Comparison of Language Skills of Adjudicated and Nonadjudicated Adolescent Males and Females

Blanton, Debra J.; Dagenais, Paul A.

doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2007/033)

Cited by 34 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this preliminary evidence has not been replicated in other studies that have specifically looked at language differences. A study considering the language differences between adjudicated and non‐adjudicated adolescents, for example, reported a between‐group difference but no within‐group gender differences (Blanton & Dagenais, ). In order to provide further insight into potential gender differences in youth offenders and address the available mixed evidence based on very small sample sizes in previous studies, we include, to the best of our knowledge, the largest sample of female young offenders in the United Kingdom (UK), to provide evidence of the point prevalence of DLD in females and examine gender differences in the psycholinguistic and socioemotional profiles of young offenders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

Winstanley

Webb

Conti‐Ramsden

2019

Legal Criminol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Previous research demonstrates an association between developmental language disorder (DLD) and criminal offending. International research also implicates alexithymia as being over‐represented in forensic samples. This study provides a comprehensive examination of the psycholinguistic and socioemotional profiles of males and females in the youth justice system, with a focus on first‐time entrants. In the context of restorative justice (RJ) underpinning youth justice disposals, this allows for informed intervention and identifies those who may be compromised in their ability to effectively engage in certain interventions. Methods Participants (N = 145) from a triage centre and youth offending teams, with a mean age of 15.8, completed a range of standardized psycholinguistic assessments considering non‐verbal IQ, expressive and receptive language measures, and literacy. Additionally, socioemotional measures completed included The Alexithymia Scale and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Results Developmental language disorder was present in 87 participants. Except for the emotional score, no statistically significant gender differences were found. The mean language scores for the DLD group were more than 2.25 standard deviations below the normative mean, and they demonstrated greater literacy difficulties. A high proportion of the group met the criteria for alexithymia/possible alexithymia (60%), and this was not associated with DLD. Conclusions High prevalence values for DLD and socioemotional difficulties, not generally gender‐specific, were found. These difficulties have the possibility to compromise a young person's ability to engage in rehabilitative strategies. Language assessment and identification of difficulties, especially DLD, upon entry to the youth justice service, would assist when planning interventions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

Winstanley

Webb

Conti‐Ramsden

2019

Legal Criminol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People with language impairments are overrepresented in our courts and prisons (Blanton & Dagenais, 2007; Kavanagh, Rowe, Hersch, Barnett, & Reznik, 2010). In fact, the majority of prisoners in the United States have language impairments that are either acquired (see Shiroma, Ferguson, & Pickelsimer, 2010, for a review) or developmental (Bryan, Freer, & Furlong, 2007; Sanger, Hux, & Belau, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Miranda Rights Comprehension in Young Adults With Specific Language Impairment

Rost

McGregor

2012

Am J Speech Lang Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether citizens with language impairment understand legal rights as conveyed in Miranda warnings. Method Grisso's Instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of Miranda Rights (1998) was administered to 34 young adults, half of whom met the diagnostic criteria for specific language impairment (SLI). A correlational analysis of the relationship between language scores and Miranda rights comprehension was conducted, as were tests of differences between individuals with SLI (n = 17) and individuals without SLI. Results Language ability was positively correlated with overall performance on the Miranda measure. As a group, individuals with SLI were significantly poorer than their peers with normal language at defining Miranda vocabulary and applying Miranda rights in hypothetical situations. The group with SLI was also marginally less able to paraphrase Miranda sentences. Conclusion Language impairment limits comprehension of Miranda warnings. As a result, citizens with language impairment are at risk of being denied their constitutional rights.

show abstract

“…Another UK-based analysis (Barrett et al, 2006) reported that an estimated £1000 million per year is spent on "processing and dealing with young offenders" (p. 541 Research in Australia (Snow & Powell, 2004a,b;2005; has contributed to a small but growing body of international research on the oral language skills of young offenders. These studies, together with work from the USA (e.g., Blanton & Dagenais, 2007;Sanger, Moore-Brown, Magnuson & Svoboda, 2000) and the UK (Bryan, 2004;Bryan, Freer & Furlong, 2007) show that in addition to being socially and educationally marginalised, young offenders (particularly males) are at high risk of experiencing unrecognised oral language impairments, as evidenced by significantly compromised performance on standardised language measures when compared with 8 controls of similar ages and demographic backgrounds. Snow and Powell (2008) found that over 50% of a sample of young offenders on community orders could be classified as language impaired, using measures of comprehension and verbal expression, particularly where these were sensitive to the processing and manipulation of abstract language.…”

Section: Table Of Contentsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Oral Language Competence and Interpersonal Violence: Exploring Links in Incarcerated Young Males

Snow¹,

Powell²

2011

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral language competence is a basic prerequisite for functional and prosocial development across the lifespan, but has been inadequately investigated in young people in whom behaviour disturbance is the dominant concern. Previous work in Australia and overseas has shown that young offenders serving community-based orders are at high-risk for undetected but clinically significant oral language (everyday talking and listening) difficulties. However this phenomenon has received little attention in incarcerated samples, and links with offending severity, mental health, and other markers of early risk (e.g., a history of early Out of Home Care placement) have not been systemically examined. A cross-sectional examination of one hundred (100) young offenders (mean age 19.03 years, SD = .85) completing custodial sentences in Victoria, Australia was carried out. Participants were assessed on a range of standardised oral language, IQ, mental health and offending-severity measures. Language measures were selected for their sensitivity to a range of everyday linguistic competencies, such as listening comprehension, the ability to define words, and to understanding of everyday idioms and other forms of non-literal language. Language impairment (LI) was operationally defined as performance below two standard deviations below the mean on two standardised language measures (the CELF4 and the TLC-E). Forty-six percent of participants were classified as language impaired (LI), using this definition. When the subgroup with high offending scores was compared with those with (relatively) lower offending scores, significant differences on a range of language measures were identified. A range of early risk indicators (such as placement in Out of Home Care) was also examined with respect to language impairment in this high-risk group. Unidentified oral language impairments are over-represented in young men in the justice system, and may serve to further marginalise this already disadvantaged group. Implications for early intervention, passage through the justice system, and receipt of therapeutic services are dis.cussed. Young offenders should be routinely screened for Ll and interventions should be tailored accordingly.

show abstract

Comparison of Language Skills of Adjudicated and Nonadjudicated Adolescent Males and Females

Cited by 34 publications

References 20 publications

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

Miranda Rights Comprehension in Young Adults With Specific Language Impairment

Oral Language Competence and Interpersonal Violence: Exploring Links in Incarcerated Young Males

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About