In many cases, group psychotherapy in prison evokes very strong resistance to the prisoners. This resistance impedes the procedure of the therapy and likely causes it to fail.

In this study, we first observed the prisoners in the early therapeutic situation and studied the types of resistance in early stage of the therapy. Secondly, we sought to find out factors that cause such resistance in the prisoners. Then, we studied how the process of the therapy is related to this resistance.

Some findings in this study are as follows:

1) The resistance observed in the early therapeutic situation has to do with distrust in the prisoners rooted in their family life and/or caused by being institutionalized. This resistance, therefore, seems to be related to the prisoners’ personality traits and previous life history.

2) The occurrence of the resistance greately depends on the variables in the therapeutic situation. When the institution provides variables appropriate to produce a good therapeutic situation, less resistance occurrs, and group therapy becomes successful. From this, it is apparent that the variables of the therapeutic situation have more to do with the cause of the resistance than the personality traits and life history in psychotherapy in the prison.

3) No covert resistance facilitates the psychotherapy, whereas overt resistance brings about effective therapy.

Although students of crime and delinquency and the practitioners of the correctional education know the importance of victim experiences in the course of the formation of delinquent readiness, there are few studies intended to understand the relationship between victim experiences and later delinquency in criminal sociology, criminal psychology, and victimology. So we attempted to make clear the way how the victim experiences influenced upon the later delinquent behavior, considering the way the fundamental society for juveniles coped with their victim experiences.

Subjects were the inmates who were consigned to Yamaguchi Juvenile Detention and Classification Home during 1974, 1 to 1975, 3. Of the total inmates during the term, 60 male and 2 female juveniles had experienced victim once or more. These 62 inmates were given a fact-finding and ecological questionaire regarding the occurrence situation of the victim. And we took document method through the juvenile records of the Home.

The main results were as follows:

(1) When juveniles had not formed the delinquent readiness before the victim experience, the experience did not directly influence to the formation and fixation of delinquent readiness.

(2) In case juveniles had formed the delinquent readiness before the victim experience, the relation of victim experience to later delinquency was able to divide into two subtypes; the direct relation type and the no relation type. In the former case, the victim experience functioned to reinforce the delinquent readiness, to deepen “Delinquent Depth”, to change the delinquent means, or to correct the delinquent readiness. And there were many cases which victim experiences did not influence the later delinquency.

(3) The function of victim experience in the later delinquent behavior was related with the way of the fundamental society for juveniles coping with their victim experiences.

As a whole, we were obliged to propose only hypothetically the frame work to study the relationship between victim experience and the later delinquency. We will study each type more detail by interviewing the juvenile delinquents intensively.

1. The importance of Differential Treatment for juvenile offenders, based on the idea of individual treatment, has been recognized in Japanese and American juvenile correctional institutions.

It’s essentially important for Differential Treatment to classify juvenile offenders from the viewpoint of diagnostic types to be treated.

In U.S.A., Differential Behavioral Classification of Juvenile offenders, made by H. Quay and L. Parsons in 1971, has been effectively utilized in R. F. Kennedy Youth Center as the foundation of Differential Treatment.

This study is to re-examine their Behavior Problem Checklist (BPCL), which is one of 3 measurements of the Classification, applied to Japanese juvenile offenders, for the 1st step to make a Cross-Cultural Comparative Study between Japan and U.S.A. about the Classification, and build up the Classification, suitable for Japanese juvenile offenders.

2. Ratings were obtained from the trained instructors and psychologists in Kobe Juvenile Detention & Classification Home and Harima Reformatory on a Japanese translation of the Behavior Problem Checklist about the behaviors of 150 institutionalized male delinquents.

The average age of the sample was 17.3 (SD=1.22) and the average I.Q. was 91.4 (SD=13.47).

3. Of the 55 items on the Checklist, 54 were noted as present in at least 10% but more than 90% of the cases.

These 54 items were intercorrelated, factor analyzed using R²as the communality estimate, and rotated to the varimax criterion.

Factor scores for each subject were then computed and these scores related to age and intelligence.

4. Six factors has eigenvalues ≧ 1 and accounted for 52% of the total variance.

Factor I is clearly the counterpart of the CP (Conduct Problem) dimension of the BPCL.

Of the 17 items of the BPCL which are measures of this dimension, 13 appear in this factor.

Factor II is equally representative of the PP (Personality Problem) dimension; of the 14 BPCL items indexing this dimension, 12 appear in Factor II. This factor also encompasses 4 BPCL items which are measures of the II (Immature-Inadequate) dimensions. So the behaviors as the syndrome of Personality Problem may be a little different in Japan from American juveniles.

Factor III contains 5 of the 6 BPCL items measuring the SD dimension in company with one CP and one II item.

Factor IIII contains a mixture of items from the BPCL, CP (5 items) PP (four items) II (one item) scales as well as 3 items which are not scored for any of the 4 dimensions.

While there is somewhat of an II “flavor” to this factor, it is not a clear counterpart of the II dimension so frequently identified in studies of American samples.

The dimension meant by this factor may be rater immatured, ege-weakened, “hysteroid” personality of delinquents.

Factor V loads only three items (drowsiness, sluggishness and truancy from school) all of which also load elsewhere.

Factor VI loads only two items (repetitive speech and incoherent speech) which are referred to in the BPCL Manual as items related to psychoticism.

......Download PDF to see more.