The Disproportionate Overrepresentation of Minority Youth in ...

28
Thus, the decision makers responded to both closed ended questions and open ended
questions.
In the beginning stages of Phase Two, random sampling of delinquent youth from
the four counties was attempted. This became a rather difficult task because many of the
youth failed to attend their scheduled meetings and/or refused to participate in the
research. Youth had the opportunity to volunteer for the study or decline to participate
without repercussions from those in authority over them. As a result, random sampling,
for the most part, was abandoned in favor of accepting youth who were willing to
voluntarily participate. Delinquent youth who volunteered for the study came from the
state training school, juvenile court offices, detention centers, group or youth homes,
residential treatment centers, drug and alcohol treatment programs or hospitals, treatment
programs for children with behavioral disorders, and YMCA independent living
programs. Unlike with the adult decision makers, youth responded either to a closed
ended survey or to a open ended interview.
In short, confidence exists that youth who participated in the study represent the
spectrum of youth who have experience with the juvenile justice system. Youth who had
not been officially recognized as delinquent did not participate in this phase of the
research.
A total of 84 adult decision makers responded to interviews and self—reports. In
some situations, a decision maker simply responded to either the self-report or the
interview (n:6). Of the youth, 419 answered the self—reports and 193 were