CEFS 515 Liberty University Increase of Juvenile Recidivism Rates Bibliography assign.pdf

COUC/CEFS 515

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS

An annotated bibliography is a list of sources that includes current APA-formatted references to

the peer-reviewed articles that you have compiled for a research assignment (all articles must be

found through the Jerry Falwell Library or Google Scholar). A brief description, summary, and

evaluation of the source must follow each reference. The purpose of an annotated bibliography is

to provide the content, relevance, and quality of the sources. Each annotation must be less than

1 page.

You will provide an Annotated Bibliography of five peer-reviewed references that are relevant to

your Research Proposal Paper Assignment. At least 2 of the 5 articles must have been published

in the past 5 years; all articles must not be older than 10 years.

This assignment must be in current APA format with a title page, abstract, and references. Each

reference must include a summary, analysis, and reflection. Do not include books, book

reviews, dissertations, websites, blogs, etc.

You must include the following for each reference in your annotated bibliography:

 A brief description and summary of the article: Include the population, sampling

method, at least one assessment instrument used, research question (at least 1), and

research design. (For example: Harrichand and Knight used a convenience sample of

graduate students, they surveyed the students using the Trait Emotional Intelligence

Questionnaire Short Form (TEIQue-SF) and the Counselor Burnout Inventory (CBI), and

their research design was correlational.)

 An evaluation of the source in light of your topic: Indicate how the information is

relevant to your research. (For example: This research illustrates that as trait-based

emotional intelligence increases, counselor burnout decreases; this helps to make a case

for the development of an emotional intelligence training program).

 Answers to the following key prompts:

o Who is the author and how are they qualified (for first credited author

only)? (For example: Dr. Stacey Lilley is a licensed professional counselor and

Director of the Clinical Mental Health Counseling program at Liberty University;

she is an Assistant Professor of Counseling and sees clients at Piedmont

Psychiatric.)

o Critique at least 1 assessment used: How is the assessment psychometrically

sound? Make sure to highlight the details of the properties. (For example: The

TEIQue-SF was used and the reliability was established via the test-retest

procedure and was R=.89 which is considered…)

o Include a brief discussion of implications: Discussion in terms of how this

article is relevant to establishing a need for your emerging research

question/research study. (For example: Harrichand, Knight & Captari (2017)

indicate that emotional intelligence trainings should be developed and assessed to

see if participation can help increase Emotional intelligence (EI) and decrease

counselor burnout. Thus my research question is examining whether counseling

students EI increases after participation…)

The Liberty University Online Writing Center is available for your writing assistance.

COUC/CEFS 515

Submit this assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of Module/Week 3.

Annotated Bibliography

COUC 515

Grading Rubric

Criteria

Levels of Achievement

Content 70%;

70 points

Advanced

Proficient

Developing

Not present

Relevance and

currency of

articles (25)

23 - 25 points

The articles presented are

consistent with the research

topic and at least two of them

were published within the last

five years.

20 - 22 points

Some articles are not

consistent with the research

topic or less than two articles

are published within the last

five years.

1 – 19 points

The articles chosen are not

consistent with the research

topic significantly less than

two articles are published

within the last five years. A

total of less than five articles

are presented.

0 points

Not present

Annotation of

Articles (25)

23 - 25 points

The annotations include key

components indicated in the

directions such as: brief bio of

first author and first author

qualifications, population

studied is identified, problem

statement or purpose statement

is identified, at least one

research question is identified,

variables are identified,

identification of at least one

assessment & the

corresponding psychometrics

(reliability & validity), article

relevance to gap/proposed

topic. The annotations are

20 - 22 points

The annotations include

incomplete or inaccurate

information on one or more of

these key components

indicated in the directions

such as:

brief bio of first author and

first author qualifications, the

population studied is

identified, problem statement

or purpose statement is

identified, at least one

research question is identified,

variables are identified,

identification of at least one

assessment & the

1 – 19 points

Key components of research

presented in several

annotations are missing.

Several annotations are not

clear or concise and the

content presented does not

demonstrate an understanding

of the research studies

presented and their

implications.

0 points

Not present

clear, concise, and demonstrate

mastery of the research studies

presented and their

implications.

corresponding psychometrics

(reliability & validity), article

relevance to gap/proposed

topic is stated. The

annotations are clear, concise,

and demonstrate mastery of

the research studies presented

and their implications.

Identification

of Gap in the

Research (20)

18 - 20 points

The gap in the research is

consistent with the chosen

topic, is clearly articulated, and

is supported by published

literature

15 - 17 points

A gap in the research is

evident and consistent with

the chosen topic.

Identification of the gap

needed more clarity and

support.

1 – 14 points

A gap in the research is not

identified and or the articles

presented to not support that

the gap exists.

0 points

Not present

Structure

Advanced

Proficient

Developing

Not present

(30%; 30

points)

27 - 30 points

 Each annotation is less

than one page

 Writing is clear, concise,

and has a logical flow

 Grammar, sentence

structure, and spelling are

correct

 APA style is correct

23 - 26 points

 Some annotations are

more than one page

 Some issues with writing

being clear, concise, and

having a logical flow

 Some issues with

grammar, sentence

structure, and spelling

 Some issues with APA

style

1 – 22 points

 Several annotations are

more than one page

 Significant issues with

writing being clear,

concise, and having a

logical flow

 Significant issues with

grammar, sentence

structure, and spelling

 Significant issues with

APA style

0 points

Not present

Total (100)

Advanced 91-100

Proficient 80-90

Developing 1-79

Not Present

Professor

Comments

Research Proposal Paper Annotated Bibliography

Name

Department of Counselor Education and Family Studies, Liberty University

COUC/CEFS 515: Research Methods and Program Evaluation

Instructor Name

Assignment due date

Abstract

This annotated bibliography will review five sources from peer-reviewed journals that have

studied potential factors involved in the alarming increase of juvenile recidivism rates in the past

five years. For decades, an individual’s risk to re-offend has been the dominating factor in

predicting recidivism and in turn, has shaped many of the juvenile intervention and treatment

programs used today. As recidivism rates continue to rise, current literature contends that generic

risk assessments are not capable of assessing other predictive variables of recidivism such as

criminogenic needs and protective factors. Therefore, further research is necessary to determine

if the incorporation of protective factors and individual needs in intervention and reentry

programs would help lower youth recidivism rates. The following bibliography will include a

thorough summary of each source including a critique of the assessment instrument used, the

qualifications of the first author, and a brief discussion of the implications and relevance of the

study’s findings.

Keywords: recidivism, youth, juvenile, risk, protective factors, criminogenic needs

References

Aalsma, M. C., White, L. M., Lau, K. S. L., Perkins, A., Monahan, P., & Grisso, T. (2015).

Behavioral health care needs, detention-based care, and criminal recidivism at community

reentry from juvenile detention: A multisite survival curve analysis. American Journal of

Public Health, 105(7), 1372–1378. doi:10.2105/ajph.2014.302529

Aalsma et al., used a cluster sample of 8,363 adolescents from six juvenile

detention centers across the state of Indiana, ages 12-18 years old. Data regarding

behavioral health needs and treatment, as well as recidivism within 12 months

after release was collected electronically each month from January of 2008 to

May of 2012. This correlational study sought to determine the impact of

behavioral health services to youth and the impact of those services on recidivism.

The research team hypothesized that youth receiving detention-based behavioral

health services would experience lower rates of recidivism, with the independent

variable being behavioral health services and the dependent variable being lower

recidivism rates. Aalsma et al., used The Massachusetts Youth Screening

Instrument, Version 2 (MAYSI-2) by Grisso and Barnum (2000) as an indicator

of behavioral health needs that fell within either the normal, caution, or warning

range.

This research study calls into question whether or not detention-based services are

effective and consistent in administering behavioral health services to juvenile offenders.

The primary role of detention centers is to treat adolescents for their behavioral health

needs, but youth recidivism rates continue to rise. Juvenile offenders receiving quality

services based on their specific behavioral health needs rather than solely targeting risk

factors remains a topic in need of further research.

Matthew Aalsma, Ph.D., is currently a Professor of Pediatrics and a Health Service

Provider in Psychology at the University of Indiana, School of Medicine. Aalsma

specifically focuses his research on youth in the juvenile justice systems to improve the

use of mental and physical health care for children and adolescents.

The MAYSI-2 is a self-administered assessment with 52 “yes/no” items that are

scored on six clinical scales: Alcohol/Drug Use, Angry/Irritable, Depressed/Anxious,

Somatic Complaints, Suicide Ideation, and Thought Disturbance; and one non-clinical

scale measuring Traumatic Experiences. The MAYSI-2 scales have acceptable internal

consistency with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .61 to .81. After 5 to 8 days,

reliability was established through the test-retest procedure with r= .88 on average, which

is considered very good. In terms of validity, scores on the MAYSI-2 can predict

several institutional outcomes from lengthier sentences to institutional violence or

suicide attempts. The internal consistency, test-retest reliability and predictive validity of

the MAYSI-2 make this a psychometrically sound instrument.

While this study hoped to find a negative correlation between increased

behavioral health services and reduced recidivism rates, it did not. This outcome may

lend itself to the fact that only one instrument was used to determine juveniles’ mental,

physical and emotional needs. Aalsmar et al., indicate that further research is needed to

assess the quality, consistency, and duration of services provided both in and outside of

detention centers. This lends to my research proposal that recidivism rates will decrease

when offenders complete a strengths and protective factor program focused on their

unique needs that are commonly overlooked in risk-centered services.

Haqanee, Z., Peterson-Badali, M., & Skilling, T. (2015). Making “what works” work:

Examining probation officers’ experiences addressing the criminogenic needs of

juvenile offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54(1), 37–59.

doi:10.1080/10509674.2014.980485

Haqanee et al., chose a qualitative, semi-structured design with a voluntary sample

of 29 probation officers from Toronto, ON. This study sought to gather information from

crucial service providers on the challenges of addressing juvenile offenders’ high impact

needs and how failure to do so may adversely affect youth recidivism rates. The study

outlined research questions such as: How do probation officers select and prioritize

youths’ needs in case management? And, What are the barriers to youths’ successful

completion of programming? Each participant completed a one-on-one 60-minute

interview that was recorded and, in turn, coded into emergent themes.

Although this study used a small, self-selected sample to conduct research, the

findings were representative of previous quantitative studies that explore the overall

effectiveness of youth treatment programs as related to recidivism. The narrative received

from the frontline officers provides relevant insight into the strengths, weaknesses and

challenges of the juvenile justice system today.

Zohrah Haqanee, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist currently working with children

and adolescents presenting with a variety of behavioral and mental health problems.

Haqanee received her Ph. D in School and Clinical Child Psychology from the Ontario

Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto.

The semi-structured interviews in this study were coded into 12 emerging themes

that were checked for inter-rater reliability by an independent rater. The inter-rater

reliability was found to be excellent with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of

r=.83 by using a two-way random-effects model. Validity of the interpreted data was

explored via follow-up focus groups with the participants, which encouraged feedback,

clarification and elaboration on the discovered themes.

Findings by Haqanee et al., were consistent with existing quantitative research.

Although, due to the small sample size and the self-selection process caution in

interpreting and making generalizations is necessary. Haqanee et al., contend that greater

research is needed in exploring protective factors and the effectiveness of rehabilitative

services as it relates to youths’ criminogenic and high impact needs. Considering this, my

research investigates the possibility of lower youth recidivism rates after completion of

protective factors and needs treatment program, as opposed to the current implementation

of risk and deficit curriculum.

Peterson-Badali, M., Kapoor, A., & Skilling, T. (2018). Barriers to service provision for justice-

involved youth. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(12), 1832–1851.

doi:10.1177/0093854818794754

Peterson-Badali et al., used an archival sampling method to obtain probation and

recidivism data from the clinical files of 219 youths aged 12 to 20 years in Toronto, ON.

The purpose of the study was to identify barriers to service for sentenced youth

concerning their specific criminogenic needs and whether the existence of such barriers

predicts recidivism. Retrospective and descriptive in design, this study utilized the Youth

Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI; Hoge & Andrews, 2002)

instrument to determine criminogenic needs, strengths and overall risk to reoffend.

This research is highly relevant to the idea of creating interventions that are based

on protective factors instead of offender risk. Peterson-Badali et al., argue that the

criminogenic needs of youth are regularly not met in the services they receive, which

points to the growing trend of needs being inappropriately and underwhelmingly

addressed in the juvenile justice system; potentially leading to higher recidivism rates.

Michele Peterson-Badali, Ph. D is a registered psychologist and professor in the

Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development at the University of

Toronto. She currently maintains the position of Associate Dean of Research,

International and Innovation at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

The YLS/CMI is a 42-item checklist that is divided into eight dynamic

criminogenic domains that are scored by present or absent items and added together for

each domain. The total risk score is determined by adding all items from each domain.

The YLS/CMI is considered psychometrically sound with strong internal consistency

with a correlation coefficient of r= .82 and an equally strong inter-rater reliability

averaging at r=. 93. Concurrent validity has been established through significant

correlations between the YLS/CMI and The Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach 1991)

and Youth Self Report (Achenbach 2001) instruments. Predictive validity has been seen

with significant correlations between the outcomes of the YLS/CMI and records of

recidivism.

This source successfully identified multiple barriers to service and rehabilitation

that currently exist in the juvenile justice system. The results propose that barriers to

service extend beyond risk-need assessments and instead include criminogenic needs,

lifestyle destabilizers and capacity deficits. Future research is necessary to determine how

the unique needs of juvenile offenders can be more readily incorporated into probation

services. Thus my research question seeks to examine the recidivism outcomes for youth

who complete a needs-based and protective factor focused program as opposed to a risk

and deficit program.

Taxman, F. S., & Caudy, M. S. (2015). Risk tells us who, but not what or how. Criminology

& Public Policy, 14(1), 71–103. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12116

Taxman and Caudy took an archival sample of 17,252 offenders from the North

Carolina Department of Public Safety’s Section of Community Corrections (NCDPS).

The offenders were chosen for this study if they had been released on probation in 2009,

received a risk and needs assessment within 90 days of probation and were supervised for

at least 24 months. Taxman and Caudy utilized a latent class model to identify profiles of

dynamic needs and hypothesized that offenders having a greater number of needs would

experience higher rates of recidivism within 24 months of supervision. The study used

the results of the Offender Traits Inventory (OTI; NCDPS, n.d.) and the Offender Needs

Assessment (ONA; NCDPS, n.d.) to complete a latent class analysis (LCA) based on

dynamic needs.

This research illustrates the lack of precision risk assessments have in identifying

specific needs. When needs and protective factors go unrecognized, treatment programs

fail to be informed, resulting in less than effective interventions for previous offenders. A

case can confidently be made that developing a needs and protective factor intervention

program could assist in reducing recidivism rates.

Faye Taxman, Ph.D., is a Criminology Professor at George Mason University in

Virginia. Her research on reengineering probation and parole services to better improve

behavioral correction programs has led to over 200 publications. Taxman is also the

Director of The Center for Advancing Correctional Excellence.

The OTI is primarily used to predict recidivism risk based on personal

demographics like age, gender, overall attitude and education. This 10-item instrument

categorizes an offender’s potential risk of recidivism as minimal, low, moderate, or high.

The OTI has been validated as an adequate predictor of recidivism with the current study

finding the OTI total score as being “significantly correlated with arrest (r = 0.286, p

<.001), conviction (r = 0.226, p < .001), and incarceration (r = .0251, p < .001) within 2

years of supervision” (p. 80).

Through their research, Taxman and Caudy successfully discovered four classes,

or profiles, of needs and destabilizers within their sample of offenders. The majority of

current literature focuses primarily on risk and severely lacks understanding of complex

criminogenic needs, which leads to a vast amount of correctional programs missing the

underlying dynamic factors at play. Therefore, future research is needed to lessen the gap

between risk factors and complex needs. With this in mind, my research proposes the

development of a strengths, needs, and protective-factor based correctional program that

reduces recidivism risk and attempts to restructure the unbalanced reliance on risk factors

in assessment instruments.

Villanueva, L., Valero-Moreno, S., Cuervo, K., & Prado-Gasco, V. (2019). Sociodemographic

variables, risk factors, and protective factors contributing to youth

recidivism. Psicothema, 31(2), 128–133. doi:10.7334/psicothema2018.257

Villanueva et al., chose an archival sample from 389 judicial files of juvenile

offenders ranging from 14 to 19 years that were released on supervision between March

2008 and December 2010. Recidivism rates were available for each participant up to two

years after their release. Correlational and prospective in design, this study aimed to

create offender profiles based on demographic variables, risk and protective factors to see

potential differences between offenders and individuals who desist from offending again.

Villanueva et al., hypothesized that the profile most likely to recidivate would be a young

foreign male with high-risk scores and very few protective factors present. The

instrument used in this study was the Youth Level of Service/Case Management

Inventory (YLS/CMI; Hoge & Andrews, 2002) to score risk and strength factors that

were eventually analyzed using logistic regression and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative

analysis (fsQCA).

This research reveals that a juvenile offender presenting with high risk factors and

an absence of protective factors is more likely to re-offend within two years than a first-

time offender with low risk and high protective factors. Additionally, the study contends

that certain sociodemographic variables that most juvenile risk and need models focus on,

such as nationality, type of crime, and gender, were not significantly predictive of

recidivism. Moreover, the use of protective factors as a variable when assessing risk and

needs may be vital in providing successful treatment that offenders are more responsive

to. Added research on protective factors as a predictive variable of recidivism is needed

to inform and restructure juvenile offender intervention.

Lidon Villanueva, Ph.D., is a Senior Lecturer in Psychology at the Jaume I

University in Spain. The majority of her research focuses on peer relationships, trait

emotional intelligence in adolescents, and Theory of Mind. Lidon is known for her work

in validating the Emotion Awareness Questionnaire (EAQ) in Spanish.

The YLS/CMI has been proven to be internally reliable with Cronbach’s alpha

coefficient reporting ranges from .62 to .80. For this study, “the reliability of the total risk

score was α=.92, while for protective factors was α=.84”, showing good reliability (p.

130). Scores from the YLS/CMI were plugged into a binary logistic regression model to

determine the predictive validity of recidivism based on several variables. This study

found that, “risk factors yielded a significant positive beta coefficient (B=.11, p ≤ .001),

and the protective factors a significant negative beta coefficient (B=-.37, p=.04)”

meaning the presence of high-risk factors and low protective factors, the greater the

recidivism rate (p. 130).

Villanueva et al., indicate that the absence, and presence of protective factors may

be a predictive variable of youth recidivism rates. However, the current literature on

reducing recidivism is based on the risk-need-responsivity model, which identifies only a

small proportion of criminogenic needs in juvenile offenders. In light of these findings,

my research plans to examine recidivism rates in youth offenders who participate in an

offender intervention program tailored to the dynamic needs and protective factor

variables of each specific offender.

Research Proposal Paper Annotated Bibliography

Keyantae L. Westbrook

Research and Program Evaluation

Dr. Kirk

September 6, 2020

Topic Selection Assignment Part 2

2) Final Topic of Interest: How does the socioeconomic status (SES) and drug history among

African American women effect the use of self-protective behaviors in domestic violence

situations?

Gap Statement: “The results of this study suggest that African American women are

utilizing forceful resistance strategies within domestic violence situations in which, the

likelihood of sustaining injury may be reduced. However, considering that this sample

consists of incarcerated women with a high risk of violence and drug abuse, the self-

report accuracy of this particular sample may be called into question.

Reference

Wyckoff, R., & Simpson, S. S. (2008). The effects of self-protective behaviors on injury for

african american women in domestic violence situations. Crime, Law and Social

Change, 49(4), 271-288. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1007/s10611-

0089109-

This article explores how African American women are more likely to fight back in

domestic violence situations compared to their white counterparts and the subsequent injury of

fight back against intimate partners. The study concluded, without temporal sequencing forceful

behaviors increase the risk of injury. However, with temporal sequencing, forceful behaviors

significantly decrease the risk of injury when compared to no injury.

Variables To Be Measured

This study will use self-protective behaviors as the independent variable and injury as the

dependent variable.

RESEARCH PROPOSAL PAPER ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Name

Department of Counselor Education and Family Studies, Liberty University

COUC/CEFS 515: Research Methods and Program Evaluation

Instructor Name

Assignment due date