Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigating Probation Strategies with Juvenile Offenders: The Influence of Officers’ Attitudes and Youth Characteristics

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

Probation officers are the focal point for most interventions with delinquent youths in the juvenile justice system. The present study examines probation strategies and interventions in a sample of 308 probation officers who completed the Probation Practices Assessment Survey (PPAS) in a web-based survey. The PPAS measures six probation approaches: deterrence, restorative justice, treatment, confrontation, counseling, and behavioral tactics. Structural equation models and latent class analyses showed that probation officers use multiple approaches with delinquent youths consistent with the balanced and restorative justice movement. Younger youths, high-risk youths, and youths with prior social service involvements are likely to receive more intensive interventions. The implications of these findings for improving probation practices with delinquent youth are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazemore, G. (1999). The fork in the road to juvenile court reform. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564, 81–108. doi:10.1177/0002716299564001006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazemore, G., & Schiff, M. (2005). Juvenile justice reform and restorative justice: Building theory and policy from practice. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazemore, G., & Terry, W. C. (1997). Developing delinquent youths: A reintegrative model for rehabilitation and a new role for the juvenile justice system. Child Welfare, 76, 665–716.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bazemore, G., & Walgrave, L. (1999). Restorative juvenile justice: Repairing the harm of youth crime. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1976). Economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender, V., King, M., & Torbet, P. (2006). Advancing accountability: Moving toward victim restoration. Juvenile & Family Court Journal, 57, 53–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D. M., & Frazier, C. E. (1996). Race effects in juvenile justice decision-making: Findings of a statewide analysis. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 392–414. doi:10.2307/1144031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, R., & Roberts, C. (Eds.). (2004). What works in probation and youth justice: Developing evidence-based practice. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butts, J., Mayer, S., & Ruth, G. (2005). Focusing juvenile justice on positive youth development. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney-Lind, M., & Sheldon, R. G. (1998). Girls, delinquency, and juvenile justice (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: West/Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, C. M., Rothschild, L., & Haslam, N. (2000). Detecting latent taxa: Monte Carlo comparison of taxometric, mixture model, and clustering procedures. Psychological Reports, 87(1), 37–47. doi:10.2466/PR0.87.5.37-47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feld, B. C. (2005). Race and the jurisprudence of juvenile justice: A tale in two parts, 1950–2000. In D. F. Hawkins & K. Kempf-Leonard (Eds.), Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in American juvenile justice (pp. 122–166). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flexnor, B., & Baldwin, R. N. (1914). Juvenle courts and probation. New York: The Century Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaarder, E., Rodriguez, N., & Zatz, M. (2004). Criers, liars, and manipulators: Probation officers’ views of girls. Justice Quarterly, 21, 547–578. doi:10.1080/07418820400095901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giblin, M. J. (2001). Using police officers to enhance the supervision of juvenile probationers: An evaluation of the Anchorage CAN program. Crime and Delinquency, 48, 116–137. doi:10.1177/0011128702048001005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodstein, L., & Sontheimer, H. (1997). The implementation of an intensive aftercare program for serious juvenile offenders: A case study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 332–359. doi:10.1177/0093854897024003002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Lowery, B. S. (2004). Priming unconscious racial stereotypes about adolescent offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 483–504. doi:10.1023/B:LAHU.0000046430.65485.1f.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, P., & Torbet, P. (2002). Desktop guide to good juvenile probation practice. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino-Ghezzi, S., & Loughran, E. J. (2004). Balancing juvenile justice (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, D. J., & Warner, J. E. (1994). Treatment adherence of maltreating families: A survey of professionals regarding prevalence and enhancement strategies. Journal of Family Violence, 9, 1–19. doi:10.1007/BF01531965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoge, R. D. (2002). Standardized instruments for assessing risk and need in youthful offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 380–396. doi:10.1177/0093854802029004003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoge, R. D., & Andrews, D. A. (2003). The youth level of service/case management inventory (YCS/CMI): Intake manual and item scoring key. Carleton University.

  • Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing & reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2004). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurlychek, M., Torbet, P., & Bozynski, M. (1999). Focus on accountability: Best practices for juvenile court probation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, J., Turner, S., Fain, T., & Sehgal, A. (2005). Evaluating an experimental intensive juvenile probation program: Supervision and official outcomes. Crime and Delinquency, 51, 26–52. doi:10.1177/0011128704264943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, J., Turner, S., Fain, T., & Sehgal, A. (2007). Implementing “Corrections of Place” ideas: The perspective of clients and staff. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 76–95. doi:10.1177/0093854806288436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., & Fox, K. C. (2005). Race and the impact of detention on juvenile justice decision making. Crime and Delinquency, 51(4), 470–497. doi:10.1177/0011128705275976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., Schwarze, K., Mack, K. Y., & Farnworth, M. (2002). The effects of occupation and education on punitive orientations among juvenile justice personnel. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 303–316. doi:10.1016/S0047-2352(02)00131-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1998). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious & violent juvenile offenders (pp. 313–345). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, J. M., & Chesney-Lind, M. (2001). Gender bias and juvenile justice revisited: A multiyear analysis. Crime and Delinquency, 47(2), 173–195. doi:10.1177/0011128701047002002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maloney, D., Romig, D., & Armstrong, T. (1988). The balanced approach to juvenile probation. Juvenile & Family Court Journal, 39, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsueda, R. L., Kreager, D. A., & Huizinga, D. (2006). Deterring delinquents: A rational choice model of theft and violence. American Sociological Review, 71, 95–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLachlan, G. J., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Minor, K. I., & Elrod, H. P. (1990). The effects of a multi-facetted intervention on the offense activities of juvenile probationers. Journal of Offender Counseling, Services, & Rehabilitation, 15, 87–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minor, K. I., & Elrod, H. P. (1994). The effects of a probation intervention on juvenile offenders’ self-concepts, loci of control, and perceptions of juvenile justice. Youth & Society, 25, 490–511. doi:10.1177/0044118X94025004004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (1998–2006). Mplus user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polcin, D. L., & Greenfield, T. K. (2003). Factors associated with probation officers’ use of criminal justice coercion to mandate alcohol treatment. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 29, 647–670. doi:10.1081/ADA-120023463.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pullmann, M. D., Kerbs, J., Koroloff, N., Veach-White, E., Gaylor, R., & Seiler, D. (2006). Juvenile offenders with mental health needs: Reducing recidivism using wraparound. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 375–397. doi:10.1177/0011128705278632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, W. H., & Van Dyke, D. J. (2004). A multiple family group intervention for first time juvenile offenders: Comparisons with probation and drop-outs on recidivism. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 177–2004. doi:10.1002/jcop.10085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, R. H. (1992). Strategies for work with involuntary clients. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. New York: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwalbe, C. S., Fraser, M. W., & Day, S. H. (2007). Predictive validity of the Joint Risk Matrix with juvenile offenders: A focus on gender and race/ethnicity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 348–361. doi:10.1177/0093854806292244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwalbe, C. S., Fraser, M. W., Day, S. H., & Cooley, V. (2006). Classifying juvenile offenders according to risk of recidivism: Predictive validity, race/ethnicity, and gender. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 305–324. doi:10.1177/0093854806286451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shearer, R. A. (2002). Probation strategies of juvenile and adult pre-service trainees. Federal Probation, 66, 33–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skeem, J. L., Emke-Francis, P., & Louden, J. E. (2006). Probation, mental health, and mandatory treatment: A national survey. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 158–184. doi:10.1177/0093854805284420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skeem, J. L., Encandela, J., & Louden, J. E. (2003). Perspectives on probation and mandated mental health treatment in specialized and traditional probation departments. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 21, 429–458. doi:10.1002/bsl.547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skeem, J. L., Louden, J. E., Polaschek, D., & Camp, J. (2007). Assessing relationship quality in mandated community treatment: Blending care with control. Psychological Assessment, 19(4), 397–410. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.4.397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, B., Prukiss, M., Kifer, M., Roberts, E., & Hemmens, C. (2004). Legally prescribed functions of adult and juvenile probation officers: Worlds apart? Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 39, 47–67. doi:10.1300/J076v39n04_04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torbet, P., & Thomas, D. (2005). Advancing competency development: A white paper for Pennsylvania. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal, S., & Skeem, J. L. (2007). Effect of psychopathy, abuse, and ethnicity on juvenile probation officers’ decision-making and supervision strategies. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 479–498. doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9077-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, A. (2001). Correctional assessment, casework, and counseling (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Correctional Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, D. A., Stafford, M. C., & Gray, L. N. (2006). Rational choice, deterrence, and theoretical integration. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 571–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebush, R. G. (1993). Juvenile intensive supervision: The impact on felony offenders diverted from institutional placement. Crime and Delinquency, 39, 68–89. doi:10.1177/0011128793039001005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. R. E., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Paternoster, R. (2004). Does the perceived risk of punishment deeter criminally prone individuals? Rational choice, self-control, and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41, 180–213. doi:10.1177/0022427803260263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. V. (1937). Social treatment in probation and delinquency: Treatise and casebook for court workers, probation officers and other child welfare workers. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, S. X. (1997). The efficiency of working under one roof: An evaluation of Los Angeles County juvenile justice centers. Crime and Delinquency, 42, 257–268. doi:10.1177/0011128796042002007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Diane Kinkaid and the staff of the American Probation and Parole Association for their assistance with this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University School of Social Work, 1255 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Craig S. Schwalbe

  2. Fordham University Graduate School of Social Service, 113 West 60th Street, New York, NY, 10023, USA

    Tina Maschi

Authors
  1. Craig S. Schwalbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tina Maschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Craig S. Schwalbe.

About this article

Cite this article

Schwalbe, C.S., Maschi, T. Investigating Probation Strategies with Juvenile Offenders: The Influence of Officers’ Attitudes and Youth Characteristics. Law Hum Behav 33, 357–367 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9158-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9158-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation