Over 500 men, half of whom had been randomly assigned to a treatment program that lasted approximately 5 years, were traced 30 years after termination of the project. Although subjective evaluations of the program by those -who received its benefits would suggest that the intervention had been helpful, comparisons between the treatment and control groups indicate that the program had negative side effects as measured by criminal behavior, death, disease, occupational status, and job satisfaction. Several possible processes are suggested in explanation of these findings. In 1935, Richard Clark Cabot instigated one of the most imaginative and exciting programs ever designed in hopes of preventing delinquency. A social philosopher as well as physician, Dr. Cabot established a program that both avoided stigmatizing participants and permitted follow-up evaluation. Several hundred boys from densely populated, factory-dominated areas of eastern Massachusetts were included in the project, known as the Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study. Schools, welfare agencies, churches, and the police recommended both "difficult" and "average" youngsters to the program. These boys and their families were given physical examinations and were interviewed by social workers who then rated each boy in such a way as to allow a selection committee to designate delinquency-prediction scores. In addition to giving delinquency-prediction scores, the selection committee studied each boy's records in order to identify pairs who were similar in age, delinquency-prone histories, family background, and home environments. By the toss of a coin, one member of each pair was assigned to the group that would receive treatment. The treatment program began in 1939, when the boys were between S and 13 years old. Their median age was 10$. Except for those dropped from the program because of a counselor shortage in 1941, treatment continued for an average of 5 years. Counselors assigned to each family visited, on the average, twice a month. They encouraged families to call on the program for assistance. Family problems became the focus of attention for ap284 • MARCH 1978 • AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST Copyright 1978 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/78/3303-0284$00.75 proximately one third of the treatment group. Over half of the boys were tutored in academic subjects; over 100 received medical or psychiatric attention; one fourth were sent to summer camps; and most were brought into contact with the Boy Scouts, the YMCA, and other community programs. The control group, meanwhile, participated only through providing information about themselves. Both groups, it should be remembered, contained boys referred as "average" and boys considered "difficult." The present study compares the 253 men who had been in the treatment program after 1942 with the 253 "matched mates" assigned to the control group.
[1]
T. Adorno.
The Authoritarian Personality
,
1950
.
[2]
Edwin Powers,et al.
An experiment in the prevention of delinquency : the Cambridge Somerville youth study
,
1952
.
[3]
An Experiment in the Prevention of Delinquency: The Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study.Edwin Powers , Helen Witmer
,
1954
.
[4]
E. Douvan,et al.
The sense of effectiveness in public affairs.
,
1956
.
[5]
J. McCord,et al.
A Follow-up Report on the Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study
,
1959
.
[6]
H. Bakwin.
Origins of crime.
,
1961,
The Journal of pediatrics.
[7]
W. Miller.
The Impact of a ‘Total-Community’ Delinquency Control Project
,
1962
.
[8]
Maude M. Craig,et al.
What Happens after Treatment? A Study of Potentially Delinquent Boys
,
1965,
Social Service Review.
[9]
Gerald D. Robin.
Anti-Poverty Programs and Delinquency
,
1969
.
[10]
M. Wasserman,et al.
The Provo experiment;: Evaluating community control of delinquency
,
1972
.
[11]
Stay where you were: a study of unemployables in industry
,
1973
.