Corrections_Today_Winter_2025-2026_Vol.87_No.4

Introduction I n recent years, authorities in Pennsylvania have worked to lead juvenile justice reform aimed at rehabilitating young offenders and improving reintegration outcomes. Reducing recidivism among both juveniles and adults continues to present significant challenges for practitioners nationwide, and comparing reoffending rates across jurisdictions can be complicated (Glick & Prince, 2016). Generally, juvenile recidivism in Pennsylvania has declined slightly since roughly the turn of the millennium (Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission, 2022). For many, this trend has highlighted the effectiveness of new state policies and improvements to rehabilitative treatment programs and services for youths. For others, however, much work remains to be done. Transitioning from punitive to more rehabilitative objec tives, Pennsylvania authorities have employed approaches based on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model of programming to break the cycles of juvenile criminal behavior (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2025). Consid ered the premier approach to “what works” in correctional interventions, this model uses cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs) as foundational structures for chang ing maladaptive thoughts and behaviors (Andrews, 2012, p.128). Empirically validated and grounded in principles of psychology, CBTs aim to alter clients’ cognitive distor tions that lead to criminality, such as the justification of violence, the deflection of responsibility, or minimizing the consequences of committing crimes (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Programs including Thinking for a Change (T4C) and Aggression Replacement Training (ART) that inte grate CBTs have been implemented in juvenile detention facilities and community-based treatment environments throughout the state with some success. Still, their modest results have drawn criticism that more must be done to address delinquency and youth recidivism. Cognitive-behavioral interventions in corrections While various psychological therapies and programs have proven popular and effective at modifying individu al behavioral outcomes, perhaps none have been applied to corrections as rigorously as cognitive-behavioral

interventions (Glick & Prince, 2016). According to Latessa (2012), “the most effective correctional pro grams are based on structured social learning where new skills and behaviors are modeled, and cognitive behavioral approaches … target criminogenic risk factors” (p. 56). More specifically, CBTs are largely based on assumptions about how offenders think. Common characteristics include distorted cognitive patterns, such as the displacement of blame, deficient moral reason ing, ideologies of dominance, feelings of entitlement and more (Lipsey et al., 2007). These distortions often lead to criminal activity when youths act on mispercep tions or their own dysfunctional suppositions. Criminal thinking is additionally reinforced by interactions with like-minded peers. Lipsey et al. (2007) describe how criminal thought patterns are bolstered by entrenchment in antisocial subcultures where such behaviors might otherwise be considered adaptive. By self-identifying their thought patterns, offenders can learn to change their thinking processes, thereby reducing the deficiencies that lead to poor choices. Cognitive behavioral interventions are based on the idea that dysfunctional thinking leading to criminal behavior is learned rather than inherited. If it is learned, it can be restructured to include more appropriate responses and prosocial skills. Treatment programs emphasize individual accountability, encouraging youths to reflect on their thought processes immediately before potential criminal conduct. By self-identifying their thought patterns, offenders can learn to change their thinking processes, thereby reducing the deficiencies that lead to poor choices. Lipsey et al. (2007) and Glick and Prince (2016) explain that CBTs utilize structured techniques aimed at building skills in areas where clients have deficits, as well as restructuring cognitive patterns

Opposite page: Adobe Stock/pathdoc

Winter 2025-2026 | Corrections Today

31