Save
...
Paper 2
Studies
Contemporary study Crim
Save
Share
Learn
Content
Leaderboard
Share
Learn
Created by
Ade
Visit profile
Cards (19)
What is the aim of Howells et al. (2005) study?
To see if
offender
characteristics
predict
improvement
View source
What does the study compare regarding anger management?
Effectiveness
of
AMP
versus treatment
View source
How many male offenders participated in the study?
418
male offenders
View source
What was the mean age of the offenders in the study?
28.8
years
View source
What percentage of offenders came from prison-based AMP?
86%
View source
What was the follow-up duration for the assessments?
Two
and
six
months
View source
What was the attrition rate at the follow-up sessions?
Not a
large
attrition rate
View source
How many sessions did offenders attend in the AMP?
10
sessions
View source
How long did each session last?
2
hours
View source
What skills did offenders identify during the sessions?
Provocations
, relaxation,
cognitive restructuring
View source
What type of measures did offenders complete?
International
self-report
measures
View source
How were questionnaires administered for those with literacy issues?
Verbally
administered
View source
What did staff complete for each offender?
Observational staff rating scale
View source
What was the result of the AMP on anger knowledge at the two-month follow-up?
Greater improvement than the
control group
View source
What was the significant finding regarding offenders' ability to manage anger?
Not
significantly
different from the
control group
View source
What factor predicted improvement in offenders?
Higher
readiness
for treatment
View source
What was the conclusion regarding predictions about offenders benefiting from AMP?
Motivated offenders
had the biggest positive change
View source
What was noted about the overall impact of AMP?
Limited impact and
benefits
not always sustained
View source
Describe Howells et al sample and procedure
418
male offenders mostly violent from different ethnic backgrounds in Australia that had been referred to
AMP
86%
from prison based AMP while rest from community programmes
Offenders attended
10 sessions
lasting
2 hours
each
They had to identify provocations, relaxation, cognitive restricting and
relapse prevention
via skills activities
They also completed 2
international self report measures
about experiences of anger and triggers before and after attending the programme