Psychosocial influences that motivate young offenders to engage in a non-custodial community intervention

Abstract

Offender programmes do not fully consider how psychosocial factors influence individual engagement within interventions. While factors associated with offending behaviour are well-known, their influence on motivational engagement is not clear. The present study of 109 adolescent offenders in a non-custodial community intervention explored the influence of aggression, antisocial behaviour in the community, problematic and disruptive behaviour in school, and parental bonding and self-esteem on reported motivation to engage with a non-custodial intervention. Regression and correlational analysis revealed relationships between these variables and four subtypes of motivation (i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, identified regulation and amotivation), although results in respect of selfesteem were mixed. The findings highlight the multidimensional and complex nature of motivation, and support the need to internalise extrinsic motivations through the promotion of self-autonomy and competence within intervention programmes in order to maximise engagement.

Diverting young men from gangs: a qualitative evaluation

“…Without effective engagement, significant time and resources can be lost and the initiative cannot progress. Focusing on an individual need-based approach to encourage engagement is supported by literature (Brooks and Khan, 2015). Furthermore, soft outcomes such as behavioural changes (i.e.…”

“…The participants in the current study advised that youth workers should also seek to develop trust with the family of the young person. Brooks and Khan (2015) found that young people who had mothers with less caring and more authoritative parenting styles, were less inclined to engage in interventions and suggests this was because these parenting styles do not foster encouragement to develop self-determined goals or prosocial behaviours. Therefore, family buy-in can be key for engagement with the young person and help to endorse their learning and development.…”

“…Turning to interventions that aim to reduce offending behaviours, previous research has identified several key factors for successful engagement. These include, but are not limited to, tailored individual need-based approaches (Eadie and Canton, 2002) and family support (Brooks and Khan, 2015; Larkins and Wainwright, 2013). In particular, good relationships with the advisor and/or case worker are viewed as extremely important, specifically: the perceived level of care, listening, understanding (Phoenix and Kelly, 2013), trust and mutual respect (Evans et al , 2006; Merton et al , 2004).…”

The role of emotional resilience, childhood parentification, and attachment style on antisocial behaviour in adulthood: a comparison of an offender and normative population

“…As previous research links low levels of resilience with antisocial behaviour (e.g., Armstrong et al, 2005;McKnight & Loper, 2002), this result was surprising. However, prior research involving offenders (e.g., Brooks & Khan, 2015) has found that they tend to exaggerate personal abilities in response to self-report measures.…”

“…The Antisocial Behaviour Questionnaire (ABQ) (Khan and Cooke, 2008) is a ten-item measure of an individuals’ participation in antisocial behaviour after the age of 18 only. It was previously used in studies of non-custodial offender populations where it has demonstrated good internal consistency, and positive correlations with measures of antisocial behaviour in school and general aggression (Brooks and Khan, 2015). Example items include “Have you ever taken any illegal substances?” and “Broke into another person’s home/property (for fun or theft)” rated on a five-point scale from “never” (1) to “always” (5).…”