Use of Research Evidence by Juvenile Justice and Youth Service Professionals

• Author: Lee Michael Johnson,Paul Elam,Susan M. Lebold
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403414548314
• Published date: 01 June 2016
• Date: 01 June 2016
• Subject Matter: Articles

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2016, Vol. 27(4) 402 –419

© 2014 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0887403414548314

cjp.sagepub.com

Article

Use of Research Evidence by

Juvenile Justice and Youth

Service Professionals: A

Research Note

Lee Michael Johnson1, Susan M. Lebold2,

and Paul Elam3

Abstract

The current study utilized focus group interviews to examine use of research

evidence by juvenile justice and youth service professionals. It was undertaken to

help explain why social research is underutilized in determining policy and practice.

Through focus group interviews, the current study explored research use among

professionals providing various local services to troubled youth in a one-county area.

A total of 35 professionals participated in four focus groups. Results suggest that

participants have limited knowledge and awareness of research evidence, though they

were very familiar with evidence-based programming itself. The need continues for

strategies to bring research and the field closer together in an effort to develop more

effective policies and practices. For example, public policy and research/evaluation

firms should be given a major role in pursuing this mission.

Keywords

research evidence, juvenile justice, youth services

Introduction

The value of basing public policies and social service practices on research evidence

seems to be apparent. Social science research provides insights into the nature, causes,

and consequences of the conditions that these policies and practices address,

1University of West Georgia, Carrollton, GA, USA

2Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA

3Public Policy Associates, Inc., Lansing, MI, USA

Corresponding Author:

Lee Michael Johnson, University of West Georgia, 1601 Maple St., Carrollton, GA 30118, USA.

Email: ljohnson@westga.edu

548314CJPXXX10.1177/0887403414548314Criminal Justice Policy ReviewJohnson et al.

research-article2014

Johnson et al. 403

and evidence exists that research-based policy and practice decisions have produced

beneficial results. Evaluation research is particularly important as it directly examines

the effectiveness of interventions (Weiss, Murphy-Graham, Petrosino, & Gandhi,

2008). Well-designed and implemented research can deeply explore the impact of

policies and practices. Without research evidence, policies and practices may be

decided on the basis of special interests, myths and misconceptions, inaccurate infor-

mation, or spontaneous reactions—all of which could worsen rather than alleviate

social problems. Empirical research offers a more objective and careful strategy for

showing “what works.” Still, after several years of lobbying by both researchers and

practitioners, research evidence continues to have a very limited impact on policy and

practice, especially when its use is not imposed or incentivized (Weiss et al., 2008).

Thus, efforts to understand why research evidence is underutilized should continue.

The potential to utilize research in policy and practice certainly exists. Both aca-

demic and professional literature reveals that there is (a) a large body of academic

scholarship highly concerned with improving policy and practice; and (b) several

practitioners who are highly interested in learning from research and working with

academicians to improve policy and practice. In fact, there is a notable approach

within criminal justice and child welfare scholarship focused on studying crime reduc-

tion that has been deliberately termed what works (Latessa & Lowenkamp, 2005). In

one journal article, Marlowe (2011) not only reviewed evidence-based practices in

responding to drug-involved offenders but offered recommendations as to how evi-

dence-based principles can be incorporated into policy and practice in each stage of

the justice process. These include basing sentences on empirical information support-

ing behavior-change and cost-effectiveness, conducting offender assessments after

conviction (to avoid bias) but prior to sentencing, holding agencies that provide treat-

ment accountable for their procedures and outcomes, and stringently apply perfor-

mance contracting in reentry services (Marlowe, 2011).

Still, it can be difficult to translate this body of information into policy and practice.

Thus, it is important to empirically search for obstacles that exist even when scholars

and field professionals have the best of intentions. The current study utilizes focus

group interviews to examine youth service professionals’ perceptions of and experi-

ences with empirical research evidence. An emphasis was placed on exploring the

challenges professionals face in applying research evidence to practice. The study was

undertaken to contribute to an understanding of why social research is underutilized in

determining policy and practice in services offered to at-risk and offending youth.

Before presenting the study, the value of research evidence is discussed as well as pos-

sible explanations for its lack of use.

Literature Review

Some reasons offered to explain research underutilization may be invalid. Popular

explanations may be based primarily on anecdotal evidence and speculation, therefore

comprising an unsatisfactory set of reasons for why social research is not applied

enough. These reasons may center on negative stereotypes (Bogenschneider & Corbett,