A Comparative Evaluation of Group Treatments in an Adult Correctional Facility

Authors

  • Thomas G. Schramski Author
  • Clyde A. Feldman Author
  • David R. Harvey Author
  • Marj Holiman Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12926/0wwyax49

Keywords:

Evaluation

Abstract

This paper describes a comparative evaluation of Psychodrama with three other group treatments (Anger Therapy, Values Clarification
and Decision Making) and a control group in a medium-security prison for adult males. The results support the overall benefit of
Psychodrama and the other group treatments when compared with the control group. Psychodrama in particular facilitated significant improvement in resident attitudes toward the institution and a reduction in distressing symptomatology. Other results suggested that the treatment groups had differential positive impact on resident behavior. The relationships between these effects and characteristics of the treatment environments are discussed.

References

Arnold, W., & Stiles, B. Summary of increasing use of "group methods" in correctional institutions. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1972, 22, 77-92.

Bednar, R. L., & Kaul, T. J. Experiential group research: Current perspectives. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978

Beutler, L. E., & Crago, M. A. Self-report measurements of psychotherapy outcome. In M. S. Lambert, E. R. Christensen, & S. De.Julio (Eds.), The assessment of psychotherapy outcomes. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1983.

Cronbach, L., & Furby, L. How should we measure ''change'' or should we? Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 74, 68-80. .

Derogatis, L. R., & Cleary, P.A. Confirmation of the dimensional structure of the SCL-90: A study in construct validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1977, 33, 981-989.

Derogatis, L. R., Rickels, K., & Rock, A. F. The SCL-90R and the MMPl: A step in the validation of a new self-report scale. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1976, 128, 280-289.

Kipper, D. A. Trends in the research on the effectiveness of psychodrama: Retrospect and prospect. Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama and Sociometry, 1978, 31, 5-18.

Maas, J. The use of actional procedures in group psychotherapy with sociopathic women. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1966, 16, 190-197.

Moos, R. H. Correctional institutions environment scale. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1981. (a)

Moos, R. H. Group environment scale. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1981. (b)

Parloff, M. B., & Dies, R. R. Group psychotherapy outcome research 1966-1975. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1977, 27, 281-319.

Slaikeu, K. A. Evaluation studies on group treatment of juvenile and adult offenders in correctional institutions. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1973, 10, 86-99.

Waskow, I. E., & Parloff, M. B. Psychotherapy change measures: A report of the clinical research branch outcome measures project. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, Department of Health, Education and Welfare Publication (ADM), 1975.

Waters, J. Social ecology and groups: The group environment scale in total institutions. Together, 1978, 3, 13-20.

Wolk, R. L. The relationship of group psychotherapy and institutional adjustment. Group Psychotherapy, 1963, 16, 141-144.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-14

Issue

Vol. 36 No. 4 (1984): Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama, and Sociometry

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Psychodrama, Sociometry, and Group Psychotherapy

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

You are free to:

  1. Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
  2. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
  3. NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
  4. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.