all reports thatOf the experimental group, 27 had arrest records, 19 did not. In the control group, 14 had arrest records, 21 did not. These figures strongly suggest the treatment or experimental group contained more delinquents, proportionately, than did the control group. As social scientists (and people in every walk of life) have long known (Hall 1999, pg. 34). A letter from the Panel on Research on Rehabilitation of Criminal Offenders of the National Academy of Sciences was cited in Finckenauers book Scared Straight and the Panacea Phenomenon. It says that they do not believe that Finckenauers study provides a basis for any conclusion about the effectiveness of the Juvenile Awareness Program other than that it will not be easy to find out how effective the program may be(Finckenauer 1982, pg. 129). The reliability of Finckenauers study was criticized, but there werent any other comparisons to be made except the letter sent from the Lifers Group to the parents which showed a very high success rate.The importance of discussing Finckenauers study is to show that more studies need to be done to discover how accurate this form of rehabilitation and prevention is. Finckenauers study shows the difficulty in gathering participants and money to conduct experiments to find the relevance of these programs. Many people were quick to criticize the problems with the experiment, but this can only help future research on these shock treatments.The main difference in the experiment by Finckenauer and the letter sent to parents by the Lifers Group is that of the validity issue. When sending a letter to the parents of delinquent children, anything can happen to the letters. They might not be returned to the prison, the parents may lie, or the children themselves could answer the questions incorrectly. The success of the program should not have been decided on the basis of the letters. One person out of more than 155 returning to a crimin...
