This article was downloaded by: [University of Bristol]On: 06 November 2014, At: 04:07Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Residential Treatment for Children & YouthPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wrtc20

Social Competence Among Adolescentsin Residential Settings: Validation of anEmpirically-Based InventoryD. Patrick Zimmerman PsyD a b c d & Gordon MacNeil PhD ea Sonia Shunkman Orthogenic Schoolb Department of Psychiatry , University of Chicagoc Illinois School for Professional Psychologyd Chicago Center for Psychoanalysise School of Social Work, The University of Alabama , Box 870314, Tuscaloosa,AL, 35487-0314Published online: 17 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: D. Patrick Zimmerman PsyD & Gordon MacNeil PhD (1998) Social Competence AmongAdolescents in Residential Settings: Validation of an Empirically-Based Inventory, Residential Treatment forChildren & Youth, 16:1, 79-90, DOI: 10.1300/J007v16n01_07

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J007v16n01_07

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publicationare the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or

distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and usecan be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT D. Patrick Zimmerman, PsyD, Department Editor

Social Competence Among Adolescents in Residential Settings:

Validation of an Empirically-Based Inventory

Gordon MacNeil, PhD

ABSTRACT. The Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Adolescent So- cial Competence Inventory (SEDASCI) was developed to assess so- cial competence in emotionally disturbed adolescents. This paper re- ports the findings of a study attempting to detennine if this instrument is also useful for assessing the competence of delinquent adolescents in residential settings. The SEDASCI was administered to three crite- rion groups of adolescents: SED youth, criminally delinquent youth,

D. Patrick Zimmerman, Editor of this Department, is Coordinator of Research at the Sonia Shankrnan Orthogenic School, and Lecturer in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Chicago. Hc is also a tneniber of the Senior Associatc Faculty at the Illinois School for Professional Psychology and a Candi- date at the Chicago Center for Psychoanalysis.

Financial support for this study was provided by The University of Alabama I<cscarch Grants Committee.

The author may bc written at thc School of Social Work, The University of Alabama, Box 8703 14, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-03 14.

Rcsidential Treatment for Children & Youth, Vol. 16(l) 1998 O 1998 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights rcserved. 79

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

80 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR CH1I.DREN & YOUTH

and a comparison group of youth with no identified social problems. Competence levels of the SED youth and the criminally delinquent youth did not differ, but both were significantly lower than the com- parison group. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed. [Article copies available for a Jeejiwtn The Hawov~h Document Delivety Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: ge~itlfo@haworl/t.cotn]

Social work practitioners arc placing increased emphasis on a social competence model for undcrstanding, preventing, and remediating the problems cxperienccd by children and adolescents (Kennedy, 1988; LeCroy, 1983). This conceptualization asserts that problem behavior in children and adolescents can be undcrstood in terms of their not having acquired skills appropriate to situational demands (Bloom, 1990; LeCroy, 1986). Adolcscents lacking social skills frequently encounter problcms maintaining friendships, rcsisting peer pressure and interacting appropri- ately with authority figures. These problems may be a gateway to pregnan- cy, delinquency, substance abuse, and social isolation (LeCroy, 1986). Examples of social skills are: an ability to criticize in a constructive man- ner, responding to criticism, expressing emotions (such as anger or frustra- tion) in appropriate ways, or asking for help. Social competence is viewed as a set of skills and abilities that hclp an individual meet distinctivc environmental demands (Curran, 1985). Thus, we would have to know something about thc specific environmental demands and what skills might be effective in addressing those demands in order to help children and adolescents enhance their social competence (Coie, 1985; Kazdin, 1977). Although social skills training programs are now common, few programs have empirically identified what skills are needed by the targct population being taught the skills (Conger & Conger, 1986).

Developmcnt of effective social skill training programs requires compe- tence inventories that assess the skills and abilities nccded for particular situational tasks that are relevant and critical in thc lives of particular indi- viduals or populations (McFall, 1982). The Seriously Emotionally Dis- turbed Adolescent Social Competence Inventory (SEDASCI) was recently devcloped to identify problematic social situations and competent responses to those situations for adolescents in residential treatment facilities (Mac- Neil & LeCroy, 1997). Despite efforts during the development of the inven- tory to sample emotionally disturbed youth who did not have sccondary diagnoses of Conduct Disorder or hislories of delinquency, it seemed that many of the youth also had problems in this area. The connection between emotional disturbance and delinquency is well-documented in the literature on adolescent psychopathology (Alessi & Magen, 1988; Kashani, Carlson, Bcck, Hoeper, Corcoran, McAllister, Fallahi, Rosenbcrg, & Reid, 1987;

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Robbins & Price, 1991; Rohde, Lewinsohn, & Seeley, 1991). Tllis connec- tion prompted the question of the SEDASCI's usefdness as an instrument to assess the social competence of delinquent youth in residential settings.

In addition to thc issue of comorbidity between youth with emotional disturbances and those who are identified as having conduct disorders, there appcar to be similarities between the rcsidential ccnters serving these populations. For instance, both are closed (sometimes locked) facilitics, both are administered by paid adult staff under the auspices of agencies charged with treating (or remediating) the youth. Both generally rely on thcrapeutic com~nunity models incorporating behavior nlodification pro- grams. Although social skill dcvelopment programs have been developed for delinquent youth (Goldstein & Glick, 1993; Goldstein, Glick, Carthan, & Blanccro, 1994; Nousiainen, Frame & Forehand, 1992; Rosenthal, 1978), no inventories have bcen developed specifically to be used with delin- qucnt youth in rcsidcntial settings. For instance, Goldstein's Anger Re- placement Training program has bcen used extensively in institutional settings, but was not developed specifically for this environment.

It is critically important that social workers working wit11 either popula- tion havc an empirically-based assessment instrument which can bc used to identify compctent responses to problematic situations encountered by these youth. If we are to make meaningful inroads toward improving thc ability of youth placed in residcntial settings due to serious problems in thcir bchav~or or inability to interact with others, wc must use instruments that validly reflect thc situations of concern to these youth.

Similarities bctween SED adolcsccnts and those demonstrating delin- quent behaviors, and the residcntial scttings employed to treat them, sug- gest that the SEDASCI may be uscfi~l as an instru~nent to asscss thc social cornpetencics of adolescents in either type of rcsidential setting. Since the SEDASCI has already been shown to bc useful for usc with adolescents with identified serious emotional disorders, the study reported below was undcrtakcn to determine the validity of the SEDASCl as a tool for asses- sing the social cornpctcnce of delinquent youth in residential settings. If the instrulncnt is a valid measure of the level of social competency of delinquent youth in residential scttings, scores of subjects in this popula- tion should not differ significantly from adolcsccnts with serious emotion- al disordcrs in similar settings. A third group, serving as a comparison group, with no known social problems would bc cxpectcd to demonstrate a higher levcl of social compctcnce, as dc~nonstratcd by highcr seorcs on the SEDASCI.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

82 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH

METHODS

Measure

The Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Adolescent Social Competcncy lnventory(SEDASC1) is an empirically-based 34 item inventory that was developed specifically to assess the social competence of adolescents in residential settings (MacNeil & LeCroy, 1997). The SEDASCI was devel- oped using a Behavior-Analytic Modcl (see Goldfried & D'Zurilla, 1969). The first step involved conducting focus groups with adolescents identi- fied as having serious emotional disturbances, their parents and siblings, and the staff where these adolcscents were receiving residential treatment. The goal of these focus group sessions was to identify social situations that were viewed as problematic for these adolescents. Once these problematic situations were identified, a second group of youth with serious emotional disturbances was asked to evaluate their frequency, difficulty, and impor- tance. A rangc of responses to these problem situations was then obtained from a third group of seriously emotionally disturbed adolcscents, and those responses were then evaluated by adults who assess social compe- tence in the natural environment of these youth (primarily staff mernbcrs). The items comprising the SEDASCI were developed from the problem situations and responses that emerged from this process. For a more de- tailed discussion of the devclopment of the SEDASCI, see MacNeil and LcCroy (1997).

Each item in the inventory describes a problem situation, provides examples of possible responscs to that situation which range from compe- tent to incompetent, and lists the criteria that judges can usc to evaluate subject responses to the problem situations. Figurc 1 provides an example of the items found in the inventory. Each itcm is scored on a five point Likcrt scalc (5 = "most competent," 1 = "least cotnpctent"). A mean score for all completed items is then calculated, with higher mean scores indicating a higher level of social competencc.

Fifteen of the items of the inventory deal with problem situations re- lated to peer interaction. A second subscale of thc inventory contains 17 items dealing with problematic situations rclatcd to interaction with treat- ment staff. Tests of the reliability of these two subscales using Chron- bach's alpha produced scores of 30 and .77 respectively, indicating a fairly high degree of reliability for both. Two additional items target prob- lems involving parents who arc visiting the trcatrnent setting.

Thc SEDASCI was originally dcveloped in order to usc the identified problem situations as topics for discussion and education in treatment groups. In this fonn, it contains 42 items. Sincc thc purpose of this study

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Gordon MacNeil 83

FIGURE 1

You find out that a secret you told only to your roommate is now common knowledge on the unit.

Com~etent Responses: Talk to my roommate about it. (4.4)*

Tell my roommate that she has broken my trust, and that she has to earn it back. I'd also say that what she did really hurt me. (4.0) Wouldn't tell him any more secrets. (3.6)

Mediocre Responses: Tell staff that I want to change roommates. (2.2) Use sarcasm and try to make her feel guilty about it. (2.1) Make her admit she did it. (2.0)

Incompetent Res~onses:

Tell others she can't be trusted. (1.9) Just freeze him out for a while. I won't talk to him at all. (1.8)

Spread a rumor about her. (1.6)

Judaes' Criteria:

Competent responses are those that involve direct communication with the roommate, including some disclosure of feelings resulting from the roommate's actions. Mediocre responses are those that tend to close communication lines rather than open them. Incompetent responses are those that include confrontation, aggression or vengeance, or evading the issue.

'Numbers in parentheses identify the mean score of judges evaluating responses on a five point scale (I = very incompetent, 5 = very competent)

was to assess the competence o f individuals' responses, thc original inven- tory was modified by rcmoving eight items which do not target specific social interactions. The Chronbach's alpha for the 34 item form o f the inventory is .89.

Subjects

A total samplc o f 74 adolescents representing three distinct groups was rccruitcd for this study. Thcsc wcrc convcnience samplcs (thc youth al- ready being assigncd to their settings). Because the lcgal custodians o f

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

84 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT F O R CHILDREN & YOUTH

those subjects who were in the residential treatment settings were reluctant to release certain identifying information about thcm, it was agreed that only age, sex, and primary diagnosis (or delinquent act that lead to incar- ceration) would bc obtained. (Table 1 presents the ages and sex of the subjects by group.)

Group 1 was comprised of adolescents in residential treatment settings who were identified as having serious cmotional disturbances. These faci- lities included two group homes, and two state supported psychiatric faci- lities. The mcan age of these subjccts was 15. Their DSM-IV diagnoses included major depression (41%), schizophrenia (18%), and various anxi- ety disorders (41%). Although none of them had primary diagnoses of conduct disorder or oppositional defiant disorder, approximately 25% of them wcre thought (by those providing treatment) to meet critcria for thcse diagnoses.

Group 2 was comprised of criminally delinquent adolescents who were placed in one of three rcsidential group homes. Although a number of subjects in this sample had previously been incarcerated in lockcd facili- ties, none were in this type of facility at the time of this study. The mean age for the subjccts in this group was also 15. The typcs of criminal activities engaged in by subjects in this group that lead to their incarcera- tion included petty theft (7%), grand larceny (IS%), grand theft auto (23%), assault (38%), attemptcd murder (12%), prostitution (15%), run- ning away (3%), and illicit drug trafficking (23%). (Some of the subjects reported more than one criminal activity, so the percentages here total more than loo%.) Although some of these youth acknowledged that they were substance abusers, none was incarcerated specifically bccause of this behavior.

Group 3 was intended to serve as a comparison group. Subjects from

TABLE 1. Demographic Characteristics of Subjects

SED Group Delinquent School & Church Group Group

Mean Age 15.2 15.1 13.4' Age Range 13-1 7 13-1 7 12-16

Male n = 13 (59%) n = 18 (69%) n = 11 (42%)'* Female n = 9 (41 %) n = 8 (31%) n = 15 (58%)

' F = 18.39, p. c ,001 " not significant

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

this group werc recruited frotn niiddle schools and churches, and while thcy were not in residential facilities, they all had previous experiences i n sununer church camps and other sultuner residential programs. The mean age for this group was 13.

As the subjects in this study included youth in residential (non-volun- tary) settings, voluntary conscnt to participate was needed from both the parents or legal custodians as well as the treatment staff and the adoles- cents. For each of the three groups, appropriate institutions were identified and permission to conduct the research was obtained frotn administrative offices. Parent addresses of children meeting criteria for inclusion (age between 12 and 18; SED youth to have a primary DSM diagnosis of emotional or mental disturbance with no active or debilitating psychosis and no diagnosed oppositional defiant or conduct disorder; delinquent youth to be residing in Department of Youth Services group home; school or church-based youth to have attended a residential sununer camp or program) werc provided by institution administrators, and letters were sent to the parents or legal custodians of those children explaining the naturc of the inventory and requesting permission to interview their children and informing them of their human subject rights. Children of parents or custodians who consented were asked to participate. Thcsc adolescents were fully informed about the project, advised of their rights as human subjects, and asked if thcy would like to participate. Those that chose to take part signed assent forms.

The inventory was administered verbally to the subjects in each of the three groups so that differences in literacy between the subjects would not be an issue. The inventoty was administered individually so that partici- pants would not be biased by an audience of peers or staff members. Responses were audiotaped for later transcription. Two doctoral students, trained to score the inventory, rated the audiotaped responses. Eight ran- dom items were chosen to assure that inter-rater reliability was acceptable. The raters demonstrated 90% agrccmcnt.

RESULTS

The only demographic characteristic that was statistically different be- tween the sarnplc groups was age (F = 18.39, p. < ,001). Despite the fact that the school and church based group was younger than the other two groups, this group scored higher on the inventory than the other respon- dents, indicating a higher lcvel of social competence.

The mean inventory score for the seriously emotionally disturbed sam- ple was 3.16. The mean inventory score for the delinquent sample was

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

86 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENTFOR CHILDREN & YOUTH

2.93. The m a n inventory score for thc school and church samplc was 3.44. As presented in Table 2, an ANOVA indicated that the differences of these mean scores are statistically significant (F = 9.37, p. < ,001). A Scheffe post-hoc test idcntified thc significant difference as bcing between the school group and thc other two groups (mean diffcrence = ,4887, significant at ,001). Thereforc, therc was no difference in overall social competence between the two groups in residential settings.

There were also differcnces between groups on the Peer subscale, as indicated by an ANOVA (F = 7.0, p. < ,002). A Scheffe post-hoc test identified the only significant difference being between the school group and the other two groups (mean difference = ,5416, significant at .002). Again, the school group demonstrated greater levels of social competence than thc other groups and there was no significant difference between the emotionally disturbed group and the delinquent group. Similar differences were found on the Staff subscale. The ANOVA indicated that there were significant differences between the groups (F = 7.61, p. < .001), and a Scheffe post-hoc test revealed that the only significant differcnce was between the school group and the other two groups (mean diffcrence = ,4658, significant at .001).

DISCUSSION

In this study the Seriously Emotionally Disturbcd Adolcscent Social Competcnce Invcntory was administered to threc groups of adolescents: one idcntified as having serious emotional disturbances, onc identified as exhibiting delinquent behaviors, and a comparison group. The emotionally disturbed youth and the delinquent youth were in residential treatment scttings, subjects in the comparison group had expericnces in rcsidcntial

TABLE 2. Inventory Scores by Group

I SED DEL SCHOOL F P 1 Inventory mean 3.16 2.93 3.44 9.37 < ,001 score

I Peer subscale 3.18 2.90 3.44 7.0 < ,002 , mean score

Staff subscale 3.15 2.94 3.41 7.61 c ,001 mean score

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

sununer camps. Social competence scorcs of adolescents in the compari- son group were significantly higher than thosc of the adolescents in resi- dential trcatlncnt settings. Since the adolescents from the school and church group werc not assumed to have the same degrcc of interpersonal problems as were the subjects from the two residcntial sctting groups, this finding providcs evidence of the divergent validity of the Seriously Emo- tionally Disturbed Adolescent Social Competcncc Inventory. This finding supports the use of the SEDASCI as a tool to assess the social competence of adolcsccnts in residential treatment facilities, regardless of whether their problems are related to serious emotional problems or conduct disor- ders.

Although they werc younger, the school and church-based group scored significantly higher than the other two groups with regard to their ability to compctcntly respond to problem situations, indicating a higher level of social compctcncc. Therc were no significant diffcrences between the scores of adolesccnts with serious emotional disturbances and delinquent adolescents with regard to their abilities to respond to thcsc problem situations; both groups had mcan scorcs reflecting moderately poor social compctcncc. It should be noted, howcvcr, that clinical cutoff scores have not bcen established for this instrument. Further research, with larger samplc sizes and objcctive critcria for this purpose, will be necessary to determine spccific scores indicating acccptablc lcvels of competence for thcse groups.

Initially it was thought that there might be differences bctwccn thc SED group and the delinquent group with rcgard to the persons with whom they have interpersonal difficulties: pcers or staff. However, no differences between the groups.were found. Both groups demonstrated moderately low levels of competence when dealing with situations with others, re- gardless of the othcr person's status. This suggests that thcse youth do not act differently in problematic situations whcn thcy are aware of the roles of othcrs with whom they are interacting. This may be an area where increased sensitivity and skill building would serve them wcll.

Thc major limitations of this study are the small sample sizes and the possibility that the two "rcsidential" samples are not hctcrogencous. Efforts were made to insurc that the SED group wcre not delinquent, and that the delinquent group did not have diagnoses of SED, but thcrc appcars to be some comorbidity in each samplc. While problematic for this study, this comorbidity is representative of these populations. An additional concern is that the school and church group in thc comparison group were not actually in residential settings, and thereforc may not havc bccn able to hlly under- stand the problematic situations depicted in the instrument. Attcrnpts were

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

88 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH

made to sample children who had spent at least two weeks at summer church camps or other recreational camps. While problematic interpersonal situations emerge in such settings, the types of problematic interpersonal situations experienced by these adolescents and those experienced by ado- lescents in residential treatment settings may not be comparable.

Generalization of these findings to populations beyond institutions simi- lar to those used in this study is another limitation of this study. Also, parcnts, legal custodians and individual youth who refused to participate may have differed in some way from those who did participate. Further studies need to be conducted, with larger samples, in order to establish the limits of external validity for this instrument. It would also be important to know what factors other than those examined in this study may influence the level of social competence of adolescents in residential settings. For example, hture researchers might examine such variables as length-of-stay, style of administration (how authoritarian the setting is), previous gang involvement, and degree of involvement on the part of family members.

The findings of this study suggest that the shortened version of the SEDASCI is useful for measuring the social compctenee of adolescents in residential settings, regardless of whether they have serious emotional disturbances or are incarcerated for delinquent behaviors. The invcntory's items provide a wide range of valid problematic social situations confront- ing these youth. Their responses to these itcms accurately reflect youth's ability to compctently respond to problems they cncounter in their envi- ronment. Clinicians can use this inventory to identify youth with low social competence (perhaps upon arrival at a facility) in order to hasten their placement in programs to address these deficiencies. Idcntifying the social skills that individuals possess will allow social workers to use a strengths pcrspective and help transfer those skills to situations with which the youth has difficulty. Because this 34 item version of the inventory provides situations relevant to youth with either scrious emotional distur- bances or criminally delinqucnt behaviors, it has been named the Adolcs- cent Residential Social Cornpetencc Inventory (ARSCI).

REFERENCES

Alessi, N.E., & Magen, J. (1988). Comorbidity of other psychiatric disturbances in depressed psychiatrically hospitalized children. A~rtericuri Jour7ial of Psy- chiatry, 145, 1582-1 584.

Bloom, M. (1990). The psychosocial constructs of social compctency. In T.P. Gullotta, G.R. Adarns, & R. Montemayor (Eds.) llevelopit~g social coniperew cy it1 n~lolesce~~ce. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Coie, J.D. (1985). Fitting social skills inte~cntion to the target group. In B.H. Schneider, K.H. Rubin, & J.E. Ledinghain (Eds.), CltiIl,.enipee~'relalio~ts: Issure iri cis~essr~~mt/ nrtd irtte~~e~diott (pp. 14 1 - 156). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Conger, J.C., & Congcr, A.J. (1986). Components of heterosocial competence. In J.P. Curran, & P. Monti (Eds.), Social skills tt~ubiing: A praclical kattdbook for assess~r~ett~ attd~wrrtment. New York: New York University Press.

Curran, J.P. (1985). Social compctency training. In H.A. Marlowe, Jr., & R.B. Wcinbcrg (Eds.) Cotnpe/etice developtrretr/: Tlleo~y 011d pt,cicrice it1 special poprrlatiot~s. Springfield, IL : Charlcs Thomas.

Goldfried, M.R., & D'Zurilla, T.J. (1 969). A behavioral-analytic model for asses- sing cornpetcnce. In C.D. Spiclberger (Ed.), Currett1 lol~ics in c l i ~ ~ i c a l artd conttt~io~ily psychology (Vol 1). New York: Academic Press.

Goldstein, A,, & Glick, B. (1993). The Gang l~~~e tve t~ t io r t Handbook. Chapman, IL : Rcsearch Prcss.

Goldstein, A., Glick, B., Carthan, W., & Blancero, D. (1994). The Prosocial Gartg: It i~plemet~ti~rg Aggt~essioti Replace~nettt Pairtbrg. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, lnc.

Kashaiii, H.A., Carlson, G.A., Bech, N.C. Hocper, E.W., Corcoran, C.M., McAI- listcr, J.A., Fallahi, C., Rosenberg, T.K., & Reid, J.C. (1987). Depression, depressive symptoms, and deprcsscd mood among a community sample of adolescents. Attrerican Joirural of Psj~cI~iutry, 145,93 1-933.

Kazdin, A.E. (1977). Assessing the clinical or applied itnporlancc of behavior changc through social validation. Beltavior MudiJica~iorr, 1,427-452.

Kennedy, J.H. (1988). lssucs in the identification of socially incolnpctent chil- drcn. Scltool Psychology Review, 17 (2), pp. 276-288.

LeCroy, C.W. (1983). Social skills /~,ai t t i t~g for chili/~~eti artd j~oullt. New York: Thc Ilaworth Press, Inc.

LeCroy, C.W. (1986). Social Compclence Training. Adwatrces LI Adolescetrl Men- tal Health, 2, 101-114.

MacNcil, G. & LcCroy, C.W. (1997). Pronloting Social Competence Among Severely Emotionally Disturbed Youth: Devcloptnent of a Social Competence Inventory. Reside~ttial f i ~ a / t ~ ~ e r i / for Clrildrett d Yolrlh 15(1), 63-78.

McFall, R.M. (1982). A rcvicw and rcformulation of the concept of social skills. Behuviot~al Assessnrer~t, 4, 1-33.

Nousiainen, S.D., Frame, C., & Forehand, R. (1 992). Actual and perceived social competence in dcpresscd, conduct problcm, and normal children. C l~ i ld Study ./oro?~ul, 22(1), 103-1 13.

Robins, L.N. & Price, R.K. (1991). Adult disorders predictcd by childhood con- duct disorders: Rcsults from the N lMH Epidcrniologic Catchment Arca proj- ect. Psyc/iia/ty, 54, 1 16- 132.

Rohdc, P., Lewinsohn, P.M., & Seelcy, J.R. (1991). Comorbidity of unipolar deprcssion: II. Comorbidity with othcr mental disorders in adolescents and adults. Jo1r1.1ra1 of A ~ I ~ O I ' I I I U ~ Psj~c/tolog)~, 100, 2 14-222.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14

RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Gordon MacNeil is Assistant Professor at Thc University of Alabama School of Social Work. His MSW is from the University of Iowa, and his doctorate in social work is from Arizona State University. His research intcrests focus on mental health treatment of adolescents, particularly in residential settings.

HAWORTH JOURNALS ARE AVAILABLE ON MICROFORM

All Haworth journals areavalloble In elther mlcroflche or mlcrofllm from The Haworth Press. Inc.

Microfiche and mlcrofllrns are avallable to hardcopy subscriben at the lower "lndlvldual" subscrlptlon rote. Other mlcroform subscribers may purchase mlcroflche or mlcroform at the "llbrary" subscrlptlon rate.

Microfilm speclficatlons: 35rnm; dlozo or silver. Mlcroflche speclficatlons: lO5mrn x 184rnm (4" x 6" ) : reductlon ratlo: 24X;

nonsllver (diazo) posltlve polarlty. Mlcroform ore molled upon completion of each volume.

For further Infarmation, contact Janette Hall. Mlcroform Contact. The Haworth Press. lnc.. 10 Allce Street. Blnghamton. NY 13904-1580: Tel: (800) 342-9678 (ext. 328); Fax: (607) 722-1424: E-Mall: getlnfo@haworth.com

Orders for mlcroform may also be placed with University Mlcrotllms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. MI 48106: Tel: (303) 761-4700.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

rist

ol]

at 0

4:07

06

Nov

embe

r 20

14