Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
The relationship between the group climate and aggression within residential youth care Jantine van den Tillaart, Chantal van Rijswijk & Sanne Kleeven September 3rd, 2014 Content • • • • Residential youth care Group Climate Aggression Current research: - Research questions - Research method • • • • Results Conclusions Recommendations Benefits 2 Residential youth care • Spirit: Ambulatory and residential youth care, foster care • Open living groups • De Koppeling: Secure institution • Amsterbaken: Youth prison • Three central goals of child and adolescent development: - Raising - Care - Treatment 3 Video Impression of a positive group climate 4 Group climate • Dimensions: - Support (responsive group workers) Growth (perspective) Atmosphere (safety, trust) Repression (injustice, rules) 5 Group climate • Importance of a positive group climate - Increase in treatment motivation Decrease in aggressive behaviour Emotional stability Positive treatment outcome • Relevance - Attention for a positive group climate - Positive group climate contributes to the effects of youth care 6 Aggression • Direct aggression • Indirect aggression • Effects of aggressive incidents: - Negative impact on safety and atmosphere - Decrease in treatment outcome 7 Research Questions • “Is there a difference in the perception of the group climate by youth staying in various types of residential youth care?” •“What is the relation between the perception of group climate and the number of aggressive incidents?” 8 Research method • Participants: N = 159 • Aggressive incidents: N = 1273 • Procedure - Prison Group Climate Instrument - Incident registration and daily reports 9 Statistical analysis • Reliability: cronbach’s alpha (α) • Oneway ANOVA • Multilevel regression analysis • Hierarchical multiple regression analysis 10 Results Oneway ANOVA with F-values for the difference in perception of the group climate, within the various types of residential youth care Noot. † = p ≤ .1 * = p ≤ .05 ** = p ≤ .01 Verschillende superscript (a,b) duiden op significante post-hoc verschillen op p < .05, gecorrigeerd voor kans (SNK) Dimension Open living group Open living group Secure institution Secure institution Youth prison Youth prison N M (SD) N M (SD) N M (SD) F df Support 63 3.69 (.80) 40 3.48 (.89) 39 .954 2.139 Growth 67 41 3.51a (.97) 41 5.17** 2.146 Repression 65 3.43a (.98) 3.12 (.73) 39 3.43 (.74) 40 2.66† 2.141 Atmosphere 68 3.46 (.88) 41 3.14 (.85) 41 3.51 (.83) 2.88b (.99) 3.33 (.63) 3.52 (.90) 2.38† 2.147 Note. † = p ≤ .1 * = p ≤ .05 ** = p ≤ .01 Differential superscript (a,b) indicate significant post-hoc differences p < .05, onward adjusted for risk (SNK) 11 12 Results Multilevel regression analysis with t-values of the relation between group climate and the number of aggressive incidents Support Variables Beta Growth t p Beta t Repression p Beta t Atmosphere p Beta t p Step 1 (setting) Open living group .02 .18 .86 -.13 -1.28 .20 -.14 -1.29 .20 .14 1.32 .19 Youth Prison -.09 -.90 .37 -.34 -3.39 .00** .00 -.00 1.00 .16 1.51 .13 Direct aggression -.26 -2.89 .01** -.20 -2.25 .03* .18 1.98 .05* -.10 -1.08 .28 Indirect aggression -.08 -.89 .36 .42 -.01 -.08 .94 -.02 -.25 Step 2 (aggression) .38 .67 .81 R = .30 R = .31 R = .25 R = .20 R2 = .09 R2 = .10 R2 = .06 R2 = .04 F(4,137) = 3.26* F(4,144) = 3.92** F(4,139) = 2.37† F(4,145) = 1.56 Note. † = p ≤ .1 * = p ≤ .05 ** = p ≤ .01 Atmosphere is subject to significant contextual variables, thus cannot be interpreted with a multiple regression analysis 13 Conclusions • Research question 1 : oneway ANOVA - Significant differences in growth - Trend on repression and atmosphere • Research question 2 : hierarchical multiple regression analysis - Significant relation between support and growth - Trend on repression 14 Recommendations • Residential care process • Individual daily reports • Multilevel regression analysis: individual and contextual variables 15 What are the benefits? • Assurance - Measuring results - Implementation - Training • Attention for a positive group climate • Hopeful results – future research 16 Thank you for your attention! Does anyone have any questions? [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 17