The Effects of a Truancy Reduction Program on Antisocial Behavior: Age, Race, and Sex Differences

Abstract

Past research from the Ability School Engagement Program (ASEP), a third-party policing intervention designed to increase school attendance, finds the program is able to reduce self-reported antisocial behavior up to two years following program participation. This research further explores the generalizability of these effects and assesses whether the effects of ASEP on self-reported antisocial behavior varied by different age, race, and sex characteristics of young people in the study at one- and two-years post randomization. Data for this study come from 102 young people who participated in the ASEP, which was designed to increase school attendance and reduce antisocial behavior through a conference with police, schools, young people, and their parents in Brisbane, Australia. There were no statistically significant interactions between the condition and predictors on self-reported antisocial behavior at the one-year mark. However, young people in the experimental group who were in secondary school during the intervention had significantly lower odds of self-reported antisocial behavior relative to secondary students in the control group at two years post-randomization. Results suggest that ASEP may be more effective at reducing self-reported antisocial behavior among adolescents in secondary school.

Keywords:

• ability school engagement program
• adolescence
• antisocial behavior
• truancy

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 We note that in 2015 (after the ASEP trial concluded), the Queensland Department of Education shifted Year 7 students into high schools.

2 Though not statistically and significantly different from one another, it is still important to account for baseline measures of outcomes in randomized controlled trials because there “may be large differences that statistical testing [of baseline measures] fails to detect,” especially in experiments with small sample sizes (Harvey, 2018, p., 919). Controlling for important baseline covariates related to the outcome is also beneficial for models with binary outcomes as doing so can increase statistical power and reduce sample size requirements (Hernández, Steyerberg, & Habbema, 2004; Jiang, Kulkarni, Mallinckrodt, Shurzinske, & Molenberghs, 2015). Further, because participants were not recruited based upon antisocial behavior (recruitment was based on school attendance), we control for this baseline measure to account for this. Additionally, one of the best predictors of future offending is past offending (Cohen, Roth, & Visher, 1986 (Buerger and Mazerolle, 1998)) and is important to account for in explaining future behavior.

3 Percentages for all 10 of the individual items that make up the variety scale at Time 1 are as follows: (1) “stolen something worth more than $10,” (14.7%); (2) “Beaten up someone so badly that they probably needed to see a doctor or nurse,” (12.7%); (3) “Been arrested,” (4.9%); (4) “Carried a weapon,” (4.9%); (5) “Sold illegal drugs,” (0%); (6) “Stolen or tried to steal a motor vehicle such as a car or a motorcycle,” (0.9%); (7) “Attacked someone with the idea of seriously hurting them,” (8.8%); (8) “Been drunk or high at school,” (8.9%); (9) “Threatened someone with a weapon,” (5.8%); and (10) “Been in a gang” (5.9%).

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course; Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship (2010–2015; grant number FL100100014) that funded the experimental evaluation of the Ability School Engagement Program. This research was supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course (project number CE140100027). The Centre is administered by the Institute for Social Science Research at The University of Queensland, with nodes at The University of Western Australia, The University of Melbourne and The University of Sydney. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research Council. As with any large-scale trial, the work that is presented in this paper is made possible by the dedication, passion, and professionalism of a large number of very special people. We are, therefore, indebted to the project team at the University of Queensland, our PhD students, as well as the dedicated operational team from the Queensland Police Service, the Department of Education and Training, the staff, students and families from the 11 schools participating in the trial, and the facilitating team seconded from the Department of Justice and Attorney General. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors. Responsibility for any errors of omission or commission remains with the authors.

Notes on contributors

Stephanie Michelle Cardwell

Stephanie M. Cardwell is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice at The University of Texas at San Antonio and an Honorary Research Fellow in the School of Social Science at The University of Queensland. Her research predominantly focuses on the relationship between risk factors and antisocial behavior in adolescence and understanding how interventions can modify these relationships.

Lorraine Mazerolle

Lorraine Mazerolle is an Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow (2010–2015), a professorial research fellow at The University of Queensland, School of Social Science. She is the co-chair Crime and Justice Group, Campbell Collaboration and an elected fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences, Australia and the American Society of Criminology (ASC).

Kelsy Luengen

Kelsy Luengen is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of Social Science at the University of Queensland. Her research is focused in the areas of cybercrime prevention and security, evidence-based policing, and experimental methods. Her recent publications can be found in Current Psychology, Prevention Science, and Policing: An International Journal.

Sarah Bennett

Sarah Bennett is a senior lecturer in Criminology at the University of Queensland and a fellow of the Academy of Experimental Criminology. Her research interests include evidence-based policing, procedural justice and legitimacy and experimental criminology. She applies rigorous research methods in real world settings to inform policy and practice.