treatment cited the Finckenauer study as biased (Sherman 1997, pg. 8). The specific goals of the research were to evaluate the psychological and behavioral reactions the juveniles experienced as a direct result of their involvement in the project, the recidivism rate of these juveniles, and the extent to which the initial exposure and the effects therefrom were manifested in the lives of the participants (Finckenauer 1982, pg. 117). Finckenauer wanted 100 participants, recommended by youth organizations. He planned to have a random experimental group of fifty and a random control group of fifty. After many problems with cooperation from the agencies, Finckenauers study consisted of forty-six experimentals and thirty-five controls (Finckenauer 1982, pg. 122). A section of Finckenauers book was dedicated to criticisms of his study, in this section, which ranges from pages 123-131; many different people voiced opinions. Judge George Nicola thought the conclusions too broad due to the 81 kids in the study as opposed to the 13,600 who have participated in the program (pg. 124). Lieutenant Alan August who was in contact with Finckenauer to help facilitate this study said, I dont like the way they did it. The control group did not match up. Some of the teenagers had no recordsFinckenauer was here one time in three years. He had his mind made up before he started(pg. 125). The previous examples were not from professionals, but Finckenauer also included opinions of professionals in his book. The main methodological problem addressed by the various professionals was the issue of randomization. Though not discussing the Finckenauer study, In The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment, Lipton says that so central is this procedure (randomization) to experimental evaluation methodology that evaluations which do not use it cannot appropriately be called experiments(Lipton 1975, pg. 12). In Jailhouse Shock Aims to Scare Youths Straight, H...
