Sociomoral Atmosphere, Adolescent-Staff Relationship Quality,
Moral Development, Prosocial Behavior and Psychopathology
of Juvenile Delinquents
in a Turkish Juvenile Justice Institution:
A Cross-Cultural Comparison
Masterscriptie Forensische Orthopedagogiek
Pedagogische en Onderwijskundige Wetenschappen
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Z. Baldemir
E. Ipekci
Begeleiding: dhr. Prof. dr. G.J.J.M. Stams
Proeflezer: Drs. Sanne de Vries
Tweede beoordelaar: Dr. Peer van der Helm
Amsterdam, Juli 2014
Table of contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Dutch summary .......................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Results ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 16
Literature References ............................................................................................................... 20
Appendix .................................................................................................................................. 23
1
Abstract
The
present
study
examined
adolescent-staff
relationship
quality,
moral
development, prosocial behavior and psychopathology in a Turkish Juvenile Justice
institution (JJI). Using a sample of 40 male juvenile offenders between the age of 15 and 19
years. Interviews with staff and field observations indicated that the open Ankara JJI showed
characteristics of a sociomoral community in which juveniles were treated with respect, and
conditions for therapeutic relationship building were satisfied. Unexpectedly, on average, the
juveniles did not report high adolescent-staff relationship quality and high levels of prosocial
behavior if compared to self-reports of adolescent delinquents from secure (closed) Dutch
juvenile justice institutions. Results regarding psychopathology were equivocal. However, the
Turkish juvenile delinquents showed positive moral development if compared to their Dutch
counterparts. Finally, supportive adolescent-staff relationships were associated with higher
levels of both cognitive empathy and prosocial behavior. The discussion focuses on the
generalizability of the findings to more individualistic societies and if the method of the
Turkish juvenile justice system would be effective in Western countries?
Keywords
Moral reasoning, empathy, psychopathology, relationship quality, sociomoral climate
2
Samenvatting
De huidige studie onderzoekt de kwaliteit van de therapeutische relatie, de morele
ontwikkeling, het prosociaal gedrag en psychopathologie bij delinquenten in een Justitiële
Jeugdinrichting in Ankara. De steekproef bestaat uit 40 mannelijke jeugdige delinquenten
tussen de leeftijd van 15 en 19 jaar. Veldobservaties en interviews met medewerkers tonen
aan dat er kenmerken van een sociaal-morele gemeenschap aanwezig zijn, waar jongeren met
respect behandeld worden en condities voor een positieve therapeutische relatie gecreëerd
kunnen worden. Tegen de verwachtingen in kwam er uit zelfrapportages naar voren dat de
Turkse jeugddelinquenten in vergelijking met de Nederlandse jeugddelinquenten die in een
gesloten inrichting verblijven geen hogere kwaliteit van therapeutische relaties en hogere
niveaus van prosociaal gedrag laten zien. Resultaten met betrekking tot psychopathologie
waren tegenstrijdig. Echter, in vergelijking met de Nederlandse delinquenten lieten de Turkse
jeugddelinquenten een positieve morele ontwikkeling zien. Tot slot kan er geconcludeerd
worden dat ondersteunende therapeutische relaties samenhangen met hogere niveaus van
cognitieve empathie en prosociaal gedrag. Bediscussieerd wordt of deze bevindingen
gegeneraliseerd kunnen worden naar de meer individualistische Westerse samenleving,
waaronder Nederland, en of de methode van het Turkse jeugdstrafrecht effectief zou kunnen
zijn in Westerse landen?
3
Introduction
Juvenile recidivism rates are high and increasing in most Western countries. For instance the
official juvenile recidivism rate of 2009 in the Netherlands was 57,2% (Wartna et al., 2012).
However, in Turkey juvenile official recidivism rates tend to be low and stable, around 4% 1,
although we should be careful in comparing recidivism rates across countries given that
methods of registration, definitions of delinquency and the judicial system may show
substantial differences that could well affect recidivism rates. The present study aims to find
explanations for favorable recidivism rates in Turkey among juvenile delinquents from the
perspective that a collectivistic culture (1) values high quality adolescent-staff relationships in
juvenile justice institutions, which have been identified as an important therapeutic factor in
(forensic) residential youth care (Karver, Handelsman, Fields, & Bickman, 2006; Van der
Helm, 2011), and (2) emphasizes a sociomoral community approach in terms of taking
responsibility, showing concern for each other, and providing opportunities for moral
reflection (Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989). The present study examines the degree to
which a Turkish Juvenile Justice institution in Ankara could be considered as a sociomoral
community positively affecting adolescent-staff relationship quality, moral development
(empathy and moral reasoning), prosocial behavior and psychopathology.
The Ankara juvenile justice institution
At the moment of research (2008) there were three open juvenile justice institutions in
Turkey. Ankara and Elazig are only for boys, and Izmir is a mixed open juvenile justice
institution. This study was carried out in the open juvenile justice institution (JJI) of Ankara.
The focus of the Turkish JJI is to win back (i.e., reintegrate) juveniles into society (Turkish
Ministry of Justice/ Adalet Bakanligi, 2014). Restoring the family ties is important, but it is
also important within the institution to create strong bonds with staff members and the society
at large. Placement in the institution itself is seen as an intervention by itself, and is thought to
result in positive behavioral outcomes and eventually rehabilitation. In the institution no
difference is made between the adolescents according to type of crime, age and educational
level (Turkish Ministry of Justice/ Adalet Bakanligi, 2014). Each juvenile receives treatment
according to his individual needs, while placement in the institution is considered to be the
main intervention.
1
Türk Istatistik Kurumu (TÜIK), 2007
4
The expectation is that in the open juvenile justice institution of Turkey staff members
are more open and communicative, which makes it possible for them to work on healthy
relationships with the adolescents. In the Netherlands, juvenile justice institutions are
secure/closed facilities, as is the case in most Western countries. However, Van der Helm et
al. (2009, 2011) assume that an open instead of a closed institution facilitates one the most
important educational and rehabilitative (sentencing) aims of secure residential youth care,
namely, successful reintegration into society through restoring the bond with society that was
damaged by antisocial behavior. According to Gatti, Tremblay, and Vitaro (2009),
rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents should be a major goal of youth correctional
interventions, which is in line with the international convention on the rights of the child 2.
In July 2005 the Turkish government has accepted a special child law 3. The aim of
this law is to protect children who are in need of protection or who are being dragged into
crime. For example, it is not allowed to interrogate the child without the presence of an
attorney and a social worker. During the examination a lawyer must be present. A juvenile
younger than 16 years will not be sentenced more than 7 years. Also, each day will count for
two days of detention. A juvenile between 16 and 18 years old will serve 2/3 of his detention
time and will not be sentenced more than 12 years. When a juvenile is studying during his
stay in a juvenile justice institution, detention can be extended until he is 21 years old.
Individualism and collectivism
Reintegrating the child back into society from the perspective of the child is considered
individualistic, but winning the child back to the society from a societal perspective is
considered collectivistic. Loose ties among individuals are representing an individualistic
society. Individualism is more common within the developed modern societies with a high
level of personal freedom and social and geographic mobility. In collectivistic societies
individuals belong to strong attached groups that offer protection in exchange for
unconditional loyalty. Globally, approximately 70% of the societies are collectivistic. These
collectivistic societies are often agricultural in nature, characterized by extended families and
a high level of interdependence (Wissink, 2006). In general, Turkish culture can be typified as
collectivistic. Within collectivistic cultures, a sense of an individual self is limited.
Individuals possess collective selves: their self-esteem as well as self-concept is highly
2
3
Article 40 IVRK
Article of law: 5395 sayili Cocuk Koruma Kanunu, yayinlama tarihi 15-07-2005, Tertip: 5, Cilt: 44
5
dependent on the family reputation, the status, the support and approval that the individual
receives from the family.
The Islam plays an important part in the cultural norms and values of Turkey. The
social control is stronger and respect is considered to be very important. These factors can act
as protective factors. A study by Helal and Coston (1991) showed that in Islamic countries a
cohesive family network has been largely preserved. The family network is still very
effective, even in modern cities (Serajzadeh, 2002). It provides an important role in the
process of socialization and provides social security and support for its members. Turkish
parents consider themselves as very responsive and supportive to the needs of their children
(Nijsten 1998). Kagitcibasi (1990) described that parenting practices in some collectivistic
societies seem to be changing. This change can be explained by urban development and
economic growth. The economic value of a child is becoming of less concern, whereas the
psychological value of children is more and more emphasized. According to Stark, Kent and
Doyle (1982) Islam develops a strong sense of moral community, where religion is an
influential social force generating social sanctions (Groves, McCleary, & Newman, 1987),
which might contribute to a low crime rate.
Therapeutic Relationship, Moral Development and Prosocial Behavior
Attachment theory provides a descriptive and explanatory framework for understanding
interpersonal relationships between human beings. Attachment is first of all an emotional
bond with another person. Bowbly (1969) believed that there are four distinguishing
characteristics of attachment, namely: proximity maintenance, safe haven, secure base and
separation distress. Because the attachment representation is established on the basis of early
experiences with close relationships, clients in treatment institutions who often have histories
of abuse and neglect are expected to have very insecure attachment representations (Zegers,
2007).
Attachment representations can be regarded as a mediating process between
proceeding attachment experiences and forthcoming attachment experiences in new
relationships, such as the therapeutic relationship. A Therapeutic relationship is considered to
be a part of the therapeutic alliance. Therapeutic alliance can be conceptualized as consisting
of three elements: the collaborative relationship, the affective bond, and the client therapist
agreement on goals and tasks (Bordin, 1979; Martin, Garske, & Davis, 2000). The therapeutic
alliance is transactional, which means that both juvenile and therapist characteristics and
actions play a role (Karver, Handelsman, Fields, & Bickman, 2005). The current study
6
focuses on the affective bond between the juvenile and the professional, referred to hereafter
as the ‘therapeutic relationship’.
The quality of therapeutic relationships is one of the most important non-specific
predictors of treatment success in both outpatient psychotherapy and residential treatment.
Furthermore, it is thought to substantially reduce psychopathology (Karver, Handelsman,
Fields, & Bickman, 2006). Garrido and Morales (2007) and Van der Helm (2009) showed that
when prison staff have a controlling style of working, there is not much space for building
therapeutic relationships with the adolescents, and treatment results are not very promising.
Zegers (2007) found that after three months of stay in a residential facility no effect of staff
on adolescents can be expected when it comes to adolescent attachment representations. If
adolescents stayed for a longer period of time, prison staff members who are responsive to the
needs of the inmates can build supportive (i.e., secure) inmate-staff relationships that may be
characterized as positive therapeutic relationships. In that case, prison staff function as a
secure base and safe haven (Zegers, 2007; Zegers, Schuengel, Van IJzendoorn, & Janssen,
2006). On the other hand, therapeutic relationships can be damaged when prison staff is
hostile and overly restrictive or repressive (Zegers, 2006; Zegers et al., 2007). These findings
underscored the potential relevance of attachment research for understanding barriers to
healthy therapeutic relationships in residential treatment. Youths’ positive perceptions of the
institutional environment are related to a significant decline in recidivism and externalizing
problems when these youths are released over and above individual factors and facility
characteristics (Schubert, Mulvey, Loughran, & Loyosa 2012).
In the case of the Juvenile Justice Institution it is reasonable to think that the staff
within the justice institution play a role in the development of moral reasoning and empathy
of the juveniles. Cohen and Strayer (1996) provided a widely agreed upon definition of
empathy, which is the ability to share and understand another’s emotional state and context.
Rest, Thomas and Edward (1997) define Moral reasoning as "a psychological construct that
characterizes the process by which people determine that one course of action in a particular
situation is morally right and another course of action is wrong". Van IJzendoorn (1997)
states that although moral reasoning develops through an invariant sequence of stages,
children need parents, teachers, and peers to help them move toward a mature level of moral
reasoning (Boyes & Allen, 1993; Haan, Langer, & Kohlberg, 1976; Hoffman & Saltzstein,
1967; Parikh, 1980; Powers, 1988 in van IJzendoorn 1997).
It is probable that the professionals in the Justice Institutions can play an important
role in the development of moral reasoning. The combination of a lack of moral
7
internalization and a lack of confidence in self and others may lead to serious antisocial and
criminal behavior when a network of secure attachment relationships is not available to
compensate for the absence of early rewarding attachment experiences. A recent metaanalysis shows that the effectiveness of intervention deteriorates as the amount of coercion
increases (Parhar, Wormith, Derkzen, & Beauregards, 2008). In addition, Lipsey (2009)
showed that interventions with punishment as the main objective often have
counterproductive effects: a significant increase in delinquency is observed instead of a
decline in antisocial behavior. According to van IJzendoorn, (1997) neither temperament and
cognition nor discipline can create moral beings. Instead, morality emerges from attachment
experiences that lead to optimal regulation of negative emotions as well as to the delicate
emotional balance between self-confidence and a concern for others.
Both moral development and psychopathology have been shown to be related to
delinquency. A meta-analysis by Stams et al. (2006) showed that developmentally delayed
moral judgment is strongly associated with juvenile delinquency, even after controlling for
socioeconomic status, cultural background, gender, age, intelligence, assessment method,
publication bias, institutionalization and period of incarceration. Jolliffe and Farrington
(2004) and Van Langen, Wissink, Van Vugt, Van der Stouwe and Stams (2014) conducted
meta-analyses of empathy and offending and found that cognitive empathy was associated
with offending, but not with affective empathy. Finally, Vermeiren (2003) and Vermeiren,
Schwab-Stone, Ruchkin, De Clippele & Deboutte (2002) showed psychopathology to be
related to delinquency.
Also the therapeutic relationship can affect prosocial behavior of the juveniles.
Prosocial behaviors are voluntary behaviors made with the intention of benefiting others
(Eisenberg & Fabes, 1998). Environmental factors linked to individual differences in
children's prosocial behavior include parental modeling of helping behavior and use of
inductive discipline (e.g., explaining to children the consequences of their behavior) as
opposed to power-assertive discipline (e.g., punishment) (Eisenberg, & Fabes, 1998). Beyond
parental influence, siblings, peers, and schools also may affect prosocial behavior. Positive,
warm, and secure teacher-student relationships are associated with children's prosocial
behavior too (Eisenberg, Fabes, & Spinrad, 2006).
8
Hypotheses
This study examined adolescent-staff relationship quality and moral development, prosocial
behavior and psychopathology of juvenile delinquents in a Turkish juvenile justice institution.
We hypothesize that the Turkish open juvenile justice institution in Ankara can be considered
as a moral community in which juveniles are treated with respect, and conditions for
therapeutic relationship building are evident. The second hypothesis is that adolescent-staff
relationships are positive in general, and more positive compared to adolescent-staff
relationships found in Dutch secure juvenile justice institutions. The third hypothesis is that
moral development (empathy and moral reasoning) and prosocial behavior are relatively high
and psychopathology relatively low if compared with data from detained juvenile delinquents
in Holland, where residential juvenile justice institutions tend to be rather repressive, without
much attention paid to moral growth (Van der Helm, 2011). The fourth hypothesis is that
therapeutic relationship quality will be positively related with empathy, moral reasoning and
prosocial behavior and negatively associated with psychopathology. A positive therapeutic
relationship is thought to substantially reduce psychopathology (Karver, Handelsman, Fields,
& Bickman, 2006). Cardol, de Jong and Ward (2002) have suggested that increasing patient
autonomy would lead to increased motivation to participate in treatment. Also this would fit
with theories of intrinsic motivation, that is, that autonomy would lead to being intrinsically
motivated, which leads to greater persistence toward behavioral change (Deci, & Ryan, 1987)
or in this case prosocial behavior.
Methods
Participants
The sample consisted of delinquent adolescent from 15 to 19 years of age, with a mean age of
16.95 (SD = 1.0). The treatment period for the juveniles in the study was between 1 month
and 2 years. A total of 52,5% of the juveniles were sentenced because of robbery, 20% for a
sexual offense, 12,5% for murder, 7,5% for attempt to murder and 7,5% for theft. Their
educational level at the moment of research was low, having attended vocational training or
no education beyond elementary school (17,5 % was illiterate). Also the staff members took
part in this research; the head of institution, the psychologist, a social worker, a teacher, the
medical doctor and two prison staff members.
9
Procedure
When this research took place there were 46 juveniles placed in the Ankara juvenile justice
institution. After a process of informed consent and a written permission of the Ministry of
Justice of Turkey, 40 juveniles voluntarily agreed to participate. They were told that their
answers would be treated anonymously and confidentially. The names on the documents were
deleted and given a number in SPSS. The questionnaires were administered orally by the
researchers with 7 illiterate participants. The other adolescents were asked to fill in the
questionnaires (PARA, BES and SDQ) under supervision of the researchers. The moral
interview (SRM-SF) was taken orally by the researchers. Also seven members of the staff
were interviewed individually.
Measures
In this study the standardized questionnaires were used in order to address the research
questions regarding Therapeutic Relationship, Moral Development and Prosocial Behavior.
Furthermore, semi-structured interviews were taken to assess the relationships between the
staff-inmates and the juveniles and the moral climate of the institution.
The Psychological Availability and Reliance on Adult (PARA) is developed to assess
the basic elements of attachment (Zegers & Schuengel, 2006), affective bond (7 items),
reliance on adult (6 items) and psychological availability (6 items). Juveniles filled in the
forms about one of the staff members with whom the adolescent had most contact.
Participants were asked to respond to each of the 19 items on a 4-point Likert scale. For
example, “My mentor is warm and understanding”. Cronbach’s alpha were .75, .64, and .77
for affective bond, reliance on adult en psychological availability, respectively.
The Basic Empathy Scale (BES) was developed by Jolliffe and Farrington (2006) to
asses both affective and cognitive empathy. This instrument is based on four of the five basic
emotions, including anger, sadness, fear and happiness. The participants rated themselves on
the 20 items using the five-point scale from 1 representing “strongly disagree” to 5
representing “strongly agree”. Cronbach’s alpha was .63 for affective empathy, and .78 for
cognitive empathy.
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a brief behavioral screening
questionnaire that provides balanced coverage of young people’s and children's behaviors,
relationships and emotions (Goodman, 1997). This instrument has been designed to meet the
needs of educationalists, researchers and clinicians. The SDQ contains 25 items, 10 of which
would generally be thought of as strengths, 14 of which would generally be thought of as
10
difficulties, and one of which is neutral. The 25 items are divided between 5 subscales
namely, emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity/ inattention, peer relationship
problems and prosocial behavior. Cronbach’s alpha for total psychopathology (20 items) was
.65, and for prosocial behavior .61.
The Sociomoral Reflection Measure-Short Form (The SRM-SF) was developed by
Gibbs et al. (1992) to assess moral reasoning. The questionnaire contains 11 items that elicit
evaluations and justifications. Participants evaluate the importance of the main issues, values
or institutions that compromise the core of morality and are found in every society and
culture, including contract, truth, affiliation, life, property, law and legal justice (Kohlberg,
1984, pp. 189-190, 309; cf Maccoby, 1980, pp. 297-299). Participants explain or justify their
evaluation orally. For example: “Think about when you have made a promise to a friend of
yours”, answered by: “very important, important or not important”. The answers are
compared with moral judgment stages. Interrater agreement was satisfactory, with Kappa
beyond .80 for all items. Cronbach’s alpha was .62.
In-depth interviews were held with prison staff in order to assess educational climate,
vision, goals, intervention and educational philosophy. Questions such as “what is the vision
of the open juvenile justice institution”, “what is your motivation for this work”, “what kind
of activities can be found in the institution” and “how would you describe the atmosphere
within the institution” were asked. The researchers were offered the possibility to walk
independently around for several days to taste the atmosphere and to participate. Field
observations by the researchers were performed to describe interactions between inmates and
staff.
Plan of analyses
Qualitative data derived from the interviews and field observations were analyzed by means
of axial coding (Strauss, & Corbin, 1998) in order to evaluate the degree to which the open
juvenile justice institution was characteristic of a moral community. The interview focused on
different relevant topics, such as the vision of the institution, the methods used and the social
atmosphere in the institution. Subsequently, quantitative data on therapeutic relationship
quality, moral development, prosocial behavior and psychopathology is compared with
normative data using a series of t-tests. Finally, the relation between adolescent-staff
relationship quality and moral development (empathy and moral judgment), prosocial
behavior and psychopathology will be examined in simple correlational analyses.
11
Results
The Ankara Juvenile Justice Institution is a sociomoral community (hypothesis 1)
The institution
Field observations were conducted in the open juvenile justice institution. The juvenile justice
institution was not surrounded by high walls or fences, but green trees and flowers. The
capacity of the institution was 108 persons; the juveniles stayed in 6-person dorms. An open
juvenile justice institution can be defined as a detention center, which is not surrounded with
walls and fences. Juveniles can walk in and out by themselves (for example to go to school or
work) and there is no special staff to prevent prison breaks. The juveniles were placed in the
institution by court order. Until sentence, they had to stay in a detention center. Once placed
in the open juvenile justice institution the juveniles have the possibility to complete their
study or go to work outside or inside the institution. There are also possibilities for
participation in different social activities. Resocialization is the main focus of the institution
(Turkish Ministry of Justice/ Adalet Bakanligi, 2014).
The researchers experienced a cozy and open atmosphere and did not have the feeling
of being in a detention center. The juveniles were walking around, sitting in groups or were
involved in voluntary (social) activities. The former isolation room was used as a stocking
room because there was no need for using it. There were possibilities to attend school or work
inside or outside the institution. There was no visible hierarchy between the juveniles and the
staff. Juveniles and staff were, for example, drinking tea and coffee together in the garden,
showing affection. Another example is that the staff consumes breakfast, lunch or dinner
together with the juveniles. The contact between the juveniles and the staff seemed rather
informal, including the director of the institution.
Therapy
When juveniles enter the institutions they have to attend creative therapy with clay. This
therapy is thought to reduce the stress and aggression levels of the juveniles. It also offers the
possibility to build relationships with the staff and the other juveniles. Also this therapy is
meant to help juveniles in their adaptation to their new environment. Besides this therapy the
juveniles receive individual therapies, such as cognitive behavior therapy with the
12
psychologist and the social workers if indicated. If there is an indication of an addiction 4
(45% of the juveniles were addicted to drugs upon entry of the institution), the juvenile
follows compulsory treatment targeting substance abuse with involvement of the medical
doctor.
Building a therapeutic relationship
Semi-structured interviews were held with staff members working at the open juvenile justice
institution. The findings will be described in this part. All of the interviewed staff emphasized
the importance of reintegrating these juveniles into society. They defined this as a major part
of their work. Therefore, it was considered important to be a positive role model for these
children and to work on relationship building, as is illustrated in the following transcripts. The
following transcripts are gathered from the director, two depute directors, the psychologist,
two social workers, the doctor and two guardians.
“In this juvenile justice system, you have to be a role model for the juveniles. The children
who come here are more sensitive, are coming from a different environment, have mostly a
low social economic status and are in need of more love and compassion. We have to
understand this and give them the care and love they need”.
“It is also important to build trust bonds with the juveniles before you can give criticism to
the juveniles”.
“ A large part of the juveniles have experienced lack of love; they need to be approached as if
by a parent. As a director I am a doctor, a father, a lawyer, you become everything you
can imagine for these children. I am satisfied when I make them happy”.
“The juveniles can be 18-19 years old and could be seen as adults, but we cannot forget that
they are still children who are in need love”.
Some staff members mentioned that it is not only detention that the children receive within
the institution, but more importantly, they get education to acquire the skills to become
productive members of the society.
4
File information
13
“ This institution is not just a juvenile justice institution, but also an educational institution”.
“ It’s important to win the trust of the youngsters to enhance their intrinsic motivation to stay
on the right path”.
It emerges that it is important to take part in activities, so the juveniles keep the feeling that
they are part of society. Also the juveniles who have a lower class background experience that
they can do things in a different way. Another important function of these activities is that the
skills learned at the institution can be displayed. Activities are organized by the institution
two or three times a month, sometimes even with guests, such as music stars.
Another important view of the institution is to give the juveniles structure in their lives in
order to prepare them for life out of the institution. The juveniles have to wake-up at 6 a.m.,
tidying the bed and take a shower. They are expected to attend to breakfast, lunch and dinner
at set times. At 10 p.m. they have to be in their dorms to go to sleep.
Many professionals explain that their motivation to do this work emerges from seeing the
changes in the juveniles. They state that the opinions and behavior of the juveniles change,
and that this makes them very happy and make it worth doing this work.
In summary, interviews and field observations show that the Turkish open juvenile justice
institution in Ankara can be considered as a sociomoral community in which juveniles are
treated with respect, and conditions for therapeutic relationship building are evident. We
conclude that the first hypothesis is confirmed.
Therapeutic adolescent-staff therapeutic relationships are positive in general
(hypothesis 2)
We first conducted frequency analyses based on the PARA cut-off score of 2,5, indicating a
positive relationship, to establish percentages of juveniles evaluating their relationship with
staff as positive: 53% of the juveniles in the Turkish justice institution experienced an
affective bond, 58% said they could rely on staff, and 79% reported staff to be
psychologically available. In addition, one sample t-tests were conducted to examine
14
differences in means, with one-tailed significance. Results showed that on average juveniles
did not experience an affective bond with staff, could not rely on staff, but nevertheless
considered staff to be psychologically available, t (38) = 2.83, p < .01. Compared with Dutch
justice-involved adolescents in secure residential care (Zegers, 2007), the Turkish adolescents
evaluated psychological availability of staff as significantly lower than did Dutch adolescents
(see Table 1), which proved to be a large difference (d = .75). No difference was found for
reliance on adult.
To conclude, although half of the juveniles experienced positive relationships with
staff, the hypothesis about relatively positive adolescent-staff relationships could not be
confirmed.
Table 1. Comparisons between Juvenile Delinquents in a Turkish and Dutch Juvenile Justice
Institution: Therapeutic Relationship Quality, Moral Development, and Psychopathology
Turkey
Psychological availability
Reliance on adult
Cognitive empathy
Affective empathy
Sociomoral reasoning
Prosocial behavior
Psychopathology
Holland
M
SD
n
M
2.88
2.70
4.05
3.22
2.61
8.33
11.69
0.84
0.79
0.79
0.90
0.42
1.74
5.29
39
39
40
40
36
40
40
3.41
2.63
3.50
2.70
2.41
7.83
10.19
SD
n
0.64 74
0.73 74
0.73 59
0.61 59
0.23 108
1.96 360
4.55 360
t
d
-3.75*
0.47
3.56*
3.43*
3.60*
1.55
1.94+
-0.75
0.09
0.73
0.72
0.72
0.23
0.32
* p < .001, + , p < .10
Moral development (cognitive empathy and moral reasoning) and prosocial behavior
are relatively high, and psychopathology relatively low (hypothesis 3)
It can be derived from Table 1 that juvenile delinquents in the Ankara juvenile justice
institution rated higher on empathy and sociomoral reasoning (between instrumental and
prosocial moral judgment) than their Dutch counterparts residing in secure juvenile justice
institutions (Nas, Brugman & Koops 2005; Van der Helm, Stams, Van der Stel, Van Langen,
& Van der Laan, 2012). The differences were large, with Cohen’s d around .70. The
difference for psychopathology just failed to reach significance, indicating a trend that the
Turkish juveniles rated higher on psychopathology than did Dutch juveniles in juvenile justice
15
institutions (Boonekamp, 2010). According to borderline clinical and clinical SDQ cut-off
scores, 20% of the Turkish juveniles were classified in the borderline-clinical range and
17.5% in the clinical range, which compares favorably to rates of psychopathology found in
detained male adolescents in general, amounting to 70% (Colins et al., 2010). This data was
not available of the Dutch juveniles. There were no significant differences in prosocial
behavior between the Turkish and Dutch juveniles.
Adolescent-staff relationship quality is positively related to moral development,
prosocial behavior and negatively related to psychopathology (hypothesis 4)
Affective bond, reliance on adult and psychological availability all correlated significantly
and positively with prosocial behavior, while psychological availability was significantly and
positively associated with cognitive empathy (see Table 2). No significant relations were
found between adolescent-staff relationship quality and affective empathy, moral reasoning
and psychopathology.
Table 2. Correlation between Cognitive Empathy and Prosocial Behavior:
Affective Bond, Reliance on Adult and Psychological Availability
Cognitive empathy
Affective bond
Reliance on adult
Psychological availability
Prosocial behavior
r
n
r
n
.17
.16
.34*
39
39
39
.38*
.30*
.36*
39
39
39
* p < 0.05 one-tailed
16
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the degree to which a Turkish Juvenile Justice
institution in Ankara could be considered as a sociomoral community positively affecting
adolescent-staff relationship quality, moral development (empathy and moral reasoning),
prosocial behavior and psychopathology. Moral reasoning, empathy and prosocial behavior
were expected to be relatively high and psychopathology was expected to be low compared to
data of incarcerated juvenile delinquents in Holland. This expectation was based on the
assumption that open juvenile justice institutions in Turkey emphasize rehabilitation and
moral development instead of retaliation.
Qualitative evidence was found for the sociomoral community approach in the Ankara
Turkish juvenile justice institution. Although supportive adolescent-staff relationship quality
proved to be associated with higher levels of both cognitive empathy and prosocial behavior,
no evidence was found for high adolescent-staff relationship quality in adolescent self-report
questionnaires. Hypotheses about positive moral development were confirmed, which was not
substantiated in higher levels of prosocial behavior. Finally, findings with respect to
psychopathology were equivocal.
The findings derived from adolescent self-reports showed that the juveniles generally
did not have positive relationships with staff. However, satisfactory psychological availability
of staff concurred with our qualitative study results of staff availability. It is plausible to
suggest that most of the Turkish juveniles had a history of insecure attachment relationships,
and therefore have insecure-disorganized working models of attachment that might explain
lack of positive outcomes in their affective bond with staff and reliance on staff (Smith,
Msetfi, & Golding, 2010). Another possible explanation is that relationship quality was
assessed in terms of attachment, with neglect of aspects of the therapeutic relationship that are
more task orientated (Shirk & Karver, 2003). Nevertheless, high adolescent-staff relationship
quality proved to be associated with both cognitive empathy and prosocial behavior.
It is difficult to explain why no positive effect was found for prosocial behavior given
the positive outcomes on moral development. Possibly higher levels of both empathy and
social moral reasoning did not result in more prosocial behavior because of cognitive
distortions. Beerthuizen, Marinus, Brugman and Basinger (2013) have shown that attitudinalrelated processes, such as self-serving cognitive distortions, are important correlates of
delinquent behavior. Also cognitive distortions have been shown to hamper the translation of
moral cognition in morally relevant behaviors (Helmond, Overbeek, Brigman, & Gibbs, in
17
press). Moreover, although moral reasoning was relatively high if compared to juveniles
socialized in Dutch juvenile justice institutions, moral reasoning was still stage 2/3, that is,
partly instrumental and thus immature. Also, prosocial behavior is thought to be modeled by
staff, but in this case lack of an effective bond between the adolescents and staff may have set
limits to learning by means of behavioral modeling (Hirschi, 1969).
The Turkish juvenile delinquents did not compare favorably with the Dutch
incarcerated adolescents on psychopathology. Possibly, the Turkish delinquents may have
experienced more negative childhood experiences than their Dutch counterparts (import
hypothesis, see Souverein, Van der Helm & Stams, 2013). Notably, the offenses committed
by the Turkish juveniles were relatively serious and violent crimes. For instance, 13% of the
juveniles committed murder. Nevertheless, the prevalence of psychopathology in the Turkish
adolescents proved to be relatively low if compared to international normative data (See
Colins et al., 2010). It should be noticed here that the juvenile delinquents in both Turkey and
Holland often receive (evidence based) treatments in forensic residential youth care, which
has been shown to significantly reduce psychopathology (de Swart et al., 2012).
From 2010, all juvenile justice institutions (JJI) in the Netherlands work with the basic
methodology YOUTURN (DJI Dienst Justitiele Inrichting, 2014). This methodology is an
integration and extension of two methods: the Social Competency Model (SCM) and EQUIP.
The basic methodology has now been developed further. EQUIP is an originally American
methodology, it was transformed into a method that is more suitable for the Dutch situation
and population in 2012. This new method is called TOPS! and it is a part of YOUTURN (DJI
Dienst Justitiële Inrichting, 2014). In Turkey treatment of the juvenile is adjusted to the
individual needs of the juvenile, while also placement in the institution serves the goal of
rehabilitation.
Limitations
The present study has limitations that must be considered when interpreting the findings.
First, this study had a small sample size of only 40 juvenile delinquents residing in one
institution for male juvenile delinquents. Although juvenile justice institutions in Turkey must
work according to similar principles, it would have strengthened our findings if we also had
sampled juveniles from other Turkish juvenile justice institutions. Notably, results cannot be
generalized to female delinquents in juvenile justice institutions. Second, we compared the
data of this study with the study by Nas et al. (2005), Boonekamp (2010) and the study by van
der Helm et al. (2012), not being able to control for differences in age, gender, educational
18
level, criminal history and ethnicity. Nevertheless, comparisons were made with incarcerated
justice-involved juveniles in the same age range, with an overrepresentation of males, which
strengthens the validity of the comparison that were made. Third, in this study no data were
available on the level of intelligence. We therefore cannot examine to what extent intelligence
might have affected research outcomes. For instance, it is well established that individuals
with a mild intellectual disability go slower through the different stages of moral reasoning
and that there is a so-called ceiling effect with the mild intellectual disabilities group. Most of
the individuals with a mild intellectual disability cannot surpass stage 2 instrumental moral
reasoning (Langdon, Clare, & Murphy, 2011; Van Vugt et al., 2011). We expect that a
substantial part of the juveniles in the Ankara juvenile justice institution had intellectual
disabilities given the high rate of illiteracy and low levels of formal education. It should also
be considered that most instruments were designed and validated for juveniles in Western
(non-Islamic) populations. It is therefore questionable whether these instruments are
applicable for juveniles in non-western countries. Also the question rises if our study findings
are generalizable to Western more individualistic communities given that the Turkish
community is a more collectivistic, which considers juvenile delinquency as a failure of the
community, where most Western individualistic societies consider delinquency as a failure of
the individual.
Recommendations
We recommend to use standardized observational instruments in addition to the
questionnaires that were used in our study. Beside staff interviews, we advise to also conduct
in-depth interviews with the juvenile delinquents. To assess adolescent-staff relationship
quality, the PARA should be complemented with an instrument developed to assess
therapeutic relationship quality from a more task-oriented perspective in order to fully
represent adolescent-staff relationship quality. Cognitive distortions should be measured in
order to be able to explain discrepancies between moral development and morally relevant
behavior. From this perspective, also antisocial behavior should be measured to capture the
whole range of morally relevant behaviors. The Islam plays a big role in the perspective on
juvenile delinquency, because of the important part the Islam plays in the cultural norms and
values of Turkish society in general. Aftercare in such society means that the family, village
or neighborhood to which the juvenile returns should all take their rehabilitative
responsibilities, which might be considered an important protective element possibly
19
explaining low recidivism rates in Turkey. Finally, we recommend to conduct longitudinal
research.
Conclusion
From the findings of this research we could conclude that the staff members of the open
juvenile justice institution in Turkey are relatively open, communicative, and psychological
available, which makes it possible for them to work on healthy relationships with the
adolescents. The results show also that the Ankara juvenile justice institution can be
considered a sociomoral community that cares about the juveniles, and which focuses on
rehabilitation instead of retaliation. Notably, supportive adolescent-staff relationship quality
proved to be associated with higher levels of both cognitive empathy and prosocial behavior,
which shows that the Ankara juvenile justice institution might make a difference for at least
some of the Turkish juvenile delinquents by establishing high therapeutic relationship quality.
Also the trend in most Western societies, or in this case the Dutch justice system, is to
respond to juvenile delinquency with incarceration as a means of punishment from the
perspective of retribution. On the other hand, the Turkish juvenile justice system has set itself
the main goal to equip the juvenile delinquents with skills to be able to independently
function in society 5.
Despite study limitations, this study provides unique insight in the (re)socialization of
Turkish juvenile delinquents in a juvenile justice institution, which might have far-reaching
consequences for treatment of juvenile delinquents in both Turkey and Western countries,
where juvenile justice institutions might also focus on rehabilitation from a children’s rights
perspective, but may have more difficulties in attuning rehabilitative efforts with the
perspective of retaliation.
5
Cocuk koruma kanuna gore verilen koruyucu ve destekleyici tedbir kararlarinin uygulanmasi hakkinda yonetmelik
20
References
Ankara Adalet Bakanligi / Ministry of Justice Ankara. Verkregen op 2 augustus 2014, van:
http://www.ankaracocukvegenclik.adalet.gov.tr/kurum%20tan%C4%B1t%C4%B1m%C4%B
1/kurum.html
Beerthuizen, M. G. C. J. ; Brugman, D., Basinger, K. S. (2013). Oppositional defiance, moral
reasoning and moral value evaluation as predictors of self-reported juvenile delinquency.
Journal of Moral Education, 42, 460-474.
Boonekamp, T. J. (2010). Een onderzoek naar de betrouwbaarheid en validiteit van de SDQ.
Master’s thesis: Universiteit van Amsterdam. http://dare.uva.nl/document/354849.
Bordin, E.S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance.
Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 16, 252–260.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Boyes, M. C., & Allen, S. G. (1993). Styles of parent-child interaction and moral reasoning in
adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 551-570.
Cardol, M., De Jong, B.A., & Ward, C.D. (2002). Cardol M. De Jong BA. Ward CD. On autonomy
and participation in rehabilitation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 24, 970-974.
Cohen, D., & Strayer, J. (1996). Empathy in conduct-disordered and comparison. Youth.
Developmental Psychology, 32, 988–998.
Colins, O., Vermeiren, R., Vreugdenhil, C., Van den Brink, W., Doreleijers, T., & Broekaert, E.
(2010). Psychiatric disorders in detained male adolescents: A systematic literature review.
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 55, 255-263.
De Swart, J. J. W., Van den Broek, H., Stams, G. J. J. M., Asscher, J. J., Van der Laan, P. H.,
Holsbrink-Engels, G. A., & Van der Helm, G. H. P. (2012). The effectiveness of institutional
youth care over the past three decades: A meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review,
34, 1818-1824.
21
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024-1037.
Dienst
Justitiële
Inrichtingen.
Verkregen
op
13
augustus
2014,
van:
http://www(.dji.nl)/Onderwerpen/Jongeren-in-detentie/behandeling-zorg-enonderwijs/Basismethodiek-YOUTURN.
Garrido, V., & Morales, L. A. (2007). Serious (Violent and Chronic) Juvenile Offenders: A
systematic review of treatment Effectiveness in Secure Corrections. Campbell Collaboration.
Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., & Vitaro, F. (2009). Iatrogenic effect of juvenile justice. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 991-998.
Gibbs, J. C., Basinger, K. S., & Fuller, D. (1992) Moral Maturity: Measuring the development of
sociomoral reflection. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.
Groves, W. B., McCleary, R., & Newman, G. R. (1985). Religion, Modernisation, and World Crime.
Comparative Social Research 8, 59–78.
Haan, N., Langer, J. & Kohlberg, L. (1976). Family patterns of moral reasoning. Child Development,
47, 1204-1206.
Helal, A. A., & Coston, C. T. M. (1991). Low Crime Rates in Bahrain: Islamic Social Control,
Testing the Theory of Synnomie. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal
Justice,15, 125–44.
Helmond, P., Overbeek, G., Brigman, D., & Gibbs, J. C. (in press). A meta-analysis on cognitive
distortions and externalizing problem behavior: Associations, moderators, and treatment
effectiveness. Criminal Justice and Behavior.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press.
22
Hoffman, M. L., Saltztein, H. D. (1967). Parent discipline and the child moral development. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 45-57.
IJzendoorn, M. H. van (1997). Attachment, emergent Morality, and aggression: toward a
developmental socioemotional model of antisocial behaviour. International Journal of
Behavioral Development, 21, 703-727.
James, C., Stams, G. J. J. M., Asscher, J. J., Van der Laan, P. H., & De Roo, A. C. (2013). Aftercare
programs for reducing recidivism among juvenile and young adult offenders: A MetaAnalytic Review. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 263-274.
Jolliffe, D., Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending. A systematic review and metaanalysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9, 441-476.
Jolliffe, D., Farrington, D. P. (2006). The development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale.
Journal of Adolescence, 29 (4), 589-611. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010.
Kagitcibasi, C. (1990). Family and socialization in cross-cultural perspective: A model of change. In
J. Berman (Ed.),Cross-cultural perspectives: Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1989 (pp.
135-200). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Karver, M. S., Handelsman, J. B., Fields, S., & Bickman, L. (2006). Meta-analyses of therapeutic
relationship variables in youth and family therapy: The evidence for different relationship
variables in the child and adolescent treatment outcome literature. Clinical Psychology
Review, 26, 50-65.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development: Vol. 2. The psychology of moral development.
San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The Primary Factors that Characterize Effective Interventions with Juvenile
Offenders: A Meta-Analytic Overview. Victims and Offenders, 4, 124-147.
Maccoby, E. E. (1980). Social development: Psychological growth and the parent-child relationship.
New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
23
Mulvey, E. P., & Schubert, C. A. (2011). Youth in prison and beyond. In B. Feld & D. Bishop (Eds.),
Oxford handbook on juvenile crime and juvenile justice. New York, NY: Oxford.
Nas, C., Brugman, D. & Koops, W. (2005). Effects of a multicomponent peer intervention program
for juvenile delinquents on moral judgment, distortions, social skills and recidivism.
Psychology, Crime, and Law, 11, 421-434.
Nijsten, C. (1998). Opvoeding in Turkse gezinnen in Nederland. Assen: Van Gorcum.
Parhar, K. K., Wormith, J. S., Derkzen, D. M., & Beauregard, A. M. (2008). Offender coercion in
treatment: A meta-analysis of effectiveness. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 35, 1109-1135.
Parikh, B. (1980). Development of moral judgment and its relation to family environmental factors in
Indian and American families. Child Development, 51, 1030-1039.
Powers, S. I. (1988). Moral judgment development within the family. Journal of Moral Education,
17, 209-219.
Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg’s approach to moral
education. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Rest,J., Thoma, S., & Edwards, L. (1997). Designing and validating a measure of moral judgment:
Stage preference and stage consistency approaches. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89,
5-28.
Schein, E. H. (1993). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schubert, C. A., Mulvey, E. P., Loughran, T. A., & Loyosa, S. H. (2012). Perceptions of institutional
experience and community outcomes for serious adolescent offenders. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 39, 71-93.
Schuengel, C. & Zegers, M. A. M. (2003). Psychological Availability and Reliance on Adult Manual,
Free University Amsterdam/ Orthopedagogical Center OGH, Amsterdam/Zetten.
Serajzadeh, S. H. (2002) Islam and Crime the Moral Community of Muslims. Journal of Arabic and
Islam studies, 4, 111- 131.
24
Shrik, S., & Karver, M. S. (2003). Prediction of treatment outcome from relationship variables in
child and adolescent therapy: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 71 (3), 452-464.
Smith, A. E. M., Msetfi, R. M., & Golding, L. (2010). Client self-rated adult attachment patterns and
the therapeutic alliance: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 326-337.
Souverein, F. A., Van der Helm, G. H. P., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2013). Nothing works in secure
residential youth care? Children and Youth Services Review, 35, 1941-1945.
Stark, R., Kent, L., & Doyle, D. P. (1982). Religion and Delinquency: The Ecology of a ‘Lost’
Relationship. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 19, 4–24.
Stams, G. J. J. M., Brugman, D., Deković, M., Van Rosmalen, L., Van der Laan, P. H., & Gibbs, J.
C. (2006). The moral judgment of juvenile delinquents: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 697-713.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures
and techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Van der Helm, G. H. P., Klapwijk, M., Stams, G. J. J. M., & Van der Laan, P. H. (2009). What
Works’ for juvenile prisoners: The role of group climate in a youth prison. Journal of
Children’s Services, 4 (2), 36-48.
Van der Helm, G. H. P. (2011). First do no harm. Amsterdam: SWP Publisher. Dissertation: Vrije
Universiteit Amsterdam.
Van der Helm, G. H. P., Boekee, I., Stams, G. J. J. M., & Van der Laan, P. H. (2011). Fear is the key.
Keeping the delicate balance between flexibility and control in a Dutch youth prison. Journal
of Children’s Services, 6, 248-263.
Van der Helm, G. H. P., Stams, G. J. J. M., Van der Stel, J. C., Van Langen, M. M., Van der Laan, P.
H. (2012). Group Climate and Empathy in a Sample of Incarcerated Boys. International
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56, 1149 - 1160.
25
Van Langen, M. A. M., Wissink, I. B., van Vugt, E. S., Van der Stouwe, T., Stams, G. J. J. M.
(2014). The relation between empathy and offending: A meta-analysis. Aggression and
Violent Behavior, 19, 179-189.
Verhulst, F. C. (2006). Leerboek kinder- en jeugdpsychiatrie. Assen: van Gorcum.
Vermeiren, R., Schwab-Stone, M., Ruchkin, V., De Clippele, A., & Deboutte, D. (2002). Predicting
recidivism in delinquent adolescents from psychological and psychiatric assessment.
Comprehensive Psychiatry, 43, 142-149.
Vermeiren, R. (2003). Psychopathology and delinquency in adolescents: a descriptive and
developmental perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 277-318.
Wartna, B. S. J., Tollenaar, N., Blom, M., Verweij, S., Alberda, D. L., & Essers, A. A. M. (2012).
Recidivebericht 2012 landelijke cijfers met betrekking tot de strafrechtelijke recidive van
justitiabelen uit de periode 2002-2009. Den Haag: WODC.
Wissink, I. B. (2006). Parenting, friendship relations and adolescent functioning in different ethnic
groups. Doctoral dissertation: University of Amsterdam.
Zegers, M. (2007). Attachment among institutionalized adolescents: Mental representations,
therapeutic relationships and problem behavior. Doctoral dissertation: Free University of
Amsterdam.
Zegers, M. A. M., Schuengel, C., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2006).
Attachment Representations of Institutionalized Adolescents and Their Professional
Caregivers: Predicting the Development of Therapeutic Relationships. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 76, 325-334.
26
Appendix
Appendix. 1
Semi-structured interview for the staff members
1.
What is the vision of the open juvenile justice institution?
2.
What activities can be found in the institution?
3.
Does your institution offer education or training on the job?
4.
What methods do you use?
5.
How long have you been working here?
6.
How would you describe the atmosphere within the institution?
7.
What is your motivation for this work?
8.
What are you hoping to achieve?
9.
Do you experience difficulties in your work?
27