample research to demonstrate that instituting Multisystemic Therapy for serious juvenile offenders, keeping them in the community with intensive intervention, can significantly reduce recidivism. When there is recidivism, it is less severe than in released incarcerated juveniles. Multisystemic Therapy provides 24 h available parental guidance, family therapy, individual therapy, group therapy, educational support and quite importantly a change of peer group. In New York City, there is the new mandate through the Juvenile Justice Initiative to implement interventions to keep juvenile offenders in the community rather than sending them to be incarcerated. However, this paper aims to examine how teaching prosocial values in early childhood can reduce the incidence of first-time juvenile delinquency. Programs such as the Perry School Project will be discussed to demonstrate that although somewhat expensive, these innovative programs nonetheless are quite cost-effective as the cost to society of adjudication, incarceration and victim damages are significantly greater. Along with teaching prosocial 0020 values, there has been renewed interest in early identification of youth at risk for developing Antisocial Personality Disorder. An update is given on the status of both promising approaches in early intervention to prevent serious juvenile delinquency and hence adult criminality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

LGBTQI+ Youth and Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research

Adolescent susceptibility to deviant peer pressure: does gender matter.

The School-to-Prison Pipeline: A Critical Review of the Punitive Paradigm Shift

Abram KM, Choe JY, Washburn JJ, Romero EG, Teplin LA. Functional Impairment in Youth Three Years after Detention. Journal of Adolescent Health 44(6):528–535, 2009.

Article   PubMed Central   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bergseth KJ, Bouffard JA. Examining the effectiveness of a restorative justice program for various types of juvenile offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. http://ijo.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/07/16/0306624x12453551 . 2012.

Borduin CM, Mann BJ, Cone LT, Henggeler SW, Fucci BR, Blaske DM, Williams RA. Multisystemic treatment of serious juvenile offenders: long-term prevention of criminiality and violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 63(4):569-–578, 1995.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Henggeler SW, Sheidow AJ. Empirically supported family-based treatments for conduct disorder and deliquency in adolesents. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 38(1):30–58, 2012.

Hoeve M, Stams GJ, Van Der Put CE, Dubas JS, Van Der Laan PH, Gerris JRM. A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and deliquency. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 40:771–785, 2012.

Lipman EL, Kenny M, Brennan E, O’Grady S, Augimeri L. Helping boys at-risk of criminal activity: qualitative results of a multi-component intervention. BMC Public Health 11:364, 2011.

New York City Administration for Children’s Services. Juvenile justice initiative. NYC.gov. http://www.nyc.gov/html/acs/downloadsproviders_newsletter/2012Jan25/slides/JJI_Presentation.pdf . 2012.

Osher DM, Quinn MM, Poirer JM, Rutherford RB. Deconstructing the pipeline: using efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-benefit data to reduce minority youth incarceration. New Directions for Youth Development 99:91–120, 2003.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Petrosino A, Turpin-Petrosino C, Buehler J. Scared Straight’ and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2:CD002796, 2009.

Schweinhart LJ, Montie J, Xiang Z, Barnett WS, Belfield CR, Nores M. The high/scope perry preschool study through age 40 summary, conclusions, and frequently asked questions. High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, pp. 194–215, 2005.

Tighe A, Pistrang N, Casdagli L, Baruch G, Butler S. Multisystemic Therapy for young offenders: families’ experiences of therapeutic processes and outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology 26(2):187–197, 2012.

Yoshikawa H. Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and deliquency. The Future of Children 5(3):51–75, 1995.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Hofstra NSLIJ School of Medicine, Hempstead, NY, USA

Jessica May

Mt. Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Kristina Osmond

NYU School of Medicine, 901 5th Avenue, New York, NY, 10021, USA

Stephen Billick

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Billick .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

May, J., Osmond, K. & Billick, S. Juvenile Delinquency Treatment and Prevention: A Literature Review. Psychiatr Q 85 , 295–301 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-014-9296-4

Download citation

Published : 09 March 2014

Issue Date : September 2014

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-014-9296-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Juvenile delinquency
• Multisystemic Therapy
• Perry preschool project
• Early childhood intervention programs
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

18 Delinquency Prevention

Brandon C. Welsh is a Professor of Criminology at Northeastern University, and the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Visiting Professor and Senior Research Fellow at the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement in Amsterdam and a Steering Committee member of the Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group.

• Published: 18 September 2012
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Delinquency prevention involves intervening in the lives of children and youths before they engage in delinquency. Delinquency control or repression responds to individuals after a delinquent act has been committed. Delinquency prevention takes place outside of the juvenile justice system, but delinquency prevention programs are not designed with the intention of excluding justice personnel. This article reviews the research on and key issues facing the prevention of delinquency. It opens by drawing attention to two important yet divergent issues confronting the present state and future of delinquency prevention, which are, research in prevention of delinquency, and the reality of policy and practice. It reviews scientific evidence on what works to prevent delinquency through individual, family, and environmental interventions that are delivered in the early years of the life course. Finally, it examines the implications of this research for juvenile justice policy and practice.

Delinquency prevention involves intervening in the lives of children and youths before they engage in delinquency in the first place—that is, before the first delinquent act. In this respect, it includes interventions applied to the whole community to prevent the onset of delinquency, and interventions targeted at children and youths who are at risk for becoming offenders because of the presence of one or more risk factors. Delinquency prevention involves measures that are largely of a developmental or social nature—preventing the development of criminal potential in individuals and improving the social conditions and institutions (e.g., families, peers, social norms) that influence offending. A social structure perspective is often a key focus in the design of prevention programs.

By contrast, delinquency control or repression responds to individuals after the fact—once a delinquent act has been committed. This marks the initiation of the juvenile justice process. In large measure, delinquency prevention takes place outside of the juvenile justice system. But delinquency prevention programs are not designed with the intention of excluding justice personnel. Some types of prevention programs, especially those that address the needs of older juveniles, involve justice personnel like the police. In these cases, justice personnel work in close collaboration with those in such fields as education, public health, recreation, and family and social services.

The history of the prevention of delinquency in the United States is closely tied to the history of juvenile justice in this country. From the founding of the House of Refuge in New York City in 1825 to more contemporary events, such as amendments to the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, child-saving organizations and law makers have had an interest in both the prevention and control of delinquency. However, many scholars have noted that efforts to prevent juveniles from engaging in delinquency in the first place were secondary to and often overlooked in favor of juvenile justice responses to youths who had come in conflict with the law (Krisberg and Austin 1978 ; Lundman 2001 ; Weis and Hawkins 1981 ).

While this imbalance between delinquency prevention and control continues to this day (and remains a cause for concern), there are signs that prevention, especially targeted at the early years of the life course, is enjoying an unusually higher profile of late. This has come about in large measure because of a number of research developments. One of these developments concerns the substantial knowledge base on the “root causes” of offending. After decades of rigorous research in the United States and across the Western world—using prospective longitudinal studies—a great deal is known about early risk factors for delinquency and later criminal offending (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ). By definition, a risk factor is a variable that predicts an increased probability of offending (Kazdin et al. 1997 ). For example, children who experience poor parental supervision have an increased risk of committing delinquent acts later on. Early risk factors that are strongly associated with delinquency and later criminal offending can be found at the individual, family, and environmental levels. Disappointingly, less is known about protective and promotive factors, but recent research provides some important insights (see Loeber et al. 2008 ; Lösel and Bender 2003 ).

Another development concerns the growing body of high quality scientific evidence on the effectiveness of prevention programs designed to tackle these risk factors and from which evidence-based conclusions can be drawn. At the heart of this is the concept of risk-focused prevention. The basic idea of this approach is straightforward: identify key risk factors for offending and implement prevention methods designed to counteract them. Risk-focused prevention links explanation and prevention, fundamental and applied research, and scholars, policy makers, and practitioners. Many early prevention trials have followed children long enough to measure delinquency. Model programs and systematic reviews and meta-analyses of early prevention programs provide scientific evidence that a wide range of programs in different domains can be effective and others promising in preventing delinquency and later offending (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ; Greenwood 2006 ; Mihalic et al. 2004 ).

An increasing number of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses show that many prevention programs provide value for money and can be a worthwhile investment of government resources compared with prison and other juvenile justice responses (Aos et al. 2004 ; Karoly, Kilburn, and Cannon 2005 ). Research has also documented the widespread public support that exists in the United States and in other countries for prevention programs compared with more punitive measures (Cullen et al. 2007 ; Nagin et al. 2006 ; Roberts and Hastings 2007 ).

Moreover, findings of neuroscience, behavioral research, and economics show a “striking convergence on a set of common principles that account for the potent effects of early environment on the capacity of human skill development,” which affirms the need for greater investments in disadvantaged children in the early years of the life course (Knudsen et al. 2006 , p. 10155; see also Heckman 2006 ). Recent U.S. national scientific commissions on early childhood development and juvenile offending that have examined much of this evidence have also identified the many benefits of early prevention programs and called for concrete action to make early prevention a top government priority (McCord, Widom, and Crowell 2001 ; Shonkoff and Phillips 2000 ; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2001 ).

This chapter sets out to review the research on and key issues facing the prevention of delinquency. The next three sections review the scientific evidence on what works to prevent delinquency (as well as later criminal offending) through individual, family, and environmental (peer, school, and community) interventions that are delivered in the early years of the life course. Only the highest quality research studies (i.e., experiments and quasi-experiments) and the most rigorous literature reviews (i.e., systematic and meta-analytic reviews) that include only high quality projects are included. This approach ensures that conclusions are based on the best available evidence. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications of this research for juvenile justice policy and practice.

I. Individual Prevention

Individual-based prevention programs target risk factors for delinquency and later offending that are found within the individual. Among the most important of these risk factors include low intelligence and attainment, low empathy, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. These programs are targeted on the child. As noted by Duncan and Magnuson ( 2004 , p. 94), “Individual interventions focus directly on the person whose development is targeted, and can occur very early in life, as with intensive preschool education.” This is distinguished from family-based interventions, which are directed at both the child and parent or caregiver (see below).

Early childhood programs help society's most vulnerable members. They have as explicit aims the betterment of children's immediate learning and social and emotional competencies, as well as the improvement of children's success over the life course. In addition, they are implemented at a time when children are most impressionable and hence receptive to intervention (Duncan and Magnuson 2004 ). With a primary emphasis on improving school readiness, providing families in need with various other services, and reaching about half of all impoverished children (Currie 2001 ), Head Start is considered the nation's most important early childhood program (Ripple and Zigler 2003 ).

Two main types of individual-based programs have been found to be effective in preventing delinquency and later criminal offending: preschool intellectual enrichment and child skills training.

A. Preschool Intellectual Enrichment

Preschool intellectual enrichment programs are generally targeted on the risk factors of low intelligence and attainment. As noted by Duncan and Magnuson ( 2004 , p. 105), “Child-focused early-education intervention programs are designed to provide economically disadvantaged children with cognitively stimulating and enriching experiences that their parents are unlikely to provide at home.” Improved cognitive skills, school readiness, and social and emotional development are the main goals of these programs (Currie 2001 ). Some of the key features of these programs include the provision of developmentally appropriate learning curricula, a wide array of cognitive-based enriching activities, and activities for parents, usually of a less intensive nature, so that they may be able to support the school experience at home (Duncan and Magnuson 2004 , pp. 105–06).

On the basis of four evaluations of preschool programs (three evaluated with randomized experimental designs), a meta-analysis found that this type of early developmental prevention produced a significant 12% reduction in delinquency and offending (e.g., from 50% in a control group to 38% in an experimental group) (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ).

The most famous of the programs included in this meta-analysis was the Perry Preschool project carried out in Ypsilanti, Michigan, by Lawrence Schweinhart and David Weikart ( 1980 ). This was essentially a Head Start program targeted at disadvantaged African American children. A sample of 123 children was allocated (approximately at random) to experimental and control groups. The experimental children attended a daily preschool program, backed up by weekly home visits, usually lasting two years (covering ages 3 to 4). The aim of the “plan-do-review” program was to provide intellectual stimulation, to increase thinking and reasoning abilities, and to increase later school achievement.

This program had long-term benefits. Berrueta-Clement and his colleagues ( 1984 ) showed that at age 19, the experimental group was more likely to be employed, more likely to have graduated from high school, more likely to have received college or vocational training, and less likely to have been arrested. By age 27, the experimental group had accumulated only half as many arrests as the controls—an average of 2.3 compared to 4.6 arrests (Schweinhart, Barnes, and Weikart 1993 ). In addition, they were more likely to have graduated from high school, had significantly higher earnings, and were more likely to be home owners.

The most recent follow-up of Perry, at age 40, which included 91% of the original sample (112 out of 123), found that the program continued to make an important difference in the lives of the participants (Schweinhart et al. 2005 ). Compared to the control group, program group members had significantly fewer lifetime arrests for violent crimes (32% versus 48%), property crimes (36% versus 58%), and drug crimes (14% versus 34%), and were significantly less likely to be arrested five or more times (36% versus 55%). Improvements were also recorded in many other important life-course outcomes. For example, significantly higher levels of schooling (77% versus 60% graduating from high school), better records of employment (76% versus 62%), and higher annual incomes were reported by the program group compared to the controls. A cost-benefit analysis at age 40 found that Perry produced just over seventeen dollars of benefit per dollar of cost, with 76% of this being returned to the general public—in the form of savings in crime, education, and welfare, and increased tax revenue—and 24% benefiting each program participant.

Duncan and Magnuson's ( 2004 ) review of preschool education programs distinguished between “intensive efficacy interventions” (or research and demonstration projects) and “more policy-relevant, less intensive interventions” (or routine practice). Their coverage of the former group of preschool intellectual enrichment programs is similar to those in the foregoing meta-analysis, and they, too, found that these programs have long-term beneficial effects on children's criminal behavior (as well as on other outcomes). On the matter of less intensive preschool education interventions like Head Start, the authors found that the evidence was less clear about the ability of these programs to produce results similar to the intensive efficacy ones. However, they concluded that “the weight of the evidence to date indicates that these programs may also improve children's life courses” (p. 105).

The economist Janet Currie ( 2001 ) reviewed early childhood education programs, defined more broadly than preschool programs. She too distinguished between “small-scale model programs” (or research and demonstration projects) and “large-scale public programs” (or routine practice), with the former “typically funded at higher levels and run by more highly trained staff” (p. 217). The findings of the routine practice programs, specifically Head Start, are relevant here. As in Duncan and Magnuson's ( 2004 ) review, Currie ( 2001 ) found that the evidence in support of favorable long-term effects (e.g., on offending) of Head Start was less than conclusive. She attributed this result mostly to a paucity of well-designed studies that have measured long-term effects.

B. Child Skills Training

Interpersonal skills training or social competence programs for children are generally targeted on the risk factors of impulsivity, low empathy, and self-centeredness. As noted by Carolyn Webster-Stratton and Ted Taylor ( 2001 , p. 178), this type of individual-based program is designed to “directly teach children social, emotional, and cognitive competence by addressing appropriate social skills, effective problem-solving, anger management, and emotion language.” A typical program includes one or more of these elements and is highly structured with a limited number of sessions, thus lasting for a relatively short period of time (Lösel and Beelmann 2003 ).

The criminologists Friedrich Lösel and Andreas Beelmann ( 2006 ; see also Lösel and Beelmann 2003 ) carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of child skills training on antisocial behavior (including delinquency). The review included fifty-five randomized controlled experiments with eighty-nine separate experimental-control group comparisons. A meta-analysis found that almost half of the comparisons produced desirable results favoring the children who received the treatment compared to those who did not, while less than one out of ten revealed undesirable results (i.e., the control group fared better than the treatment group). Control participants typically received non-intensive, basic services.

Four evaluations (all randomized controlled experiments) measured delinquency. Effects of the intervention on delinquency were consistent at two different follow-up periods. At immediate outcome or post-intervention (defined as within two months after treatment) the meta-analysis yielded a significant 9% reduction in delinquency in an experimental group compared to a control group. At later follow-up (defined as three months or more after treatment), the average effect was slightly higher—a 10% reduction in delinquency (also a significant effect). The meta-analysis also found that the most effective skills training programs used a cognitive-behavioral approach and were implemented with older children (aged 13 years and over) and higher risk groups who were already exhibiting some behavioral problems.

II. Family Prevention

Family-based prevention programs target risk factors for delinquency and later offending that are associated with the family, such as poor child rearing, poor supervision, and inconsistent or harsh discipline. Broadly speaking, family-based prevention programs have developed along the lines of two major fields of study: psychology and public health. When delivered by psychologists, these programs are often classified into parent management training, functional family therapy, or family preservation (Wasserman and Miller 1998 ). Typically, they attempt to change the social contingencies in the family environment so that children are rewarded in some way for appropriate or prosocial behaviors and punished in some way for inappropriate or antisocial behaviors.

Family-based programs delivered by health professionals such as nurses are typically less behavioral, mainly providing advice and guidance to parents or general parent education. Home visiting with new parents, especially mothers, is perhaps the most popular form of this type of family intervention. In the early 1990s, Hawaii became the first state to offer free home visits for all new mothers. A small number of other states, with Colorado at the forefront, have more recently implemented more intensive but targeted versions of home visiting programs with the aim of eventually providing universal coverage (Calonge 2005 ).

Two main types of family-based programs have been found to be effective in preventing delinquency and later criminal offending: general parent education (in the context of home visiting and parent education plus day care services) and parent management training.

A. Parent Education

Home visiting with new parents, especially mothers, is a popular, although far from universal, method of delivering the family-based intervention known as general parent education. The main goals of home visiting programs center around educating parents to improve the life chances of children from a very young age, often beginning at birth and sometimes as early as the final trimester of pregnancy. Some of the main goals include the prevention of preterm or low weight births, the promotion of healthy child development and school readiness, and the prevention of child abuse and neglect (Gomby, Culross, and Behrman 1999 , p. 4). Home visits very often also serve to improve parental well-being, linking parents to community resources to help with employment, education, or addiction recovery. Home visitors are usually nurses or other health professionals with a diverse array of skills in working with families.

In a meta-analysis that included four home visitation programs (all randomized controlled experiments), it was found that this form of early intervention was effective in preventing antisocial behavior and delinquency, corresponding to a significant 12% reduction (e.g., from 50% in a control group to 38% in an experimental group) (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ).

Oleg Bilukha and his colleagues ( 2005 ) carried out a systematic review of the effectiveness of early childhood home visitation in preventing violence. Four studies were included that reported the effects of home visitation programs on violence by the visited children. Mixed results were found for effects on criminal violence (in adolescence) and child externalizing behavior across the four programs: two reported desirable but nonsignificant effects; one reported a significant desirable effect; and one reported mixed results. On the basis of these results, the authors concluded that the “evidence is insufficient to determine the effectiveness of home visitation interventions in preventing child violence” (p. 17).

Using these and many other studies, the systematic review by Bilukha and colleagues also assessed the effectiveness of early childhood home visitation on parental violence, intimate partner violence, and child maltreatment. For the first two outcomes, there was also insufficient evidence to make a determination of effectiveness. Strong evidence of effectiveness was found, however, for home visiting programs in preventing child abuse and neglect.

The best known home visiting program (and the only one with a direct measure of delinquency) is the Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP) carried out in the semi-rural community of Elmira, New York, by David Olds and his colleagues ( 1998 ). The program enrolled four hundred women prior to their thirtieth week of pregnancy. Women were recruited if they had no previous live births and had at least one of the following high-risk characteristics prone to health and developmental problems in infancy: under 19 years of age, unmarried, or poor. The women were randomly assigned to receive home visits from nurses during pregnancy, or to receive visits both during pregnancy and during the first two years of life, or to a control group who received no visits. Each visit lasted about one and one-quarter hours, and the mothers were visited on average every two weeks. The home visitors gave advice about prenatal and postnatal care of the child, about infant development, and about the importance of proper nutrition and avoiding smoking and drinking during pregnancy.

The results of this experiment showed that the postnatal home visits caused a significant decrease in recorded child physical abuse and neglect during the first two years of life, especially by poor, unmarried, teenage mothers (Olds et al. 1986 ), and in a fifteen-year follow-up, significantly fewer experimental compared to control group mothers were identified as perpetrators of child abuse and neglect (Olds et al. 1997 ). At the age of 15, children of the higher risk mothers who received prenatal or postnatal home visits or both had incurred significantly fewer arrests than their control counterparts (twenty as opposed to forty-five per one hundred children; Olds et al. 1998 ). Several cost-benefit analyses show that the benefits of this program outweighed its costs for the higher risk mothers (see Aos et al. 2004 ; Karoly et al. 1998 ).

A small number of parent education programs that include day care services for the children of the participating parents have also measured delinquency. Day care programs are distinguished from preschool programs in that the former are not necessarily focused on the child's intellectual enrichment or on readying the child for kindergarten and elementary school, but serve largely as an organized form of child care to allow parents (especially mothers) to return to work. Day care also provides children with a number of important benefits, including social interaction with other children and stimulation of their cognitive, sensory, and motor control skills.

In a meta-analysis of three day care programs, it was found that this form of parent education resulted in a small but nonsignificant 7% reduction in antisocial behavior and delinquency (e.g., from 50% in a control group to 43% in an experimental group) (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ).

B. Parent Management Training

Many different types of parent training have been used to prevent and treat child externalizing behavior problems and delinquency (Wasserman and Miller 1998 ). Parent management training refers to “treatment procedures in which parents are trained to alter their child's behavior at home” (Kazdin 1997 , p. 1349). Gerald Patterson ( 1982 ) developed behavioral parent management training. His careful observations of parent-child interaction showed that parents of antisocial children were deficient in their methods of child rearing. These parents failed to tell their children how they were expected to behave, failed to monitor their behavior to ensure that it was desirable, and failed to enforce rules promptly and unambiguously with appropriate rewards and penalties. The parents of antisocial children used more punishment (such as scolding, shouting, or threatening), but failed to make it contingent on the child's behavior.

Patterson attempted to train these parents in effective child-rearing methods, namely, noticing what a child is doing, monitoring behavior over long periods, clearly stating house rules, making rewards and punishments contingent on behavior, and negotiating disagreements so that conflicts and crises did not escalate. His treatment was shown to be effective in reducing child stealing and antisocial behavior over short periods in small-scale studies (Patterson, Chamberlain, and Reid 1982 ; Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992 ).

On the basis of ten high quality evaluations of parent management training programs, a meta-analysis found that this type of early intervention produced a significant 20% reduction in antisocial behavior and delinquency (e.g., from 50% in a control group to 30% in an experimental group) (Farrington and Welsh 2007 ). Each of the ten parent management training programs included in this meta-analysis aimed to teach parents to use rewards and punishments consistently and contingently in child rearing. The programs were usually delivered in guided group meetings of parents, including role-playing and modeling exercises, and three of the programs were delivered by videotape. Just one of the ten programs combined parent management training with another intervention (child skills training).

Alex Mason and his colleagues ( 2003 ) evaluated the effectiveness of an early family-based program that included, as a main component, parent management training. Known as Preparing for the Drug Free Years (PDFY), this universal program to “enhance family protection and reduce children's risk for early substance initiation” was designed to aid parents on many fronts: “teaching parents about the risk and protective factors for substance abuse and helping them to develop skills for establishing and communicating clear behavioral expectations, monitoring their children's behavior and enforcing norms, managing family conflict, promoting child involvement, and strengthening family bonds” (p. 206).

In their evaluation, the first to assess the program's impact on delinquency, thirty-three rural schools in nineteen contiguous counties in the state of Iowa were randomly allocated—using a randomized block design that blocked on “enrollment and on the proportion of lower income students”—to one of three conditions. These conditions included the PDFY program, a minimal contact group (the control group), and another treatment condition known as the Iowa Strengthening Families Program (which the authors did not evaluate as part of this study) (Mason et al. 2003 , p. 205). Altogether, the study included 429 6th grade students (average age 11.3 years) and their families. The PDFY program was carried out in a group format and was fairly short in duration, involving five weekly parenting sessions, each lasting about two hours. Children were involved in one of the sessions.

At the latest follow-up (three and a half years post-intervention), it was found that the experimental group had experienced a significantly slower rate of increase in delinquency and substance use compared to the control group. The authors speculated that other comprehensive family-focused drug prevention programs should be able to produce “effects that generalize to nondrug-related delinquency” (Mason et al. 2003 , p. 210).

The psychologists Wendy Serketich and Jean Dumas ( 1996 ) carried out a meta-analysis of twenty-six controlled studies of behavioral parent training (also called parent management training) with young children up to age 10. Most were based on small numbers (average total sample size was twenty-nine), and most were randomized experiments. They concluded that parent management training was effective in reducing child antisocial behavior, especially for (relatively) older children.

Alex Piquero and his colleagues ( 2009 ) carried out a much broader systematic review and meta-analysis of parent training and found it to be effective in reducing child behavior problems, including antisocial behavior and delinquency. The review, which included fifty-five randomized controlled experiments, investigated the full range of early/family parent training programs for children up to age 5 years, including home visiting, parent education plus day care, and parent management training. Significant differences were not detected across program type (traditional parent training versus home visiting) or outcome source (parent, teacher, or direct observer reports).

III. Peer, School, and Community Prevention

Peer, school, and community prevention programs target environmental-level risk factors for delinquency and later offending. The most important of these risk factors includes associating with delinquent friends; attending high-delinquency rate schools, which have high levels of distrust between teachers and students, low commitment to the school by students, and unclear and inconsistently enforced rules; and growing up in a poor, disorganized neighborhood.

School-based prevention programs have become increasingly popular in recent years. This is due in part to increased attention to school crime that has come about from high-profile school shootings and other violent incidents. Most of the programs that have been set up in the wake of these tragic events focus on the safety of students within schools, with fewer focused on the prevention of delinquency in the wider community. Less can be said about early intervention programs targeted at peer risk factors to prevent delinquency. However, peer-based programs have been used extensively to help children resist peer influences to initiate drug use. Community-based prevention covers a wide array of programs, including after-school, mentoring, and youth and resident groups. These programs hold wide appeal among the public and political leaders alike, but are often among the first programs to lose funding in times of federal or state budget cuts (Butterfield 2003 ). This state of affairs has hampered the knowledge base on the effectiveness of this type of early intervention. An examination of this group of preventive interventions together stems in large part from their shared focus on environmental factors.

A. Peer-Based Programs

Peer-based programs to prevent delinquency and offending are ostensibly designed with two related aims: to reduce the influence of delinquent friends and increase the influence of prosocial friends. Teaching children to resist antisocial peer pressures that encourage delinquent activities can take many forms, including modeling and guided practice. Peers must be older, preferably in their later teens, and influential; such peers are sometimes known as high-status peer leaders.

Unfortunately, no systematic review or meta-analysis has been carried out to assess the effects of peer-based programs on delinquency or later offending. The reviews that have been completed to date have focused on substance use. For example, a large-scale meta-analysis of 143 substance use prevention programs by Nancy Tobler ( 1986 ) concluded that programs using peer leaders were the most effective in reducing smoking, drinking, and drug use.

The National Research Council and Institute of Medicine's Panel on Juvenile Crime (McCord, Widom, and Crowell 2001 ) reviewed four randomized experiments of peer-based interventions, two with delinquency measures. The Panel did not attempt to synthesize program effects on delinquency or other outcomes, but rather cautioned against the practice of grouping deviant or high-risk peers together during early adolescence (p. 138). This was largely because of the research of Joan McCord (the Panel's Co-Chair) on harmful effects of delinquency prevention programs (see Dishion, McCord, and Poulin 1999 ; McCord 2002 , 2003 ), which began with her long-term follow-up of the famous Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study (McCord 1978 ).

In addition, there are no outstanding examples of effective intervention programs for delinquency or later offending based on peer risk factors. The most hopeful programs involve using high-status conventional peers to teach children ways of resisting peer pressure; this has been shown to be effective in reducing drug use (Tobler et al. 1999 ). In addition, in a randomized experiment in St. Louis, Ronald Feldman, John Wodarski, and Timothy Caplinger ( 1983 ) showed that placing antisocial adolescents in activity groups dominated by prosocial adolescents led to a reduction in their antisocial behavior (compared with antisocial adolescents placed in antisocial groups). Over four hundred boys around the age of 11 were included in the study, and the focus was on group-level behavior modification. The findings of this study suggest that the influence of prosocial peers can be harnessed to reduce offending.

B. School-Based Programs

Schools are a critical social context for crime prevention efforts, from the early to later grades (Elliott, Hamburg, and Williams 1998 ). All schools work to produce vibrant and productive members of society. According to Denise Gottfredson and her colleagues ( 2002 , p. 149), “Students who are impulsive, are weakly attached to their schools, have little commitment to achieving educational goals, and whose moral beliefs in the validity of conventional rules for behavior are weak are more likely to engage in crime than those who do not possess these characteristics.” The school's role in influencing these risk factors and preventing delinquency in both school and the wider community (the focus here) differs from situational and administrative measures taken to make the school a safer place (e.g., through metal detectors, police in school, or closed-circuit television surveillance cameras).

There have been a number of comprehensive, evidence-based reviews on the effectiveness of early school-based programs to prevent delinquency and offending. David Wilson, Denise Gottfredson, and Stacy Najaka ( 2001 ; see also Gottfredson et al. 2002 ; Gottfredson, Wilson, and Najaka 2006 ) conducted a meta-analysis that included 165 randomized and quasi-experimental studies with 216 experimental-control group comparisons. Their meta-analysis identified four types of school-based programs as effective in preventing delinquency: school and discipline management, classroom or instructional management, reorganization of grades or classes, and fostering self-control or social competency using cognitive behavioral or behavioral instructional methods. Reorganization of grades or classes had the largest mean effect size ( d = .34), corresponding to a significant 17% reduction in delinquency. Three of these four effective types of school-based programs (other than school and discipline management) were also effective in preventing alcohol and drug use, and fostering self-control or social competency with cognitive behavioral or behavioral instructional methods was effective in preventing other problem behaviors.

Two other meta-analyses, one by Sandra Wilson and Mark Lipsey ( 2007 ) and the other by Julie Mytton and her colleagues ( 2002 ), provide further support for the effectiveness of school-based prevention programs in general, especially those targeted on the highest risk children.

One of the most important early school-based prevention experiments was carried out in Seattle by David Hawkins and his colleagues ( 1991 ). They implemented a multicomponent program (known as the Seattle Social Development Project) combining parent training, teacher training, and skills training. About five hundred 1st grade children (aged 6) in twenty-one classes were randomly assigned to be in experimental or control classes. The children in the experimental classes received special treatment at home and school, which was designed to increase their attachment to their parents and their bonding to the school, based on the assumption that delinquency was inhibited by the strength of social bonds. In addition, the treated children were trained in interpersonal cognitive problem solving. Their parents were trained to notice and reinforce socially desirable behavior in a program called “Catch Them Being Good.” Their teachers were trained in classroom management, for example, to provide clear instructions and expectations to children, to reward children for participation in desired behavior, and to teach children prosocial (socially desirable) methods of solving problems.

In an evaluation of this program eighteen months later, when the children were in different classes, Hawkins and his colleagues ( 1991 ) found that the boys who were in the experimental program were significantly less aggressive than the control boys, according to teacher ratings. This difference was particularly marked for Caucasian boys compared to African American boys. The experimental girls were not significantly less aggressive, but they were less self-destructive, anxious, and depressed. Julie O’Donnell and her colleagues ( 1995 ) focused on children in low-income families and reported that, in the 6th grade (age 12), experimental boys were less likely to have initiated delinquency, while experimental girls were less likely to have initiated drug use. In the latest follow-up of offending outcomes, at age 18, Hawkins and his colleagues ( 1999 ) found that the full intervention group (those receiving the intervention from grades 1 through 6) admitted less violence, less alcohol abuse, and fewer sexual partners than the late intervention group (grades 5 and 6 only) or the controls. A cost-benefit analysis of the program by Steve Aos and his colleagues ( 2004 ) found that for every dollar spent on the program, more than three dollars was saved to government and crime victims.

Noticeably absent from this discussion of effective school-based delinquency prevention programs is the widely popular DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program, which brings uniformed law enforcement officers into elementary schools to educate children about the dangers of drug use and the skills needed to resist peer pressure to use drugs. The reason for its absence here is that large-scale evaluations (many of which employed randomized experimental designs) and independent reviews have consistently found that the program has a trivial effect on substance use and delinquency (see Gottfredson et al. 2006 ; U.S. General Accountability Office 2003 ). Key reasons for its ineffectiveness include the fact that it targets children who are too young to appreciate its message and it does not employ a cognitive-behavioral focus. These results have led to hundreds of school districts to discontinue its use, as well as its removal from the “List of Exemplary and Promising Prevention Programs” administered by the U.S. Department of Education's Safe and Drug-Free Schools program (Weiss et al. 2008 ). An evaluation of a new DARE curriculum designed for older students, known as “Take Charge of Your Life,” found that it had no effect on the onset or initiation of drug use (Sloboda et al. 2009 )

C. Community-Based Programs

More often than not, community-based efforts to prevent delinquency and later offending are some combination of developmental prevention, with its focus on reducing the development or influence of early risk factors—or root causes—for delinquency and later offending (Tremblay and Craig 1995 ), and situational prevention, with its focus on reducing opportunities for crime (Clarke 1995 ). Unlike these two general crime prevention strategies, there is little agreement in the academic literature on the definition of community prevention and the types of programs that fall within it (Bennett 1996 ). Hope's ( 1995 ) definition that it involves actions designed to change the social conditions and institutions that influence offending in residential communities is perhaps the most informative.

The latest research on the effectiveness of community-based crime prevention finds that after-school programs are promising and mentoring programs are effective in preventing juvenile crime.

1. After-School Programs

This type of program is premised on the belief that providing prosocial opportunities for young people in the after-school hours can reduce their involvement in delinquent behavior in the community. After-school programs target a range of crime risk factors, including alienation and association with delinquent peers. There are many different types of these programs, including recreation-based programs, drop-in clubs, and tutoring services.

Welsh and Hoshi ( 2006 ) identified three high quality after-school programs with an evaluated impact on delinquency. Each program produced desirable effects on delinquency, and one program also reported lower rates of drug activity for participants compared to controls. Welsh and Hoshi concluded that community-based after-school programs represent a promising approach to preventing juvenile offending, but this conclusion only applies to areas immediately around recreation centers.

Denise Gottfredson and her colleagues ( 2004 ), as part of a larger study to investigate the effects of after-school programs on delinquency in Maryland, reported on a brief review of the effectiveness of these programs. They concluded that there is insufficient evidence at present to support claims that after-school programs are effective in preventing delinquency or other problem behaviors. However, they noted that, among a small number of experimental and quasi-experimental studies (which included two of the three programs in Welsh and Hoshi's review), after-school programs that “involve a heavy dose of social competency skill development … may reduce problem behavior” (p. 256). In the Maryland study, which used randomized experimental and quasi-experimental methods with statistical matching designs to evaluate the effects of fourteen after-school programs, it was found that participation in the programs reduced delinquent behavior among children in middle school but not elementary school. Increasing intentions not to use drugs and positive peer associations were identified as the mechanisms for the middle school programs’ favorable effects on delinquency, while decreasing time spent unsupervised or increasing involvement in constructive activities played no significant role (pp. 263–64).

2. Mentoring

This type of program usually involves nonprofessional adult volunteers spending time with young people at risk for delinquency, dropping out of school, school failure, and other social problems. Mentors behave in a “supportive, nonjudgmental manner while acting as role models” (Howell 1995 , p. 90). In many cases, mentors work one-on-one with young people, often forming strong bonds. Care is taken in matching the mentor and the young person.

Darrick Jolliffe and David Farrington's ( 2008 ) systematic review and meta-analysis of eighteen mentoring programs found this to be an effective approach to preventing delinquency. The average effect across the studies corresponded to a significant 10% reduction in offending. The authors found that mentoring was more effective in reducing offending when the average duration of each contact between mentor and mentee was greater, in smaller scale studies, and when mentoring was combined with other interventions.

IV. Conclusions and Policy Implications

This chapter opened by drawing attention to two important yet seemingly divergent issues that confront the present state and future of delinquency prevention in the United States. On the one hand, there is the research, which has never before been so robust and wide-ranging in its support for the prevention of delinquency. Importantly, this research shows that delinquency prevention programs can be effective and worthwhile in their own right, as well as compared to prison and other delinquency control measures. On the other hand, there is the reality of the policy and practice of delinquency prevention, which shows that it holds a small place in the nation's response to juvenile crime. Delinquency control strategies operated by the juvenile justice system dominate.

Efforts to address this imbalance have received some attention. Perhaps the most promising initiative is the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders developed by John Wilson and James Howell ( 1993 ). Programs are based on a continuum of care that begins in early childhood and progresses through late adolescence. There are six components to the strategy: (1) prevention in early childhood; (2) intervention with pre-delinquents and child delinquents; (3) immediate intervention for first-time delinquent offenders; (4) intermediate sanctions for first-time serious or violent juvenile offenders; (5) secure placement for the most serious of these offenders; and (6) aftercare or reentry (Howell 2009 , p. 222).

This strategy recognizes that effective prevention programs will go some way toward reducing the number of young people who come in contact with the juvenile justice system. How much the case flow of delinquents through the justice system could be reduced by expanded use of effective prevention programs is not known. What is known is that the current evidence base on effective delinquency prevention programs (as reviewed above) satisfies the key elements of the strategy to help achieve this objective. First, effective programs are targeted on the most important early risk factors for delinquency and later offending. Second, effective programs can be found in different domains and are targeted at different age groups. At the individual level, effective programs include preschool intellectual enrichment and child skills training. At the family level, effective programs include general parent education in the context of home visiting and day care as well as parent management training. At the environmental level, effective programs include a number of school-based programs and mentoring, and after-school programs are promising.

In the interest of achieving maximum effectiveness, this strategy also recognizes the need for a comprehensive, locally driven program that includes several of these effective prevention programs. Communities That Care (CTC) has many attractions to serve as the model for delivering these delinquency prevention programs. It is both risk-focused and evidence-based, and it is widely used across the United States, at the last count in several hundred communities (Harachi et al. 2003 ). In the first randomized controlled trial of CTC, David Hawkins and his colleagues ( 2008 ) report promising findings in reducing targeted risk factors and initiation of delinquent behavior.

Another important consideration for a strategy that values prevention is the determination about the authority that will be responsible for administering it. Peter Greenwood ( 2006 ) excellently reviews the pros and cons of different government departments that could have primary responsibility for delinquency prevention programs in general (Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services, or HHS). Ultimately, he argues that HHS should be the lead department for early prevention programs, while Justice is the more appropriate department for serving the needs of high-risk and adjudicated youths. Greenwood summarizes his arguments in favor of HHS with the following principle: “ Primary responsibility for developing and operating delinquency-prevention programs should be assigned to an appropriate agency in HHS unless immediate public protection is an overriding concern ” (p. 179, emphasis in original). One argument in favor of HHS is that the benefits of prevention are not restricted to delinquency, but include many other aspects of a successful or healthy lifestyle (including education, employment, substance use, relationships, and mental health).

Striking a greater balance between prevention and control offers to go a long way toward addressing the multiple needs of at-risk children and their families and reducing juvenile crime. Getting there will require a number of important steps and will not necessarily be easy. Making sure that the research evidence is at center stage in this process will ensure it is on the right track. And that will be a good start.

Aos, Steve , Roxanne Lieb , Jim Mayfield , Marna Miller , and Annie Pennucci . 2004 . Benefits and Costs of Prevention and Early Intervention Programs for Youth . Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Bennett, Trevor H.   1996 . “Community Crime Prevention in Britain.” In Kommunale Kriminalprävention: Paradigmenwechsel und Wiederentdeckung alter Weisheiten , edited by Thomas Trenczek and Hartmut Pfeiffer . Bonn, Germany: Forum Verlag Godesberg.

Berrueta-Clement, John R. , Lawrence J. Schweinhart , W. Steven Barnett , Ann S. Epstein , and David P. Weikart . 1984 . Changed Lives: The Effects of the Perry Preschool Program on Youths Through Age 19 . Ypsilanti, MI.: High/Scope Press.

Bilukha, Oleg , Robert A. Hahn , Alex Crosby , Mindy T. Fullilove , Akiva Liberman , Eve Moscicki , Susan Snyder , Farris Tuma , Phaedra Corso , Amanda Schofield , and Peter A. Briss . 2005 . “ The Effectiveness of Early Childhood Home Visitation in Preventing Violence: A Systematic Review. ” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28(2S1): 11–39.

Butterfield, Fox . 2003. “Proposed White House Budget Cuts Imperil a Lifeline for Troubled Oregon Teenagers.” New York Times (June 7), p. A20; available at: www.nytimes.com .

Calonge, Ned . 2005 . “ Community Interventions to Prevent Violence: Translation into Public Health Practice. ” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28(2S1): 4–5.

Clarke, Ronald V.   1995 . “Situational Crime Prevention.” In Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention . Crime and Justice: A Review of Research , vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David P. Farrington . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cullen, Francis T. , Brenda A. Vose , Cheryl N. L. Jonson , and James D. Unnever . 2007 . “ Public Support for Early Intervention: Is Child Saving a ‘Habit of the Heart’? ” Victims and Offenders 2: 108–24.

Currie, Janet . 2001 . “ Early Childhood Education Programs. ” Journal of Economic Perspectives 15: 213–38.

Dishion, Thomas J. , Joan McCord , and François Poulin . 1999 . “ When Interventions Harm: Peer Groups and Problem Behavior. ” American Psychologist 54: 755–64.

Duncan, Greg J. , and Katherine Magnuson . 2004 . “Individual and Parent-Based Intervention Strategies for Promoting Human Capital and Positive Behavior.” In Human Development Across Lives and Generations: The Potential for Change , edited by P. Lindsay Chase-Lansdale , Kathleen Kiernan , and Ruth J. Friedman . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Elliott, Delbert S. , Beatrix A. Hamburg , and Kirk R. Williams . 1998 . “Violence in American Schools: An Overview.” In Violence in American Schools: A New Perspective , edited by Delbert S. Elliott , Beatrix A. Hamburg , and Kirk R. Williams . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Farrington, David P. , and Brandon C. Welsh . 2007 . Saving Children from a Life of Crime: Early Risk Factors and Effective Interventions . New York: Oxford University Press.

Feldman, Ronald A. , John S. Wodarski , and Timothy E. Caplinger . 1983 . St. Louis Conundrum: The Effective Treatment of Antisocial Youth . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gomby, Deanna S. , Patti L. Culross , and Richard E. Behrman . 1999 . “ Home Visiting: Recent Program Evaluations—Analysis and Recommendations. ” The Future of Children 9(1): 4–26.

Gottfredson, Denise C. , Stephanie A. Gerstenblith , David A. Soulé , Shannon C. Womer , and Shaoli Lu . 2004 . “ Do After School Programs Reduce Delinquency? ” Prevention Science 5: 253–66.

Gottfredson, Denise C. , David B. Wilson , and Stacey S. Najaka . 2002 . “The Schools.” In Crime: Public Policies for Crime Control , 2nd ed., edited by James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia . Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.

Gottfredson, Denise C. , David B. Wilson , and Stacey S. Najaka . 2006 . “School-Based Crime Prevention.” In Evidence-Based Crime Prevention , rev. ed., edited by Lawrence W. Sherman , David P. Farrington , Brandon C. Welsh , and Doris L. MacKenzie . New York: Routledge.

Greenwood, Peter W.   2006 . Changing Lives: Delinquency Prevention as Crime-Control Policy . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Harachi, Tracy W. , J. David Hawkins , Richard F. Catalano , Andrea M. Lafazia , Brian H. Smith , and Michael W. Arthur . 2003 . “Evidence-Based Community Decision Making for Prevention: Two Case Studies of Communities That Care.” Japanese Journal of Sociological Criminology 28: 26–38.

Hawkins, J. David , Eric C. Brown , Sabrina Oesterle , Michael W. Arthur , Robert D. Abbott , and Richard F. Catalano . 2008 . “ Early Effects of Communities That Care on Targeted Risks and Initiation of Delinquent Behavior and Substance Abuse. ” Journal of Adolescent Health 43: 15–22.

Hawkins, J. David , Richard F. Catalano , Rick Kosterman , Robert Abbott , and Karl G. Hill . 1999 . “ Preventing Adolescent Health Risk Behaviors by Strengthening Protection During Childhood. ” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 153: 226–34.

Hawkins, J. David , Elizabeth von Cleve , and Richard F. Catalano . 1991 . “ Reducing Early Childhood Aggression: Results of a Primary Prevention Program. ” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 30: 208–17.

Heckman, James J.   2006 . “ Skill Formation and the Economics of Investing in Disadvantaged Children. ” Science 312: 1900–02.

Hope, Tim . 1995 . “Community Crime Prevention.” In Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention . Crime and Justice: A Review of Research , vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David P. Farrington . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Howell, James C. , ed. 1995 . Guide for Implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Howell, James C.   2009 . Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework , 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

Jolliffe, Darrick , and David P. Farrington . 2008 . The Influence of Mentoring on Reoffending . Stockholm, Sweden: National Council for Crime Prevention.

Karoly, Lynn A. , Peter W. Greenwood , Susan S. Everingham , Jill Houbé , M. Rebecca Kilburn , C. Peter Rydell , Matthew Sanders , and James Chiesa . 1998 . Investing in Our Children: What We Know and Don’t Know About the Costs and Benefits of Early Childhood Interventions . Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Karoly, Lynn A. , M. Rebecca Kilburn , and Jill S. Cannon . 2005 . Early Childhood Interventions: Proven Results, Future Promise . Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Kazdin, Alan E.   1997 . “ Parent Management Training: Evidence, Outcomes, and Issues. ” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 36: 1349–56.

Kazdin, Alan E. , Helena C. Kraemer , Ronald C. Kessler , David J. Kupfer , and David R. Offord . 1997 . “Contributions of Risk-Factor Research to Developmental Psychopathology.” Clinical Psychology Review 17: 375–406.

Knudsen, Eric I. , James J. Heckman , Judy L. Cameron , and Jack P. Shonkoff . 2006 . “ Economic, Neurobiological, and Behavior Perspectives on Building America's Future Workforce. ” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103: 10155–62.

Krisberg, Barry , and James Austin . 1978 . The Children of Ishmael: Critical Perspectives on Juvenile Justice . Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.

Loeber, Rolf , David P. Farrington , Magda Stouthamer-Loeber , and Helene Raskin White . 2008 . Violence and Serious Theft: Development and Prediction from Childhood to Adulthood . New York: Routledge.

Lösel, Friedrich , and Andreas Beelmann . 2003 . “ Effects of Child Skills Training in Preventing Antisocial Behavior: A Systematic Review. ” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 587: 84–109.

Lösel, Friedrich , and Andreas Beelmann . 2006 . “Child Social Skills Training.” In Preventing Crime: What Works for Children, Offenders, Victims, and Places , edited by Brandon C. Welsh and David P. Farrington . New York: Springer.

Lösel, Friedrich , and Doris Bender . 2003 . “Protective Factors and Resilience.” In Early Prevention of Adult Antisocial Behaviour , edited by David P. Farrington and Jeremy W. Coid . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lundman, Richard J.   2001 . Prevention and Control of Juvenile Delinquency , 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mason, W. Alex , Rick Kosterman , J. David Hawkins , Kevin P. Haggerty , and Richard L. Spoth . 2003 . “Reducing Adolescents’ Growth in Substance Use and Delinquency: Randomized Trial Effects of a Parent-Training Prevention Intervention.” Prevention Science 4: 203–12.

McCord, Joan . 1978 . “A Thirty-Year Follow-Up of Treatment Effects.” American Psychologist 33: 284–89.

McCord, Joan . 2002 . “ Counterproductive Juvenile Justice. ” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 35: 230–37.

McCord, Joan . 2003 . “ Cures that Harm: Unanticipated Outcomes of Crime Prevention Programs. ” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 587: 16–30.

McCord, Joan , Cathy Spatz Widom , and Nancy A. Crowell , eds. 2001 . Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Mihalic, Sharon F. , Abigail Fagan , Katherine Irwin , Diane Ballard , and Delbert S. Elliott . 2004 . Blueprints for Violence Prevention . Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.

Mytton, Julie A. , Carolyn DiGuiseppi , David A. Gough , Rod S. Taylor , and Stuart Logan . 2002 . “School-Based Violence Prevention Programs: Systematic Review of Secondary Prevention Trials.” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 156: 752–62.

Nagin, Daniel S. , Alex R. Piquero , Elizabeth S. Scott , and Laurence Steinberg . 2006 . “ Public Preferences for Rehabilitation Versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey. ” Criminology and Public Policy 5: 627–52.

O’Donnell, Julie , J. David Hawkins , Richard F. Catalano , Robert D. Abbott , and L. Edward Day . 1995 . “Preventing School Failure, Drug Use, and Delinquency Among Low-Income Children: Long-Term Intervention in Elementary Schools.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 65: 87–100.

Olds, David L. , John Eckenrode , Charles R. Henderson , Harriet Kitzman , Jane Powers , Robert Cole , Kimberly Sidora , Pamela Morris , Lisa M. Pettitt , and Dennis W. Luckey . 1997 . “Long-Term Effects of Home Visitation on Maternal Life Course and Child Abuse and Neglect: Fifteen-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial.” Journal of the American Medical Association 278: 637–43.

Olds, David L. , Charles R. Henderson , Robert Chamberlin , and Robert Tatelbaum . 1986 . “ Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect: A Randomized Trial of Nurse Home Visitation. ” Pediatrics 78: 65–78.

Olds, David L. , Charles R. Henderson , Robert Cole , John Eckenrode , Harriet Kitzman , Dennis W. Luckey , Lisa M. Pettitt , Kimberly Sidora , Pamela Morris , and Jane Powers . 1998 . “Long-Term Effects of Nurse Home Visitation on Children's Criminal and Antisocial Behavior: 15-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.” Journal of the American Medical Association 280: 1238–44.

Patterson, Gerald . 1982 . Coercive Family Process . Eugene, OR: Castalia.

Patterson, Gerald , Patricia Chamberlain , and John B. Reid . 1982 . “ A Comparative Evaluation of a Parent Training Program. ” Behavior Therapy 13: 638–50.

Patterson, Gerald , John B. Reid , and Thomas J. Dishion . 1992 . Antisocial Boys . Eugene, OR: Castalia.

Piquero, Alex R. , David P. Farrington , Brandon C. Welsh , Richard E. Tremblay , and Wesley G. Jennings . 2009 . “ Effects of Early/Family Parent Training Programs on Antisocial Behavior and Delinquency. ” Journal of Experimental Criminology 5: 83–120.

Ripple, Carol H. , and Edward Zigler . 2003 . “ Research, Policy, and the Federal Role in Prevention Initiatives for Children. ” American Psychologist 58: 482–90.

Roberts, Julian V. , and Ross Hastings . 2007 . “Public Opinion and Crime Prevention: A Review of International Findings.” In Learning from the Past—Planning for the Future , edited by Ross Hastings and Melanie Bania . Ottawa, Canada: Institute for the Prevention of Crime, University of Ottawa.

Schweinhart, Lawrence J. , Helen V. Barnes and David P. Weikart . 1993 . Significant Benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through Age 27 . Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

Schweinhart, Lawrence J. , Jeanne Montie , Xiang Zongping , W. Steven Barnett , Clive R. Belfield , and Milagros Nores . 2005 . Lifetime Effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40 . Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

Schweinhart, Lawrence J. , and David P. Weikart . 1980 . Young Children Grow Up: The Effects of the Perry Preschool Program on Youths Through Age 15 . Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

Serketich, Wendy J. , and Jean E. Dumas . 1996 . “The Effectiveness of Behavioral Parent Training to Modify Antisocial Behavior in Children: A Meta-Analysis.” Behavior Therapy 27: 171–86.

Shonkoff, Jack P. and Deborah A. Phillips , eds. 2000 . From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Sloboda, Zili , Richard C. Stephens , Peggy C. Stephens , Scott F. Grey , Brent Teasdale , Richard D. Hawthorne , Joseph Williams , and Jesse F. Marquette . 2009 . “ The Adolescent Substance Abuse Prevention Study: A Randomized Field Trial of a Universal Substance Abuse Prevention Program. ” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 102: 1–10.

Tobler, Nancy S.   1986 . “Meta-Analysis of 143 Drug Treatment Programs: Quantitative Outcome Results of Program Participants Compared to a Control or Comparison Group.” Journal of Drug Issues 16: 537–67.

Tobler, Nancy S. , Terri Lessard , Diana Marshall , Peter Ochshorn , and Michael Roona . 1999 . “Effectiveness of School-Based Drug Prevention Programs for Marijuana Use.” School Psychology International 20: 105–37.

Tremblay, Richard E. , and Wendy M. Craig . 1995 . “Developmental Crime Prevention.” In Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David P. Farrington . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2001 . Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General . Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

U.S. General Accountability Office. 2003 . Youth Illicit Drug Use Prevention: DARE Long- Term Evaluations and Federal Efforts to Identify Effective Programs . Report GAO-03–172R. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accountability Office.

Wasserman, Gail A. , and Laurie S. Miller . 1998 . “The Prevention of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offending.” In Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions , edited by Rolf Loeber and David P. Farrington . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Webster-Stratton, Carolyn , and Ted Taylor . 2001 . “ Nipping Early Risk Factors in the Bud: Preventing Substance Abuse, Delinquency, and Violence in Adolescence Through Interventions Targeted at Young Children (0–8 Years). ” Prevention Science 2: 165–92.

Weis, Joseph G. , and J. David Hawkins . 1981 . Preventing Delinquency . Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.

Weiss, Carol H. , Erin Murphy-Graham , Anthony Petrosino , and Allison G. Gandhi . 2008 . “The Fairy Godmother—and Her Warts: Making the Dream of Evidence-Based Policy Come True.” American Journal of Evaluation 29: 29–47.

Welsh, Brandon C. , and Akemi Hoshi . 2006 . “Communities and Crime Prevention.” In Evidence-Based Crime Prevention , rev. ed., edited by Lawrence W. Sherman , David P. Farrington , Brandon C. Welsh , Doris L. MacKenzie . New York: Routledge.

Wilson, David B. , Denise C. Gottfredson , and Stacy S. Najaka . 2001 . “School-Based Prevention of Problem Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 17: 247–72.

Wilson, John J. , and James C. Howell . 1993 . A Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Wilson, Sandra Jo , and Mark W. Lipsey . 2007 . “School-Based Interventions for Aggressive and Disruptive Behavior: Update of a Meta-Analysis.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 33(2S): 130–43.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Your browser does not support HTML5 or CSS3

To best view this site, you need to update your browser to the latest version, or download a HTML5 friendly browser. Download: Firefox // Download: Chrome

Pages may display incorrectly.

Chapter 3: Measuring delinquency

• Useful Websites

Chapter 3 focuses on measuring delinquency, presenting both research methods and sources of data for studying delinquent behavior. The most common method used in the study of delinquency is survey research. This chapter briefly describes the process of survey research, and presents the National Youth Survey and the Community Survey of the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods as examples of this methodology. Other research methods presented in Chapter 3 include ethnography, ecological analysis, and the comparison of offenders and non-offenders, a method used by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck in the mid-1900s. To foster an understanding of these research methods, we discuss both strengths and weaknesses of these different approaches. Three primary data sources are also presented in this chapter: “official data” provided through the Uniform Crime Reporting program and through Juvenile Court Statistics, victimization surveys such as the National Crime Victimization Survey, and self-report surveys of offending. Again, we discuss both strengths and weaknesses of these data sources, and consider why they sometimes present differing pictures of the amount and types of delinquency in the United States.

• survey research
• ethnography
• ecological analysis
• Uniform Crime Reporting program
• cross-sectional survey
• longitudinal survey
• reliability
• Comparing offenders and non-offenders
• The National Youth Survey
• The Community Survey of the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods
• Ethnography
• Contemporary ecological analysis
• Redesign of the UCR program
• Strengths of UCR data
• Weaknesses of UCR data
• Juvenile Court Statistics
• Strengths of victimization surveys
• Weaknesses of victimization surveys
• Strengths of self-report data
• Weaknesses of self-report data
• Comparing UCR and NCVS data
• Comparing self-report data to UCR and NCVS data
• Summary and conclusions
• National Youth Survey , Institute of Behavioral Science at the University of Colorado: www.colorado.edu/ibs/NYSFS/
• Uniform Crime Reporting Program , Federal Bureau of Investigation: www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr
• Juvenile Court Statistics , National Center for Juvenile Justice: www.ncjj.org/Publication/Juvenile-Court-Statistics-2011.aspx
• National Crime Victimization Survey , Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics: www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245

• Skip to main content
• Skip to FDA Search
• Skip to in this section menu
• Skip to footer links

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

•   Search
•   Menu
• Science & Research
• About Science & Research at FDA
• The FDA Science Forum

Evaluation of C. elegans growth and juvenile population locomotor activity as a potential screening tool for identifying chemical hazards

2023 FDA Science Forum

Background:

Government agencies and non-governmental organizations are currently working on the best ways to improve toxicity testing and safety evaluation while shifting away from studies on laboratory mammals. Human development is a highly complex process that cannot be fully modeled with any single experimental method. The use of apical endpoint data such as growth rate and behavior from small, non-mammalian organisms such as Caenorhabditis elegans, in combination with human cell based in vitro assays and computational modeling can contribute to weight of evidence assessments for chemical safety evaluation.

Cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, hydroxyurea, and ribavirin are teratogens that also induce growth retardation in developing mammals. In at least some studies on each of these chemicals, fetal weight reductions were seen at mammalian exposures below those that had teratogenic effects, suggesting that screening for developmental delays (DevDel) in a small alternative whole-animal model could act as a general toxicity endpoint to flag chemicals for further testing for more specific adverse developmental outcomes.

Methodology:

C. elegans are non-pathogenic microscopic nematodes. The worm Development and Activity Test (wDAT) measures C. elegans developmental timing and stage-specific spontaneous locomotor activity (SLA). Previously, the wDAT identified DevDel and SLA level changes in C. elegans with mammalian developmental neurotoxins arsenic, lead, and mercury.

As detected with the wDAT, the lowest concentrations of 5-fluorouracil, ribavirin, and hydroxyurea that induced DevDel in C. elegans were 2.0, 2.5, and 40µg/mL, respectively. Population SLA changes were detected at 2.0, 5.0 and 80µg/mL respectively for 5-fluorouracil, ribavirin, and hydroxyurea. Cyclophosphamide is a prodrug that requires bioactivation by cytochrome P450s for both beneficial and toxic effects. Cyclophosphamide tests as a false negative in several in vitro assays, and it was also a false negative with the wDAT. D-mannitol also had no effect at up to 1mg/mL, making it a wDAT true negative.

Conclusion:

Within this test set, three of four known mammalian developmental toxins induced DevDel and SLA changes in C. elegans. Further testing will determine the utility of this C. elegans assay within toxicity test batteries or weight of evidence approaches to identify chemicals as potential hazards to human health.

Download the Poster (PDF; 0.41 MB)