Date of Award

2017

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Psychology

Abstract

Reflecting concerns regarding the suitability of managing certain juvenile offenders within the juvenile justice system, the Court has embraced the transfer of juveniles to adult court as a necessary measure. Among the factors to be considered when deciding between retaining an offender in the juvenile system and transferring him to the adult court concerns his amenability to treatment. Little empirical research has been devoted to this topic, especially with regard to the circumstances that may influence these clinical decisions. The present study explored how clinicians conceptualize and assess treatment amenability, and whether judgments are context dependent when presented with a vignette of a juvenile offender facing waiver to adult court. Specifically, the impact of statute language and treatment availability on judgments of amenability was explored as legal definitions of treatment amenability vary from state to state. Sixty-five clinical psychologists with experience conducting evaluations for juvenile waiver participated in this research. Few clinicians reported using a measure specifically designed to assess treatment amenability, despite rating treatment amenability as the most important factor to consider when making juvenile waiver recommendations. Surprisingly, treatment availability did not influence ratings of treatment amenability, regardless of statute language. Moreover, statute language did not influence clinicians likelihood of recommending waiver. Despite the vagueness regarding treatment amenability within the psychological literature, the results of the present study will provide some clarity, potentially shifting the focus away from definitional research and motivating the emergence of research aimed at developing empirical assessment tools and clear assessment guidelines.

Download

Share

COinS