Aggression Replacement Training®

Program developed by Arnold P. Goldstein, Ph.D., Syracuse University; Barry Glick, Ph.D., New York State Division for Youth;
and John C. Gibbs Ph.D., Ohio State University

Logic Model created by the Evidence-based Prevention and Intervention Support Center (EPISCenter) at Penn State University.

Program Components Targets Proximal Outcomes Distal Outcomes

Decrease in
Skillstreaming Conduct Problem Reduce Criminal
Goal: To teach youth a
broad curriculum of Behaviors Behavior and
prosocial behavior Recidivism
Decrease
Risk Improved Pro-
Anger Control social Behavior
Factors
Training
Goal: To teach youth self- Increase in
control of anger In-Community
Increase Improved Anger Functioning
Protective Control
Moral Reasoning
Factors
Training
Goal: To raise youth’s level Enhanced Levels Improved Pro-
of fairness, justice, and
concern with the needs and
of Moral Social Behavior
rights of others Reasoning

Researched Delivery Model:

 targets aggressive adolescents, ages 12 to 17  goal of reducing recidivism of delinquent youth  program must be facilitated by staff trained in ART®
 30 one–hour program sessions delivered 3 times per week over 10 week period

$$ Please visit the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) website for current information regarding the Benefit-Cost Results for ART. $$
http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/BenefitCost?programSearch=aggression+replacement+training
 Targeted Risk and Protective Proximal Outcomes Distal Outcomes
Factors
Targeted outcomes that the Outcomes impacted by the program
Risk factors, which increase the program is designed to impact months/years following program
likelihood of negative outcomes (e.g., immediately following program completion that have been
Program Modalities drug use, delinquency, school
completion. demonstrated through research.
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent
Specific strategies, behavior) are targeted for a
Program methods, and techniques decrease. Protective factors, which
Components are used to accomplish the exert a positive influence and buffer
program goals. against negative outcomes, are Decrease in Conduct Reduced
targeted for an increase. Problem Behavior: Criminal Behavior and
 Improve relationships with Recidivism Rate:
teacher
Modeling of  Decrease in frequency and  Less likely to be arrested
expert use of Risk Factors: intensity in daily acting again
Skillstreaming behaviors
 Aggressive behavior
out behavior incidents  Less likely to commit a
 Decrease in impulsiveness felony again
Goal: To teach youth a  Impulsive behavior  Help youth feel more
Role Playing
broad curriculum of responsible  decrease in conduct
prosocial behavior
 Poor problem solving skills
problem behavior
(50-skill curriculum of prosocial
Performance
Feedback
 Poor social skills Improved Pro-Social
behaviors)  Early initiation and Behavior:
Transfer training
Improvement in In-
persistent antisocial
(encourage  Increased knowledge of Community Functioning:
practice outside behavior social skills
of program)  Favorable attitudes towards  more likely to express a  more likely to be rated
antisocial behavior complaint appropriately higher in domains of home
Identify triggers  more likely to express a and family, peer, legal, and
Anger Control complaint appropriately overall adjustment
Identify cues Protective Factors:
Training Improved Anger Control:
Goal: To teach youth Improved Pro-Social
Using reminders  Social skills (beginning and  more likely to respond to
self-control of anger (self-statements
advanced) Behavior:
like “stay calm”)
anger appropriately
 Emotional awareness and  less likely to initiate a fight  Enhanced pro-social skill
Use reducers (i.e. understanding Enhanced Levels of Moral competency
deep breathing)
 Emotional regulation Reasoning:
 Planning Skills Reduction in aggressive
Using self-  more likely to respond to
evaluation  Problem solving group pressure and delinquent behavior
Moral Reasoning (reflect on
whether handled
 Identify triggers and cues of appropriately
Training appropriately) anger
 Use reminders and reducers Decrease Levels of
Goal: To raise youth’s Thinking Errors:
level of fairness, justice,  Using self-evaluation
Moral dilemmas
and concern with the discussion  Heightened moral reasoning  see improvements in
needs and rights of others assuming the worst