Effects of a Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Training for Prisoners: A Controlled Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Standard Protocol Approvals, Registrations, and Participant Consents
2.3. Study Design and Procedures
2.3.1. Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Group Training
2.3.2. Dogs
2.4. Measures
2.4.1. Primary Outcome Measure
2.4.2. Secondary Outcome Measures
2.4.3. Other Measures
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Primary Outcomes
3.3. Secondary Outcomes
4. Discussion
Limitations, Strengths, and Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Scale | Subscale | Time Point | Intervention n | Intervention M (SD) | Control n | Control M (SD) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Empathy | Perspective taking | t1 | 27 | 12.70 (3.47) | 26 | 14.35 (2.54) |
t2 | 27 | 13.11 (2.95) | 25 | 14.08 (2.84) | ||
t3 | 26 | 12.65 (4.82) | 26 | 14.19 (2.79) | ||
Fantasy | t1 | 27 | 12.26 (3.54) | 26 | 11.88 (3.48) | |
t2 | 27 | 12.78 (3.46) | 25 | 12.12 (3.27) | ||
t3 | 26 | 11.73 (4.42) | 26 | 12.27 (3.34) | ||
Empathic concern | t1 | 27 | 13.96 (3.40) | 26 | 14.27 (2.79) | |
t2 | 27 | 14.11 (2.45) | 25 | 14.52 (2.08) | ||
t3 | 26 | 12.92 (4.41) | 26 | 13.92 (2.37) | ||
Personal distress | t1 | 27 | 10.26 (2.89) | 26 | 11.50 (3.98) | |
t2 | 27 | 10.07 (3.01) | 25 | 11.80 (4.86) | ||
t3 | 26 | 8.85 (4.20) | 26 | 9.73 (3.29) | ||
Self-esteem | t1 | 27 | 21.30 (6.25) | 26 | 19.31 (7.17) | |
t2 | 27 | 21.52 (6.85) | 25 | 19.32 (6.85) | ||
t3 | 24 | 22.04 (7.32) | 26 | 20.23 (7.15) | ||
Aggressiveness | Total aggressivity | t1 | 25 | 51.80 (25.35) | 26 | 58.92 (22.66) |
t2 | 27 | 48.93 (31.08) | 26 | 58.92 (26.51) | ||
t3 | 24 | 26.92 (26.22) | 25 | 56.16 (26.24) | ||
Spontaneous aggressivity | t1 | 25 | 14.68 (9.27) | 26 | 14.73 (8.42) | |
t2 | 27 | 13.33 (11.28) | 26 | 14.81 (9.57) | ||
t3 | 24 | 13.00 (10.22) | 25 | 14.36 (10.83) | ||
Reactive aggressivity | t1 | 25 | 20.20 (9.67) | 26 | 20.73 (8.07) | |
t2 | 27 | 18.93 (10.62) | 26 | 21.58 (10.22) | ||
t3 | 24 | 17.13 (9.71) | 25 | 21.04 (9.58) | ||
Excitability | t1 | 25 | 16.92 (10.12) | 26 | 23.46 (9.88) | |
t2 | 27 | 16.67 (12.06) | 26 | 22.54 (10.81) | ||
t3 | 24 | 16.79 (10.17) | 25 | 20.76 (9.10) | ||
Self-aggression | t1 | 25 | 21.56 (8.37) | 26 | 22.81 (8.75) | |
t2 | 27 | 19.52 (8.16) | 26 | 20.92 (9.23) | ||
t3 | 24 | 16.75 (8.28) | 25 | 20.28 (10.13) | ||
Aggression inhibition | t1 | 25 | 18.84 (6.94) | 26 | 22.00 (6.91) | |
t2 | 27 | 19.78 (7.00) | 26 | 21.12 (6.52) | ||
t3 | 24 | 18.71 (7.38) | 25 | 21.32 (6.43) | ||
Psychosocial problems | Total | t1 | 26 | 84.88 (21.60) | 25 | 98.28 (23.84) |
t2 | 24 | 79.33 (23.41) | 23 | 94.09 (24.26) | ||
t3 | 23 | 75.96 (20.95) | 25 | 93.32 (29.46) | ||
Social anxiety | t1 | 26 | 21.50 (7.22) | 25 | 25.65 (7.53) | |
t2 | 24 | 20.08 (7.38) | 23 | 24.13 (7.64) | ||
t3 | 23 | 19.39 (7.30) | 25 | 23.56 (8.44) | ||
Vulnerability | t1 | 26 | 14.81 (5.29) | 25 | 17.00 (5.72) | |
t2 | 23 | 14.57 (5.98) | 23 | 16.39 (4.54) | ||
t3 | 23 | 13.43 (4.34) | 25 | 15.68 (5.25) | ||
Depression | t1 | 25 | 25.60 (6.89) | 25 | 28.12 (6.35) | |
t2 | 24 | 24.29 (7.54) | 22 | 27.14 (6.99) | ||
t3 | 23 | 23.57 (7.37) | 25 | 27.40 (9.07) | ||
Exhaustion | t1 | 26 | 20.38 (5.19) | 26 | 25.27 (7.44) | |
t2 | 24 | 18.75 (5.16) | 25 | 24.96 (7.67) | ||
t3 | 23 | 18.00 (5.28) | 25 | 24.56 (8.46) | ||
Insecurity | Anxiety of failure | t1 | 27 | 29.93 (17.94) | 25 | 30.32 (20.08) |
t2 | 26 | 27.19 (17.46) | 23 | 30.96 (16.17) | ||
t3 | 22 | 25.45 (19.65) | 26 | 30.19 (19.16) | ||
Contact anxiety | t1 | 27 | 30.96 (13.70) | 25 | 35.40 (16.63) | |
t2 | 26 | 28.38 (14.32) | 25 | 32.44 (13.38) | ||
t3 | 24 | 27.25 (14.72) | 25 | 32.28 (16.70) | ||
Ability to demand | t1 | 25 | 44.92 (11.88) | 26 | 44.73 (12.61) | |
t2 | 26 | 44.27 (10.70) | 25 | 46.96 (12.19) | ||
t3 | 23 | 45.70 (13.24) | 26 | 44.92 (11.89) | ||
Ability to say no | t1 | 27 | 35.56 (15.50) | 26 | 36.00 (17.00) | |
t2 | 26 | 32.48 (15.24) | 25 | 32.46 (12.90) | ||
t3 | 23 | 28.89 (18.04) | 26 | 32.37 (14.87) | ||
Guilt | t1 | 26 | 23.42 (11.79) | 25 | 22.20 (15.73) | |
t2 | 26 | 24.12 (14.61) | 24 | 23.13 (11.07) | ||
t3 | 24 | 20.88 (14.20) | 26 | 22.50 (13.18) | ||
Decency | t1 | 27 | 34.89 (11.62) | 26 | 40.38 (14.78) | |
t2 | 26 | 33.92 (14.47) | 25 | 35.76 (14.47) | ||
t3 | 24 | 31.88 (14.50) | 26 | 38.88 (15.59) |
Mood | n | Before Sessions M (SD) | After Sessions M (SD) |
---|---|---|---|
Good–bad | 468 | 15.62 (3.22) | 13.62 (1.97) |
Awake–tired | 468 | 14.16 (3.42) | 12.08 (1.49) |
Calm–activated | 469 | 14.81 (3.12) | 10.11 (2.26) |
References
- Fair, H.; Walmsley, R. World Prison Population List, 13th ed.; Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research: London, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Welsh, W.N.; McGrain, P.N. Predictors of therapeutic engagement in prison-based drug treatment. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008, 96, 271–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Davidson, K.M.; Young, J.T.N. Treatment engagement in a prison-based Therapeutic Community: A mixed-methods approach. J. Subst. Abuse. Treat. 2019, 103, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wampold, B.E.; Imel, Z.E. The Great Psychotherapy Debate. The Evidence for What Makes Psychotherapy Work; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Norcross, J.C.; Lambert, M.J. Psychotherapy Relationships That Work III. Psychotherapy 2018, 55, 303–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewis, S. Therapeutic Correctional Relationships. Theory, Research and Practice; Routledge: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Rousan, T.; Rubenstein, L.; Sieleni, B.; Deol, H.; Wallace, R.B. Inside the nation’s largest mental health institution: A prevalence study in a state prison system. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haesen, S.; Merkt, H.; Imber, A.; Elger, B.; Wangmo, T. Substance use and other mental health disorders among older prisoners. Int. J. Law Psychiatry 2019, 62, 20–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baranyi, G.; Scholl, C.; Fazel, S.; Patel, V.; Priebe, S.; Mundt, A.P. Severe mental illness and substance use disorders in prisoners in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies. Lancet Glob. Health 2019, 7, E461–E471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fazel, S.; Hayes, A.J.; Bartellas, K.; Clerici, M.; Trestman, R. Mental health of prisoners: Prevalence, adverse outcomes, and interventions. Lancet Psychiatry 2016, 3, 871–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaudry, G.; Yu, R.; Perry, A.E.; Fazel, S. Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet Psychiatry 2021, 8, 759–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duindam, H.M.; Asscher, J.J.; Hoeve, M.; Stams, G.J.J.M.; Creemers, H.E. Are We Barking Up the Right Tree? A Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Prison-Based Dog Programs. Crim. Justice Behav. 2020, 47, 749–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villafaina-Dominguez, B.; Collado-Mateo, D.; Merellano-Navarro, E.; Villafaina, S. Effects of Dog-Based Animal-Assisted Interventions in Prison Population: A Systematic Review. Animals 2020, 10, 2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulcahy, C.; McLaughlin, D. Is the Tail Wagging the Dog? A Review of the Evidence for Prison Animal Programs. Aust. Psychol. 2013, 48, 370–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furst, G. Prison-based animal programs—A national survey. Prison J. 2006, 86, 407–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fournier, A.K.; Geller, E.S.; Fortney, E.V. Human-animal interaction in a prison setting: Impact on criminal behavior, treatment progress, and social skills. Behav. Soc. Issues 2007, 16, 89–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson-Taylor, K.; Blanchette, K. Results of an Evaluation of the Pawsitive Directions Canine Program at Nova Institution for Women; Correctional Service Canada, Research Branch: Ottawa, QC, Canada, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- van Wormer, J.; Kigerl, A.; Hamilton, Z. Digging Deeper: Exploring the Value of Prison-Based Dog Handler Programs. Prison J. 2017, 97, 520–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contalbrigo, L.; De Santis, M.; Toson, M.; Montanaro, M.; Farina, L.; Costa, A.; Nava, F.A. The Efficacy of Dog Assisted Therapy in Detained Drug Users: A Pilot Study in an Italian Attenuated Custody Institute. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mercer, J.; Gibson, K.; Clayton, D. The therapeutic potential of a prison-based animal programme in the UK. J. Forensic Pract. 2015, 17, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, B.J.; Farrington, D.P. The Effectiveness of Dog-Training Programs in Prison: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature. Prison J. 2016, 96, 854–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, T.M.; Gandenberger, J.; Flynn, E.; Sharma, J.; Morris, K.N. Empowerment theory and prison-based dog training programs. J. Soc. Work 2021, 21, 1360–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilger, C.G. Cell Dogs: No Effect of Dog Training Programs on Prisoners’ Self-Efficacy; Emporia State University: Emporia, KS, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Hill, L. Becoming the Person Your Dog Thinks You Are: An Assessment of Florida Prison-Based Dog Training Programs on Postrelease Recidivism. Correct. Policy Pract. Res. 2018, 5, 149–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seivert, N.P.; Cano, A.; Casey, R.J.; May, D.K.; Johnson, A. Animal Assisted Therapy for Incarcerated Youth: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Appl. Dev. Sci. 2018, 22, 139–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Humby, L.; Barclay, E. Pawsitive Solutions: An Overview of Prison Dog Programs in Australia. Prison J. 2018, 98, 580–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, B.J.; Hill, L.B.; Farrington, D.P.; Bales, W.D. A Beastly Bargain: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prison-Based Dog-Training Programs in Florida. Prison J. 2021, 101, 239–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leonardi, R.J.; Buchanan-Smith, H.M.; McIvor, G.; Vick, S.J. “You Think You’re Helping Them, But They’re Helping You Too”: Experiences of Scottish Male Young Offenders Participating in a Dog Training Program. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jasperson, R.A. An Animal-Assisted Therapy Intervention with Female Inmates. Anthrozoos 2013, 26, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IAHAIO. IAHAIO White Paper 2014, Updated for 2018. The IAHAIO Definitions for Animal Assisted Intervention and Guidelines for Wellness of Animals Involved in AAI; International Association Human-Animal Interaction: Seattle, WA, USA, 2018; Available online: http://iahaio.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/iahaio_wp_updated-2018-final.pdf (accessed on 31 May 2022).
- Rindermann, H. Emotionale-Kompetenz-Fragebogen. Einschätzung Emotionaler Kompetenzen und Emotionaler Intelligenz aus Selbst- und Fremdsicht; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Kanning, U.P. ISK-360°. Inventar zur Messung sozialer Kompetenzen in Selbst- und Fremdbild; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, M.H. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1983, 44, 113–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paulus, C. Der Saarbrücker Persönlichkeitsfragebogen SPF(IRI) zur Messung von Empathie: Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschen Version des Interpersonal Reactivity Index. 2009. Available online: https://psydok.psycharchives.de/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11780/3343/3/SPF_Artikel.pdf (accessed on 31 May 2022).
- O’Brien, E.; Konrath, S.H.; Gruhn, D.; Hagen, A.L. Empathic Concern and Perspective Taking: Linear and Quadratic Effects of Age Across the Adult Life Span. J. Gerontol. B-Psychol. 2013, 68, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Collani, G.; Herzberg, P.Y. Eine revidierte Fassung der deutschsprachigen Skala zum Selbstwertgefühl von Rosenberg. Z. Differ. Diagn. Psychol. 2003, 24, 3–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heubrock, D.; Petermann, F. Kurzfragebogen zur Erfassung von Aggressivitätsfaktoren; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Sander, K.; Lück, H.E. Entwicklung einer Skala zur Messung von studentischen Problemen (SSP). Z. Exp. Angew. Psychol. 1974, 21, 250–262. [Google Scholar]
- Ullrich, R.; Ullrich de Muynck, R. Der Unsicherheitsfragebogen; Pfeiffer Verlag: München, Germany, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Steyer, R.; Schwenkmezger, P.; Notz, P.; Eid, M. Der Mehrdimensionale Befindlichkeitsfragebogen (MDBF); Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Schulz, K.F.; Altman, D.G.; Moher, D.; Grp, C. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2010, 63, 834–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Flynn, E.; Combs, K.M.; Candenberger, J.; Tedeschi, P.; Morris, K.N. Measuring the Psychological Impacts of Prison-Based Dog Training Programs and In-Prison Outcomes for Inmates. Prison J. 2019, 100, 224–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walsh, P.G.; Mertin, P.G. The Training of Pets as Therapy Dogs in a Womens Prison—A Pilot-Study. Anthrozoos 1994, 7, 124–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dawson, J. Empathy through Animals: Generating Evidence-based Outcomes for Empathy Development. Juv. Fam. Court J. 2016, 67, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grommon, E.; Carson, D.C.; Kenney, L. An experimental trial of a dog-training program in a juvenile detention center. J. Exp. Criminol. 2020, 16, 299–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, B.J.; Farrington, D.P. Perceived effects of dog-training programmes in correctional settings. J. Forensic Pract. 2014, 16, 171–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, W.G. The Experiences of Offenders in a Prison Canine Program. Fed. Probat. 2007, 71, 38. [Google Scholar]
- Minton, C.A.; Perez, P.R.; Miller, K. Voices from Behind Prison Walls The Impact of Training Service Dogs on Women in. Soc. Anim. 2015, 23, 484–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Britton, D.M.; Button, A. Prison Pups: Assessing the Effects of Dog Training Programs in Correctional Facilities. J. Fam. Soc. Work. 2005, 9, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, B.J.; Farrington, D.P. The Effects of Dog-Training Programs: Experiences of Incarcerated Females. Women Crim. Justice 2015, 25, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hediger, K.; Wagner, J.; Künzi, P.; Haefeli, A.; Theis, F.; Grob, C.; Pauli, E.; Gerger, H. Effectiveness of animal-assisted interventions for children and adults with post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Psychotraumatol. 2021, 12, 1879713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calvo, P.; Fortuny, J.R.; Guzman, S.; Macias, C.; Bowen, J.; Garcia, M.L.; Orejas, O.; Molins, F.; Tvarijonaviciute, A.; Ceron, J.J.; et al. Animal Assisted Therapy (AAT) Program As a Useful Adjunct to Conventional Psychosocial Rehabilitation for Patients with Schizophrenia: Results of a Small-scale Randomized Controlled Trial. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossetti, J.; King, C. Use of animal-assisted therapy with psychiatric patients. J. Psychosoc. Nurs. Ment. Health Serv. 2010, 48, 44–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kamioka, H.; Okada, S.; Tsutani, K.; Park, H.; Okuizumi, H.; Handa, S.; Oshio, T.; Park, S.J.; Kitayuguchi, J.; Abe, T.; et al. Effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Complement. Ther. Med. 2014, 22, 371–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Borgi, M.; Collacchi, B.; Giuliani, A.; Cirulli, F. Dog Visiting Programs for Managing Depressive Symptoms in Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Gerontologist 2020, 60, e66–e75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Duindam, H.M.; Creemers, H.E.; Hoeve, M.; Asscher, J.J. Who Lets the Dog In? Differential Effects of a Dog-Training Program for Incarcerated Adults. Anthrozoos 2021, 34, 839–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hediger, K.; Thommen, S.; Wagner, C.; Gaab, J.; Hund-Georgiadis, M. Effects of animal-assisted therapy on social behaviour in patients with acquired brain injury: A randomised controlled trial. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 5831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Code | ICD-10 Category | Total | % |
---|---|---|---|
F61 | Mixed and other personality disorders | 29 | 19.59 |
F60 | Specific personality disorders | 23 | 15.54 |
F10 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of alcohol | 22 | 14.86 |
F65 | Disorders of sexual preference | 22 | 14.86 |
F91 | Conduct disorders | 9 | 6.08 |
F33 | Recurrent depressive disorder | 5 | 3.38 |
F63 | Habit and impulse disorders | 4 | 2.70 |
F19 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of multiple drugs and use of other psychoactive substances | 4 | 2.70 |
F14 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of cocaine | 4 | 2.70 |
F84 | Pervasive developmental disorders | 3 | 2.03 |
F13 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of sedatives or hypnotics | 3 | 2.03 |
F12 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of cannabinoids | 2 | 1.35 |
F52 | Sexual dysfunction, not caused by organic disorder or disease | 2 | 1.35 |
F19 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of multiple drugs and use of other psychoactive substances | 2 | 1.35 |
F90 | Hyperkinetic disorders | 2 | 1.35 |
F34 | Persistent mood (affective) disorders | 1 | 0.68 |
F31 | Bipolar affective disorder | 1 | 0.68 |
F11 | Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of opioids | 1 | 0.68 |
F79 | Unspecified mental retardation | 1 | 0.68 |
F68 | Other disorders of adult personality and behaviour | 1 | 0.68 |
F40 | Phobic anxiety disorders | 1 | 0.68 |
F43 | Reaction to severe stress and adjustment disorders | 1 | 0.68 |
F32 | Depressive episode | 1 | 0.68 |
F66 | Psychological and behavioural disorders associated with sexual development and orientation | 1 | 0.68 |
F70 | Mild mental retardation | 1 | 0.68 |
Z73 | Burnout | 1 | 0.68 |
Q98 | Other sex-chromosome abnormalities, male phenotype, not classified elsewhere | 1 | 0.68 |
Outcome | Scale | Time Point | Intervention n | Intervention M (SD) | Control n | Control M (SD) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Self-assessment | Recognition of own emotions | t1 | 27 | 3.58 (0.70) | 26 | 3.21 (0.78) |
t2 | 27 | 3.68 (0.71) | 24 | 3.46 (9.41) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.78 (0.76) | 26 | 3.57 (0.65) | ||
Recognition of emotions in others | t1 | 27 | 3.50 (9.73) | 26 | 3.28 (0.50) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.52 (0.64) | 24 | 3.30 (0.47) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.61 (0.72) | 26 | 3.33 (0.67) | ||
Emotion regulation/control | t1 | 27 | 3.52 (9.67) | 26 | 3.19 (0.68) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.54 (9.77) | 24 | 3.33 (9.58) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.53 (9.78) | 26 | 3.53 (9.61) | ||
Emotional expressivity | t1 | 27 | 2.83 (9.75) | 26 | 2.62 (9.62) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.05 (0.88) | 24 | 2.92 (9.69) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.15 (0.76) | 26 | 2.91 (9.68) | ||
Total score | t1 | 27 | 3.36 (9.60) | 26 | 3.08 (0.48) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.45 (9.62) | 24 | 3.25 (9.39) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.52 (0.60) | 26 | 3.33 (0.54) | ||
External assessment | Recognition of own emotions | t1 | 27 | 2.92 (0.72) | 26 | 2.97 (0.87) |
t2 | 25 | 3.15 (0.71) | 24 | 3.06 (0.95) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.18 (0.82) | 23 | 2.80 (0.83) | ||
Recognition of emotions in others | t1 | 27 | 2.70 (0.63) | 26 | 2.55 (0.91) | |
t2 | 25 | 2.96 (0.80) | 24 | 2.67 (1.05) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.20 (0.90) | 23 | 2.51 (0.92) | ||
Emotion regulation/control | t1 | 27 | 2.83 (0.63) | 26 | 2.51 (1.04) | |
t2 | 25 | 2.88 (0.83) | 24 | 2.63 (1.08) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.20 (0.81) | 23 | 2.42 (0.96) | ||
Emotional expressivity | t1 | 27 | 2.51 (0.74) | 26 | 2.48 (0.59) | |
t2 | 25 | 2.66 (0.86) | 24 | 2.82 (0.92) | ||
t3 | 22 | 2.78 (0.97) | 23 | 2.63 (9.99) | ||
Total score | t1 | 27 | 2.74 (0.49) | 26 | 2.63 (9.73) | |
t2 | 25 | 2.91 (0.66) | 24 | 2.79 (0.88) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.09 (0.74) | 23 | 2.83 (0.80) |
Outcome | Scale | Time Point | Intervention n | Intervention M (SD) | Control n | Control M (SD) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Self-assessment | Social orientation | t1 | 26 | 3.41 (0.46) | 26 | 3.44 (0.46) |
t2 | 27 | 3.33 (0.54) | 25 | 3.36 (0.58) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.45 (0.55) | 26 | 3.42 (0.62) | ||
Offensiveness | t1 | 26 | 3.12 (0.69) | 26 | 3.13 (9.59) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.10 (0.75) | 25 | 3.14 (9.57) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.24 (0.84) | 26 | 3.16 (0.59) | ||
Self-regulation | t1 | 26 | 3.32 (9.76) | 26 | 2.95 (9.56) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.27 (0.80) | 25 | 3.10 (0.55) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.39 (0.73) | 26 | 3.03 (0.63) | ||
Reflexibility | t1 | 26 | 3.52 (0.65) | 26 | 3.54 (0.47) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.43 (0.73) | 25 | 3.39 (0.53) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.47 (0.74) | 26 | 3.52 (0.52) | ||
Total score | t1 | 26 | 3.34 (9.45) | 26 | 3.27 (0.38) | |
t2 | 27 | 3.28 (0.56) | 25 | 3.25 (0.45) | ||
t3 | 24 | 3.39 (0.57) | 26 | 3.28 (0.44) | ||
External assessment | Social orientation | t1 | 27 | 2.77 (0.53) | 26 | 2.47 (0.96) |
t2 | 25 | 3.00 (0.63) | 24 | 2.51 (0.95) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.19 (0.65) | 23 | 2.63 (0.89) | ||
Offensiveness | t1 | 27 | 2.78 (9.78) | 26 | 2.84 (0.59) | |
t2 | 26 | 2.84 (0.60) | 24 | 2.92 (0.70) | ||
t3 | 22 | 2.92 (0.85) | 23 | 2.94 (0.81) | ||
Self-regulation | t1 | 27 | 2.78 (0.70) | 26 | 2.39 (0.86) | |
t2 | 25 | 2.30 (0.63) | 24 | 2.51 (0..83) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.22 (0.65) | 23 | 2.56 (0.77) | ||
Reflexibility | t1 | 27 | 2.87 (0.68) | 26 | 2.72 (9.73) | |
t2 | 25 | 3.18 (0.88) | 24 | 2.85 (0.77) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.31 (0.96) | 23 | 2.93 (0.91) | ||
Total score | t1 | 27 | 2.89 (0.39) | 26 | 2.61 (0.60) | |
t2 | 25 | 3.00 (0.48) | 24 | 2.70 (0.58) | ||
t3 | 22 | 3.16 (0.58) | 23 | 2.77 (0.58) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hediger, K.; Marti, R.; Urfer, V.; Schenk, A.; Gutwein, V.; Dörr, C. Effects of a Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Training for Prisoners: A Controlled Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10553. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710553
Hediger K, Marti R, Urfer V, Schenk A, Gutwein V, Dörr C. Effects of a Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Training for Prisoners: A Controlled Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(17):10553. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710553
Chicago/Turabian StyleHediger, Karin, Rahel Marti, Vivien Urfer, Armin Schenk, Verena Gutwein, and Christine Dörr. 2022. "Effects of a Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Training for Prisoners: A Controlled Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 17: 10553. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710553