Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is prevalent in youth involved in delinquency, but it is often not effectively treated. A randomized clinical trial was conducted comparing the outcomes of an emotion regulation therapy (Trauma Affect Regulation: Guide for Education and Therapy, or TARGET) with a relational supportive therapy (Enhanced Treatment as Usual, or ETAU) with 59 delinquent girls (age 13-17 years) who met criteria for full or partial PTSD. Mixed model regression analyses demonstrated generally large effects for pre-post change in PTSD symptoms for both therapies but not in emotion regulation. Both therapies had small to medium effect size changes in anxiety, anger, depression, and posttraumatic cognitions. Treatment × Time interactions showed small to medium effects favoring TARGET for change in PTSD (intrusive reexperiencing and avoidance) and anxiety symptoms, posttraumatic cognitions, and emotion regulation, and favoring ETAU for change in hope and anger. Results provide preliminary support for TARGET as a potentially efficacious therapy for PTSD with delinquent girls. Relational therapies such as ETAU also may be beneficial for delinquent girls with PTSD, particularly to enhance optimism and self-efficacy and reduce anger.

Purpose-This article reports the findings of a Dialectical Behavioral Therapy-Corrections Modified (DBT-CM) intervention upon difficult to manage, impulsive and/or aggressive incarcerated male adolescents.Methods-A secondary analysis of a sub-sample of 38 male adolescents who participated in the study was conducted. A one-group pretest-posttest design was used; descriptive statistics and ttests were conducted.Results-Significant changes were found in physical aggression, distancing coping methods and number of disciplinary tickets for behavior. Conclusion-The study supports the value of DBT-CM for management of incarcerated male adolescents with difficult to manage aggressive behaviors.

No abstract

Its better to have imprecise answers to the right questions than precise answers to the wrong questions.-Donald CampbellProcedures for identifying gifted and talented students are probably the most discussed and written about topic in our field. For the better part of the previous century, test scores dominated the identification process. Even with the advent of new theories of intelligence (e.g., Gardner, 1983;Sternberg, 1985) and broadened conceptions of giftedness (e.g., Gagné, 1999;Renzulli, 1978Renzulli, , 1988Simonton, 1997), actual practices specified in state and district guidelines continue to be dominated by cognitive ability test scores. Recognition of the need for a broader base of identification criteria has progressed from theoretical and research-based advances to generally accepted recommendations included in standard textbooks in the field (

No abstract