||Scientific Methods Score
|Land, McCall, and Williams (1990)
||ISP youth (mostly status offenders) with no prior delinquent offenses had fewer delinquent offenses (12%) than control
group (28%) [S].|
ISP youth with prior delinquent offenses had more
delinquent offenses (57%) than control group (33%) [NS].
||ISP youth had more felony complaints (51%) than
probationers (38%) but fewer than parolees (57%) [NS].|
ISP youth had more adjudications (77%) than
probationers (62%) but fewer than parolees (78%) [NS].
|Sontheimer and Goodstein
||ISP juveniles had fewer rearrests (50%) than parolees
|Minor and Elrod (1990)
||ISP group had more self-reported criminal and status
|Minor and Elrod (1992)
||ISP group had fewer status offenses but more criminal
offenses (68%) than control group (67%) [NS].
|Barton and Butts (1990)
||ISP juveniles had more charges, but control group had
more serious charges [NS].
|Greenwood, Deschenes, and
||Detroit: Aftercare group (22%) had more arrests than
control group (18%) [NS].|
Pittsburgh: Aftercare group had fewer arrests (49%)
compared with control group (48%) [NS].
|Gottfredson and Barton (1993)
||Institutionalized juveniles had fewer arrests than
noninstitutionalized juveniles [S].