Related Experiment Videos
Intervention groups for adolescents with conduct problems: is aggregation harmful or helpful?
Wendy Mager1, Richard Milich, Monica J Harris
1Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40506-0044, USA.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
|June 17, 2005
Summary
Adolescent treatment groups with only conduct problem peers showed better behavior than mixed groups. This challenges the "deviant training" theory, suggesting peer interactions significantly impact treatment outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Psychology
- Developmental Psychology
- Clinical Psychology
Background:
- Previous research suggested peer deviancy during treatment could be detrimental.
- The "deviant training" hypothesis posits negative peer influence in group settings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of "pure" (conduct problems only) versus "mixed" (conduct problems and non-problem peers) problem-solving skills training groups.
- To investigate the impact of peer aggregation on adolescent behavior during treatment.
Main Methods:
- 139 sixth and seventh graders participated in either pure or mixed skill-based groups.
- Data collected at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and 6-month follow-up.
- Intervention process variables and externalizing behavior (parent/teacher ratings) were assessed.
Main Results:
- Adolescents in "pure" groups exhibited more adaptive in-session behavior.
- "Pure" group participants had lower externalizing behavior scores post-intervention compared to "mixed" groups.
- Mediation analysis confirmed "deviant training" in mixed groups predicted worse outcomes.
Conclusions:
- Findings contradict the "deviant training" hypothesis regarding pure groups.
- Peer composition significantly influences treatment effectiveness for adolescents with conduct problems.
- Targeted interventions may benefit from homogeneous peer groupings to mitigate negative influences.