COKiU[,IITY BASED CORRECTIONAL PSYCHODRAMA: A SEVEN YEAR FOLLOW--UP1

by

Reed Adams, Harry A l l e n and Harold Vee ter

P s y c h o d r a m a as a t h e r a p e u t i c t e c h n i q u e began w i t h

J . L . Moreno n e a r l y h a l f a c e n t u r y ago , and has been u s e d as a

c o r r e c t i o n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n t e c h n i q u e f o r n e a r l y as l o n g . I t

s h a r e s w i t h mos t p s y c h o t h e r a p i e s t h e two common m o d a l i t i e s o f

t h e r a p e u t i c e m o t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e and t h e d e l i b e r a t e r e s t r u c t u r i n g

o f s i t u a t i o n s and c o n d i t i o n s c o n d u c i v e t o r e l e a r n i n g . The u n i q u e

t h e r a p e u t i c a d v a n t a g e o f p s y c h o d r a m a l i e s i n t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a

g roup norm p r e s c r i b i n g t h e p u b l i c e n a c t m e n t o f e m o t i o n a l l y - l a d e n

e x p e r i e n c e s u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h a r e r e a l enough to be p s y c h o -

l o g i c a l l y m e a n i n g f u l , y e t a r t i f i c i a l enough t o a l l o w t h e e x p l o r a -

t i o n o f p r o s c r i b e d s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l a r e a s .

In a c o r r e c t i o n a l s e t t i n g i n v o l v i n g a d j u d i c a t e d f e l o n s , t h e

u l t i m a t e g o a l o f p s y c h o d r a m a would be t h e r e d u c t i o n i f n o t e l i m i -

n a t i o n o f f u t u r e c r i m i n a l b e h a v i o r . The a s s u m p t i o n s u n d e r l y i n g

i t s use a r e t h a t t h e o f f e n d e r u n l e a r n s c r i m i n a l b e h a v i o r and

l e a r n s n o n - c r i m i n a l b e h a v i o r , and t h a t c h a n g e s i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s

s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l a d a p t a b i l i t y remove t h e r e a s o n s f o r

c o m m i t t i n g c r i m e . These a s s u m p t i o n s , as i s t h e c a s e w i t h many

t h e r a p e u t i c t e c h n i q u e s , have n o t been a d e q u a t e l y a s s e s s e d .

RELEVANT RtiSEARCH

i t has o n l y been i n v e r y r e c e n t y e a r s t h a t a d e q u a t e r e s e a r c h

e f f o r t s have been d i r e c t e d t o w a r d ou tcome s t u d i e s o f v a r i o u s t y p e s

14

of psychotherapy. While Meltzoff and Kornreich (1970) have

compiled evidence from empirical studies concerning the relative

effectiveness of many other types of psychotherapy, they and

others (Akman, et. al., 1968; Bailey, 1966; Logan, 1972; Mann,

1966; and Martinson, 1974) have found only a few empirical assess-

ments of psychodrama.

Psychodrama studies dealing with offenders have been

fraught with such methodological and conceptual difficulties as

lack of a control group, comparison of the control group with

only a part of the experimental group, use of only mentalistic

measures to indicate change, and lack of control over confound-

ing effects, such as the Hawthorne effect, contemporaneous

effects, and maturation (Campbell and Stanley, 1963). These

studies should be interpreted as suggestive, rather than defini-

tive. It appears that even after half a centure of use, correc-

tional psychodrama remains a treatment technique that is as yet

unsupported by reliable and valid empirical data.

STUD~

This paper reports an empirical assessment of psychodrama

with Federal parole and probation cases at the U.S. District

Court for the District of Columbia, executed under the clinical

supervision of Herbert Vogt, Fred Petersen and James Enneis,

whose efforts introduced psychodrama into the Federal Probation

system. For purposes of this study, it was assumed that increased

adaptation to the social environment varies directly with the

frequency and intensity of the exploration and testing of new

ways of handling maladaptive social situations and behaviors.

15

From this assumption, the following null and alternate hypo-

thesis were derived.

H o There will be no difference in arrest rate between groups receiving psychodrar;la and conventional super- vision in the period follo~:ing termination of treatment.

H 1 Psychodrama will reduce recidivism with adjudicated felons more than will conventional supervision in the period following termination of treatment.

SUBJECTS

Subjects in this study were selected from the caseload of

one United States Probation Officer (one of the researchers) and

included adult male offenders, 18 years of age and over, with

probation and parole terms of no less than one year. Subjects

did not differ significantly from the estimated Federal court

population2 on supervision status, but were significantly younger

than the Federal court population (Table i).

CHARACTERISTICS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS AHD G~ERAL

COURT POPULATION

Character ist ic Group N

Research Population

Supervlsion Status Probation 71~ s &l~ Parole 29 39 39

Total I00~ I00~ 100~ N- (31) (liZ3) (1154)

Age Less than 25 61~ 27~ 28~ 25 years or more 39 7~ 72

Total IOO~ IOO~ '100~ .= (31) (lWZ3) (!154)

Chi-square ' P Is <

1.351 .30

17.280 .001

16

S u b j e c t s d id not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the e s t i m a t e d

Federal court population (Marx, et. al., 1969) on the dimension

of race (Table 2). The subjects in the experiment were randomly

divided into experimental and control groups; there were no

significant differences on race, age, or supervision status

differentiating subjects in those groups (Table 3).

TABLE 2

RACE OF SUBJECTS AND ESTIHATE OF

POPULAT I ON

. . . . Di f ference of Race .... Group .. N proporrl,ons (z) P Is <

Subjects Es t i r~ te

White I0~ 16t 15~ Black ~ 84 85

Total ~ ~ iOO~ . - (31) (172) (203)

.857 .19

TABLE 3

CHARACTERISTICS OF EXPERIMENTAL AND C~TROL SUBJECTS

Charac te r i s t i c Group

Experimental

Age less than 25 25 years or more

Total N-

6715

I00~ (15)

Supervision Status Probation Parole

Total N-

80Z 20

Os)

Race White Black

Total N-

57 lO0~l (15)

�9 , p ' *

Control

56t 44

(1~)

61~

(31)

.41

63~

06)

71~ 29

iOo~ (31)

.25

6~ i0~ 90

lOO5 (31)

.48

*F isher ' s Exact tes t .

17

METHODS

In the experimental group, psychodrama was conducted for

eleven months (October, 1966 to August, 1967). Participation

was one condition of satisfactory parole or probation super-

vision. The subjects met once a week for approximately one and

a half hour sessions, typically involving 8 to 15 active parti-

cipants and concerned with such topics as interpersonal problems,

sexual matters, and long-range goals. The particular therapeutic

experience3 reported in this study has been described from a

clinical perspective in Franck (1967). Clinical skills appeared

to be constant across treatment groups, as both psychodrama and

conventional aftercare treatments were administered by the same

United States Probation Officer. The attendance records for

the subjects averaged 16.9 sessions (n=iS; o~12.$4). The con-

trol group (n=16) received conventional supervision. At the

conclusion of psychodrama, experimental subjects were returned

to conventional supervision for the duration of their period of

probation or parole. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality In-

ventor)" was administered to the subjects at the beginning and

the end of the psychodrama. Two years and again at seven years

after termination of psychodrama arrest data were gathered on

these experimental and control cases; subjects did not know they

were involved in a longitudinal study.

Among the possible indicators of recidivism, basically

meaning the colamission of another crime, are self-reporting by

the subject as to his actual behavior, arrest by law-enforcement

agents, adjudication by the courts, or reinstitutionalization of

18

the offender. Each indicator has its unique advantages and dis-

advantages (Wilkins, 1969, and Seiter, 1975). Acknowledging

t h e i n h e r e n t l i m i t a t i o n s and d i s a d v a n t a g e s o f any i n d i c a t o r , r e -

c i d i v i s m was o p e r a t i o n a l l y d e f i n e d i n t h i s s t u d y as t h e a r r e s t

o f t h e s u b j e c t s .

T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t a r r e s t h i s t o r y d i f f e r e n c e s be -

tween t h e two g r o u p s p r i o r t o t h e r e s e a r c h p e r i o d . S u b j e c t s

w e r e c a t e g o r i z e d as a b o v e o r b e l o w t h e mean number o f p r i o r

f e l o n y and m i s d e m e a n o r a r r e s t f o r t h e t o t a l s a m p l e . The g r o u p s

w e r e c o m p a r e d on t h e mean number o f f e l o n y , and on f e l o n y p l u s

m i s d e m e a n o r a r r e s t s f o r t h e p e r i o d p r i o r t o t h e r e s e a r c h . The

g r o u p s d i d n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e number o f s u b j e c t s

a b o v e and b e l o w t h e mean o f p r i o r a r r e s t s , i n t h e mean number

o f f e l o n y a r r e s t s o r t o t a l a r r e s t s Csee T a b l e 4 ) .

TABLE 4

ARREST RECORDS OF SUBJECTS PRIOR TO

RESEARCH PERIOD

. . . . . . , . , ,, i

N x" o df t

Felony Arrest

Experimental group

Contro! group

Felony and Misdemeanor Arrest

Experlmental group

Control group

15 2.~0 2.13

15 2.27 1.49

15 3.67 3.04

28 0.20*

28 0.55*

* not signif icant

19

RESULTS

The experimental group had significantly fe~'er felon)"

arrest t~o y ears after treatment ended. There ~'as no statis-

tically significant difference between the felon>" arrests o~

the groups a t the end of the t o t a l 82 month pe r iod (see Table 5).

Ho~'ever, when prior record was controlled there were significant-

l y fewer e x p e r i m e n t a l s u b j e c t s escaping a r r e s t f o r the 82 month

p e r i o d ( see Table 6) . TABLE S

FELOtYARREST RECORIHOF SUBJECTS FOLLOWING TREATHEIlT

Group 2 Year Period Following Treatmmt

N ~ o de t

Experln~ntal 15 0.07 .2G

Control IG 0.63 1.20 28 I . B l l *

* . . n ~ ( S l m i l : m r r a r ~ . a - . . . k ~ . l . . . I . . . I - - -

Total 82 month period following

treatment

N ~ o df t

IS O.&7 !.11 28 1 .02"**

15"* I.O7 1.03

p< .05 (Similar results v~reobtained usingmn analysis of covarlance and control l ing for pr|or records.)

** one subject died during the research period.

*** not s ign i f icant (similar results were obtained using an analysis o f coverlancalmd cont ro l l lng for n r l~ ' r~ .n rdq . I

TABLE 6

FREQUENCY OF FELONY ARREST FOLLOWING TREATNENT (82 MOtTH PERIOD) COtTROLLING FOR PRIOR RECORD.

Experimental Group

Control Group

Abow x ' o f 4 mfklow ~ o f 4 pr, lor arreStno t - I i pr ior arrest _

t not

mrrested arrested to al !rrested arrested , t o ta l

I 4 S $ 5 10

7 1 8 2 5 7

P " .032 (Fisher's Exact tesl P " -354 (Fisher's Exact text)

20

A greater impact of the psychodrama on that segment of

the experimental group ~r the greater prior record is suggest-

ed by the strong and statistically significant negative corre-

lation between number of psychodrama sessio~is attended and felon/

plus mis4emeanor arrests during the 82 month follow-up period

(see Table 7). With those offenders who have more extensive

previous arrest histories and who attended/participated most

frequently in the psychodrama sessions, significant differences

in outcomes emerged. This suggests that the application of

psychodrama might be more appropriately applied to subjects with

these characteristics. The National Advisory Commission on

Criminal Justice Standards and Goals (1973: 528) recommended

that:

-Each correctional agency immediately should begin to make performance measurements on two evaluative levels--overall performance or systems reviews as measured by recidivism, and program reviews that emphasize measurement of more immediate goal achievement. Agencies allocating funds for correctional programs should require such measurements.

TABLE 7

CORRELATION BETWEEN NUHBEROF PSYCHODRAHA SESSICNS ATTENDED AND HUHBER OF ARREST IN 82 HONTH FOLLOW-UP PERIOD.

Correlation Coefficients

Subjects N Felony Arrest . . . . . Felony § HTsdemeanor Arrest

Above ~ of 4 prior arrests 5 -O.50 -0.90*

Be low~of 4 prior arrests 10 - .12 -O.18"

Combined Sample 15 -O.26 -0.34

*p �9 .05.

21

On the basis of this data, the null hypothesis was rejected;

at two years after treatment ended, and at (for high prior arrest

subjects) 82 months after, members of the experimental (psycho-

drama) group were arrested significantly fewer times than those

in the control group.

The groups were compared on pre-test to post-test changes

in 13 Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory sub-scales

designed to measure aspects of criminality. There was no evi-

dence of a positive treatment effect.

T-tests, comparing post-test scores, showed the experiment-

al group to be significantly lower on the Pd4B, Mal, and L & 0

scales 4. In none of those cases were the groups significantly

different on the pre-test scores. In one case, the Ma scale 5,

the experimental group was significantly higher at pre-test, but

the relationship had reversed (control became higher) and was

no longer statistically significant at post-test.

Analysis of covariance was used to compare the post-test

scale scores controlling for the pre-test score. Only the Pdl

and F scales significantly differentiated the two groups, but

the scores were opposite from the predicted direction (the

control group scores were higher) 6.

CONCLUSIONS

This study lends limited support for the potential utility

of psychodrama as a technique of therapeutic intervention. This

conclusion is profferred diffidently, as a consequence of the

various threats to the validity of this study. In the inter-

pretation of the results, the reader should keep in mind the

22

small N of the study and the possibility that assumptions under-

lying some statistical tests were violated. Particular care

should be taken in the interpretation of the t-tests and the

analysis of variance used to test for the statistical signifi-

cance of the correlation.

One effect difficult to ascertain systematically, but

possibly functioning to bring about the results reported here,

may be the correctional setting in which psychodrama was con-

ducted. The optimal availability of professional resources and

clinical supervision (the psychodramatist was operating under

the close supervision of experts), the involvement of subjects---

in life experiences with generality greater than those found in

more restrictive correctional settings, the inclusion of signi-

ficant others (such as wives) as participating members Jn the

sessions--all may have contributed to the lower rates of reci-

divism in the psychodrama group. The introduction and control

of such environmental factors may not be present in other correc-

tional settings (such as institutions) or with other populations

(such as juveniles); the relative effectiveness of psychodrama

may accordingly be diminished by the abscence of these structural

advantages. Empirical research should be directed toward systema

tic exploration and evaluation of interventional consequences

that appear to be functionally related to these factors. Atten-

tion should also be directed toward psychological qualities of

counselors and clients, such as initial motivation and stated

treatment goals (Fisk, et. al., 1970) and therapist-offender

typologies (California Department o 4 the Youth Authority, 1969).

In this manner, the practical potential psychodrama presents as

23

a correctional intervention technique can be more adequately

assessed.

FOOTNO']'I!S

.

.

.

.

.

.

An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Association of Criminal Justice Educators in Columbia, South Carolina, ,October, 1975. This paper was supported in part by a National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Grant #N 1-70-030-G48 and the National Science Foundation Grant #GJ 367. Such support does not necessarily indicate the concurrence of these agencies with the statements contained herein. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of John Bindl, Jack Bowman, William Hemple, George Howard, James Pace, James H. Panton, Fred Petersen, Herbert Vogt, and William Webb.

These f i g u r e s have been c r u d e l y e s t i m a t e d from F r i e s e n (1969) . F i g u r e P (page 68) g i v e s 30.9% of the p r o b a t i o n e r s r e c e i v e d f o r s u p e r v i s i o n d u r i n g 1967 by the U.S. D i s t r i c t Court f o r the D i s t r i c t of Columbia as b e i n g equa l to or l e s s than 24 y e a r s of age . The mean p e r c e n t a g e of the f i r s t p a r o l e e s ( F i g u r e C, page 105) and the f i r s t manda to ry r e l e a s e s ( F i g u r e D16, page 125) who a re no more than 24 y e a r s of age i s 21.6%. Appendix Tab le E2 (page 1 5 0 ) l i s t s 681 p r o b a t i o n e r s and 442 p a r o l e e s unde r s u p e r v i s i o n as of June , 1967. The e s t i m a t e i n t h i s p a p e r i s made by t a k i n g 30 .9%,of p r o b a t i o n e r s and 21.6% of p a r o l e e s under s u p e r v i s i o n as of J u n e , 1967, as c o n s t i t u t i n g the number o f s u b j e c t s in the p o p u l a t i o n l e s s t han 25 y e a r s of age .

At the time of this research, the Psychodramatist (Adams) held an M.A. degree in Sociology/Criminology, a Certificate in Psychodrama from St. Elizabeth's Hospital's internship program in Group Therapy and Psychodrama, and had six years of psychia trically supervised experience in individual and group treat- ment of offenders. Neither the therapist nor his supervisors felt his clinical skills were biased towards one form of treatment.

The Pd4B scale iz designed to measure "social alienation" The Mal scale is designed to measure "amorality". The L ~ O scale is designed to measure "attitude toward law and order".

The Ma scale is designed to measure "expansiveness, egotism and irritability".

The subject who died is included in the analysis of theMMPl scales, and several subjects who missed the post testing are excluded.

24