This paper reports on a mixed methods study of adolescents' responses to case material about social exclusion. First, a qualitative coding method is presented that describes the way adolescents choose and justify strategies to negotiate such situations. The responses were then analysed quantitatively using chi square tests and multinomial logistic regression. Findings indicate that adolescents' interpretation of their social context was a significant factor in their choice of strategy. Those adolescents who invoked normative rules and conventions as the most salient justifications were more likely to recommend bystanding rather than joining in the exclusion. However, adolescents who viewed the protagonist's own choice as an opportunity for making long-lasting positive changes in the social environment were more likely to recommend helping the victim. Gender and school context also were associated with adolescents' choice of strategy. Implications for research in moral development as well as practical implications for school-based programming are discussed.
This article describes the evolution of a psychosocial intervention, pairing, from its initial utilization as an interpersonally oriented therapy for severely emotionally disturbed pre- and early adolescents in a special needs school, to its current usage as a public school prevention technique for at-risk youngsters, both aggressive and withdrawn, who are living under conditions of poverty and limited community supports. The evolution of the intervention is described parallel to both the evolution of its theoretical foundations and its associated empirical analysis and evaluation. Given that our approach to both intervention and basic research is clinical-developmental (each part of the discipline influencing the other), the facilitation of greater social competence through the intervention provides the impetus for our research inquiry into the nature of psychosocial development. A generic evaluation model that integrates both outcome behavior and psychosocial development is described as it is applied to the evaluation of this specific intervention's effectiveness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.