1. Treatment Programmes

2. Aim: To examine the use of an offender treatment programmes and its effectiveness Learning Objectives: By the end of these sessions you will be able to: Describe and evaluate Ireland’s (2000) study Describe and evaluate anger management treatment programmes

3. After a Guilty Verdict - Treatment Programmes Anger Management

4. Breakdown of Sessions 12 x 1hour over 3 days Session 1 : Content of sessions, rules of the course. Importance of using anger diaries. Session 2: Triggers for angry behaviour, understanding the consequences of temper loss. Anger Management Therapy With Young Male Offenders 183 Session 3: Cycle of angry behaviour, importance of body language in signalling anger. Session 4: Replacing aggressive body language with non- aggressive body language. Session 5: Importance of thoughts. Using ‘non-angry’ thoughts. The parts of an angry incident i.e. before, during and after. * Session 6: Using non-angry thoughts before, during and after angry incidents. Importance of self-praise following avoidance of anger- loss..

5. Session 7: Importance of bodily arousal in relation to angry behaviour. Learning how to wind down. Session 8: Relaxation techniques to help cope with feeling wound-up. Session 9: Choosing how you behave towards others. Session 10: Learning to express anger assertively. Session 11: Recognising and dealing with criticisms and insults. Peer group pressure and how to deal with this. * Session 12: Identifying high-risk situations and lapse/relapse

6. Aim To assess whether anger-management programmes work within a group of young male offenders Procedure Quasi experiment - Two groups Experimental Group (50 participants) Received CALM anger management programme Experimental Group (50 participants) Received CALM anger management programme Control Group (37 participants) No intervention or treatment programme Control Group (37 participants) No intervention or treatment programme

7. Procedure Each participant was measured on the following... 1. Their responses to a cognitive behavioural interview 2. Wing Behavioural Checklist (WBC) - Completed by prison officers rating 29 angry behaviours 3. Anger Management Assessment (AMA) - A self- report questionnaire on anger management with 53 items completed by the prisoners themselves

8. Sample 50 prisoners who had completed an anger management course and a control group of 37 prisoners who had been assessed as suitable for such a course but had not actually completed one.

9. Results: There was a significant reduction in prison wing-based aggression in the experimental group but not in the control group. Prisoners who had completed CALM rated themselves lower on the AMA questionnaire and were rated lower on the WBC by the prison officers. There was no significant reduction in either of these measures in the control group. 92% of the treatment group showed improvements on at least one measure of aggression, 48% showed improvement on both measures. 8% showed no improvement or deterioration on both measures.

10. Conclusion The CALM programme seemed effective and prisoners appeared to be helped by the programme. However, there is no re-offending data so it is unclear whether these programmes have a long-term effect. Also, the fact that 8% of prisoners appeared to get worse requires investigation.

11. Method – Quasi Experiment This allows a cause and effect relationship to be inferred as we can assess the offenders’ aggressive behaviours before and after the intervention However, there is a lack of control over other extraneous variables which may have affected inmates’ anger such as relationships with other inmates, news from family, etc. Some ecological validity as carried out in the institutional setting, however it is unclear whether these results apply when prisoners are released

12. Method – (cont’d...) It wasn’t possibly to randomly assign participants to each group, so they couldn’t be matched on variables such as age or offence type There are inherent difficulties in using self-reports in a forensic setting where there may be clear incentives for individuals to appear successful following treatment e.g., for parole purposes

13. Sample The sample comprised all male young offenders (mean age of 18-19 years) in a young offenders’ institution serving sentences of less than 3 months on average. Therefore, the results cannot be generalised to other settings and groups such as female offenders, released offenders or those in a prison.

14. Reductionism vs. holism This study is reductionist as only looks at the effect that the CALM intervention has on aggressive behaviour. Many other factors can potentially influence aggressive behaviour. Situational vs. individual explanations This study suggests that completing the CALM programme will reduce aggressive behaviour. Is it the prison situation that causes this effect due to prisoners wanting early release? Or has the individual’s behaviour changed for good? Unsure, as there is no re-offending data.

15. Results (cont.) Quantitative data: 70% reduction in drug related incidents from six months pre treatment to six months post treatment. 41% reduction in serious incident reports. 42% reduction in positive drug testing results (mandatory). 33% reduction in positive drug test results (voluntary).

16. Watch the Louis Theroux clip and design a treatment programme to improve the conditions of living in Miami County Jail. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px2kTQKZaSU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px2kTQKZaSU

17. Evaluate the effectiveness of your proposal.