Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Aspen Education Group
Ellen Behren's Industry Study Funded by AEG
Pile of Dead Kids:
Oh my fucking... I finally bothered to read this crap.
This is based on self-reporting and parent-reporting bullshit; there's no qualitative study here at all. This "study" isn't even measuring anything on an objective scale. It's based on what program parents and their victim-children believe. There's no objective measure of anything in this entire mess.
And that's assuming that there wasn't any fudging.
No wonder there wasn't a follow-up. Once it wore off by 2007 the results were not what they wanted to report!
Whooter:
Thats funny, I didnt make it up. I have been posting it along with a link and page number:
Here is the whole quote:
First, reliable change and recovery were assessed using the male adolescents’ report of symptoms
on the YSR. Of the 155 males who completed the YSR at admission and discharge, 81% of
adolescent males reported some amount or degree of symptom reduction. Of that, 31% reported
improvement that exceeded the 2 standard deviation cut-off for reliable change (>28 raw score
points) and 50% reported improvement below the cut-off for reliable change (<28 raw score
points).
so what this means is 81% of the kids reported some degree of symptom reduction... of these 81% , 31% reported improvement that exceeded the 2 standard deviation... 2 standard deviations is 95.5%... so 31% of the kids did extremely well and exceeded expectations. 50% reported improvement below the 2 standard deviation mark (which is below 95.5%).
50% + 31% = 81%
So 81% of the kids reported a reduction in symptoms and of these 31% did extremely well, 50% did as was expected.
Page 9:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study
...
Whooter:
I think the true measure of reliability is to see how well these kids do after they return home and looking a year or more out.
...
Troll Control:
--- Quote from: "Pile of Dead Kids" ---Oh my fucking... I finally bothered to read this crap.
This is based on self-reporting and parent-reporting bullshit; there's no qualitative study here at all. This "study" isn't even measuring anything on an objective scale. It's based on what program parents and their victim-children believe. There's no objective measure of anything in this entire mess.
And that's assuming that there wasn't any fudging.
No wonder there wasn't a follow-up. Once it wore off by 2007 the results were not what they wanted to report!
--- End quote ---
Yes, Pile. Behrens admitted when she interviewed for StrugglingTeens that they scrubbed the data of all kids who didn't do well and needed to be removed from the program. She also said her research on the follow up was nearly complete and would be finalized in 2007. Then they never released it or mentioned it again...never.
Right in the study she also admits the positive bias of parents and kids who didn't finish the program. The average stay was 8.6 months, well below the 16 month average program length, so most of these reports were biased, as she said right in the work.
And Whooter doesn't know what he's talking about with the numbers. 31% had reliable change while still inside the program and 50% had unreliable, statistically irrelevent change (below 2 SD's, the watermark for reliability). They were "treatment failures" before they ever left the program. Of course they don't want to look at it one year out.
When I asked Whooter for the follow up data, he lied and said 81% improved. There is no follow up data.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---
When I asked Whooter for the follow up data, he lied and said 81% improved. There is no follow up data.
--- End quote ---
If I did say that the 81% was follow-up data then you are correct. I said that in error.
This is what I was referring to just to clear that up:
81% of adolescent males reported some amount or degree of symptom reduction.
Page 9
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study
...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version