Strength Training and Leisure Counseling as Treatments for Institutionalized Juvenile Delinquents

ADAPTED PHYSICAL ACTIVITY QUARTERLY, 1985, 2, 6575 Strength Training and Leisure Counseling as Treatments for Institutionalized Juvenile Delinquents Wayne W. Munson Kent State University Stanley B. Baker and Herberta M. Lundegren The Pennsylvania State University A systematic strength training and structured leisure cowling program was investigated to determine the effects on self-esteem, leisure attitudes, leisure behaviors, and muscular fitness of institutionalized juvenile delinquents. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three groups: strength training and leisure counseling (STLC), strength training and informal discussion (STD), or a no-treatment control group (NT). The experimental groups met 3 times a week, 90 minutes per session for 7 weeks. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that there were no significant differences among the three groups on measures of self-esteem, leisure attitudes, or leisure behaviors. Analysis of variance with repeated measures indicated that there were no si&cant differences between the STLC and STD groups ofi muscular fitness, although both had significant pre- to posttest gains. The STLC and STD groups rated their treatments high on an attitude toward treatment measure, but neither group was significantly more positive about it than the other. The most common and correspondingly most severely criticized approach to rehabilitating juvenile delinquents is committing them to training schools (Adams, Carter, Gerietti, Pursuit, & Rogers, 1979). In response to criticism, training schools have initiated activities that reflect a holistic approach to the treatment of youths by introducing educational, recreational, vocational, and psychological programs (Siege1 & Senna, 1981). Unfortunately, no single program seems to stand out as a means of reducing recidivism, although group treatment approaches such as short-term structured group counseling and reality therapy appear to have been most effective in improving emotional health and behaviors (Eddefonso & Hartinger, 1976). Some investigators have reported success in modifying emotional health and behaviors with group approaches that emphasize physical training while others have combined physical training with counseling. Experimenters using physical fitness programs with juvenile delinquents have been able to improve physical fitness, increase voluntary involvement in recreation and sports, and decrease recidivism (Collingwood & Engelsgjerd, 1977). Outward Bound is one program which has incorporated physical fitness as one of its primary goals. Studies of the effectiveness of Outward Bound with juvenile delin- Request reprints from Dr. Wayne W. Munson, Recreation and Leisure Services, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242.

66 Munson, Baker, and Lundegren quents have shown positive changes in attitude, personal pride, trust, self-empowerment, and levels of physical fitness (Wright, 1982). Using a combined counseling and physical fitness program, Hilyer, Wilson, Dillon, and Caro (1982) found that institutionalized youth offenders improved significantly more than control group members on measures of flexibility, muscular strength and endurance, cardiovascular endurance, self-esteem, depression, mood states, and anxiety. In many cases treatment programs have emphasized improving self-esteem because of its significance in motivating behavior. If behavior of individuals is presumed to be dependent upon self-esteem, and exercise programs have demonstrated that they can change self-esteem in a positive direction (Sonstroem, 1982), then increasing self-esteem can have an impact on behavior. For this reason, strength training can be considered a particularly effective form of therapeutic activity because it has the potential to provide immediate reinforcing results. Participants can master skills, feel competent, and experience positive physiological changes in a relatively short period of time (Riley, 1977). While there have been many physical and psychological programs designed to reduce the juvenile crime rate by contributing to the emotional health of the adolescent, few programs have recognized the importance of leisure and, as Hitzhusen (1972) noted, both emotionally disturbed and normal youths find it difficult to use leisure time effectively. The inability to find meaningful outlets in leisure often results in boredom which can lead to delinquency, drug abuse, and inappropriate interpersonal relations that do not facilitate personal growth (Loesch, 1981). More specifically, Gleuck and Gleuck (1974) found that 93.4% of 976 delinquent boys who were studied used leisure time either negatively or harmfully. Advocacy of leisure counseling as a means of promoting psychological growth in youths has been espoused by professionals in the leisure and counseling fields (Iso-Ahola, 1981; Loesch, 1981). Leisure counseling has been viewed from various perspectives including approaches that focus on activity selection (leisure guidance and decision making) to those that promote personal growth through leisure (leisure counseling and therapy, Neulinger, 1981). Most professionals and practitioners advocate the latter approach (Tinsley & Tinsley, 1981). From this perspective, "leisure counseling amounts to human counseling through leisure for the total human being" (Iso-Ahola, 1981, p. 72). Leisure is understood and appreciated as a period of time which can be used to raise self-esteem, increase self-satisfaction, and promote self-actualization (Tinsley & Tinsley, 1982). Leisure counseling for youths, in addition to the facilitation of psychological growth, should also focus on the distinction between default and effective leisure activities (Loesch, 1981). Default activities are those which are pursued "to pass the time" primarily because of an inability to select effective alternatives. Effective leisure activities include those engaged in because they are psychologically rewarding and satisfying (Neulinger, 1974). Therefore, leisure counseling with delinquent youths is viewed as a way to facilitate positive psychological growth by clarifying attitudes and values related to self and leisure, and to foster the ability to select meaningful leisure activities and experiences. In this study, a systematic strength training and structured leisure counseling programs were integrated to determine their combined effects on the psychological growth and muscular fitness of institutionalized juvenile delinquents. Previous research has shown both exercise programs (e.g., strength training) and high-risk activities programs (e.g., Outward Bound) to have a positive effect on self-esteem (Sonstroem, 1982; Wright, 1982). Since the latter activities were not possible in this set-

STRENGTH TRAINING 67 ting, and the subjects themselves chose strength training as a leisure activity, it was selected as a variable in the study. Strength training also had the potential of satisfying Brok's (1975) four conditions of a meaningful leisure activity (i-e., perceived freedom of choice, demands effort, intrinsically rewarding, and facilitates personal growth). Previous researchers indicated that if two treatments (i.e., strength training combined with leisure counseling) were integrated, more positive gains in self-esteem would be attained (Hilyer et al., 1982). Additionally, strength training could provide an example of a meaningful leisure activity (chosen by the subjects in contrast to a default activity) which could, when combined with leisure counseling, enhance the subjects' attitudes toward positive leisure behavior. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of strength training and leisure counseling with strength training and informal discussion, and a no-treatment control condition on measures of self-esteem, leisure attitudes, and leisure behaviors. Gains in muscular fitness were assessed to determine if a group receiving strength training plus the supportive modality of leisure counseling or informal discussion was motivated to achieve higher levels of fitness. Additionally, both experimental groups were assessed on the confidence they had in the treatment programs. Subjects The study was conducted at a western Pennsylvania youth development center for males. Students having at least 8 weeks remaining in their stay at the center were randomly assigned either to a strength training plus structured leisure counseling group (STLC) (N = 12), a strength training plus informal discussion group (STD) (N = 1 I), or to a no-treatment control group (NT) (N = 8). Of the students, 21 were black and 10 were caucasian. Subjects ranged from 14 to 18 years with a mean age of 17. STLC had a mean age of 17.3 years with a standard deviation of 0.9 while STD had a mean age of 17.4 years with a standard deviation of 0.8. NT had a mean age of 17.2 years with a standard deviation of 1.0. Group Leaders Eight members of the institutional staff (7 males and 1 female) agreed to co-lead the STLC and STD groups. All leaders had at least 4 years' experience at the center and were chosen as competent counselors and leaders of physical activities by the center's program director. However, to update all leaders on the skills needed for this study, training sessions were held to refresh their knowledge and to help them understand the concepts, methods, and procedures addressed in this study. The topics reviewed in the sessions included principles of strength training, group communication and facilitation skills, and principles of leisure. Because of exigencies associated with administering the daily regimen of the center, leaders had to be assigned to groups according to their work schedules. Due to irregular work assignments, all leaders did not spend the same amount of time in the program. Two leaders co-led an average of 15.6 of the 20 sessions (78%), while the six other leaders served as substitutes and co-led an average of 1.2 of the remaining sessions (6%). This probably resulted in more consistent leadership in the long run.

Munson, Baker, and Lundegren Instrumentation The Seu-Esteem Inventory (SEZ). The SEI (Coopersmith, 1967) is designed to measure evaluative attitudes toward the self in social, academic, family, and personal areas of experience. It is self-administered, takes about 10 minutes to complete, and has been used successfully with delinquent youths (Hilyer et al., 1982). Form A contains 58 items and a total of five subscales, while Form B consists of 25 items and no subscales. Form B was based on an item analysis of Form A and consists of those items with the highest item-total correlation from Form A. The correlation between the forins is.86. The normative groups for the SEI were children through adults and crossed ethnic and social groups. The short form takes about half as long to administer as the long form and, since it correlates well with the long form, it was the instrument of choice for this group. A maximum score on the SEI is 25. This test was administered by the principal investigator before and after the interventions. The Leisure Attitude Scale (US). The LAS is a self-report instrument composed of affective, behavioral, and cognitive components of leisure attitudes (Ragheb & Beard, 1982). It has 36 items and has been determined to have appropriate content validity. The instrument was subjected to three pilot tests. The first administration was given to a sample of 30 subjects (professors and leisure students). It was then refined and administered to 155 graduate and undergraduate students. After further modification and refinement, a new version was administered to a sample of 254 graduate and undergraduate students and it yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of.94 for the entire scale. The LAS was also sent to experts in the fields of leisure and social psychology and was evaluated for content validity. Their evaluations confirmed the appropriateness of the items for measuring leisure attitudes. The LAS is divided into three subscales (Beliefs, Feelings, and Activities). The possible scores range from 0 to 72 for each subscale, with higher scores indicating more positive feelings, beliefs, and behaviors related to leisure. To reduce confusion and help lower functioning students who may have had trouble reading the scale's items, directions for administration were modified and read aloud. A simplified answer sheet with a 6-point Likert scale was used for all items. The LAS also was administered by the principal investigator before and after the interventions. The Leisure Behavior Rating Scale (LBR). To determine if the subjects had any observable changes in their leisure behaviors at the conclusion of the program, a scale was developed by the principal researcher. The instrument includes nine appropriate and inappropriate leisure behaviors that the investigator and members of the institutional staff considered to be those typically demonstrated by students during their free or leisure time (e.g., the student complains about being bored during leisure time, uses leisure for selfdevelopment, gets in trouble during leisure time). While reliability was not established for this scale, the content validity was established by members of the staff of the center, four doctoral students, and four members of a recreation and parks faculty at a major university who evaluated the scale independently of each other regarding whether the items represented leisure behaviors. Cottage counselors who had not led any of the groups were asked to complete each item on a 5-point Likert scale for students in all conditions based on behavioral observations independent of the training. The LBR was used as a posttestonly measure to determine if there were any differences among groups at the conclusion of the interventions. Attitude Toward Treatment (Am. The ATT is a self-report measure adapted from Kazdin's (undated) Client Expectancy for Change Survey for which he does not report reliability data. It was

STRENGTH TRAINING 69 groups were about the treatments and how much they liked their respective treatment programs. The ATT has 107-point Likert-type items designed to assess the posttest attitudes of the subjects toward their treatment programs (e.g., How confident are you that this program was successful in helping you? How useful were the described program techniques? How valuable was the program in changing your attitudes and behaviors? To what extent did the program allow you to gain insight into yourself?). The scale ranges from 10 to 70 with higher scores indicating greater appreciation. This test was used on a posttestonly basis because it is designed to yield posmeatment data only. Muscular Fitness. Muscular fitness generally incorporates the components of muscular strength and muscular endurance. In this study, it was defined as the ability of a group of muscles to lift a maximal load for a specific number of repetitions. Pre- to posttest gains in the bench press were used to measure muscular fitness. The bench press was selected as the exercise of choice because it incorporates three major muscle groups (pectorals, triceps, and deltoids) and has been used effectively in previous studies with juvenile delinquents (Hilyer et al., 1982). Students in the STLC and STD groups selfrecorded the amount of weight they used in a range of between 8 and 12 repetitions during each workout. The bench press exercise was used to determine a score for gain in muscular fitness by subtracting the initial pretest weight lifted by the student from the f i weight recorded. This method was followed because the strength training routine used in this study is believed to produce maximum gains in muscular strength and muscular endurance (Riley, 1977). Great emphasis was placed on performing 8 to 12 repetitions with as much weight as a subject could handle well; therefore gain scores were used to assess muscular fitness (a combination of muscular strength and endurance). A second reason for following this procedure was to discourage students from continually performing maximum singlerepetition lifts that could cause injuries to novice lifters (Riley, 1977). Procedures Prior to beginning the programs, all subjects were informed of the nature of the activities, number of sessions, and commitment required if they chose to participate. They also were promised two additional days of home visitation upon conclusion of the program as an incentive for their participation. Those who chose to participate were pretested on the psychological self-report measures (i.e., SEI and LAS). Subjects were randomly assigned to the strength training and leisure counseling (STLC) or strength training and informal discussion (STD) or to no-treatment control (NT) groups. The programs were designed so that the relative combii effects of strength training and leisure counseling, or strength training and informal discussion could be evaluated. The strength training component primarily focused on producing gains in muscular fitness in order to enhance the subject's feelings about himself and thus increase self-esteem. The leisure counseling component primarily focused on the relationship between the progress made in the exercise program, the students' awareness of self in a leisure activity, and the development of positive leisure attitudes and behaviors. STLC and STD groups met 3 times a week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) for 90 minutes over a period of 6 weeks, and twice during the last week (Monday, Wednesday). In all there were 20 sessions and 30 hours of participation. Twenty sessions were considered appropriate because other shortterm approaches have been found effective in modifying emotional health and behaviors of juvenile delinquents (Eddefonso & Hartinger, 1976; Wright, 1982). Strength Training and Leisure Counseling (SIZC). Used in both treatments, the strength training regimen was a modified version of strength training and flexibility routines

70 Munson, Baker, and Lundegren practiced by the Pennsylvania State University football team (Riley, 1977). Each session began in a designated area where the group leaders discussed the day's activities. Following this, the exercise routine started with a series of systematic flexibility exercises (i.e., four movements from a standing position and six from a seated or supine position). Each position was held for 10 seconds and repeated twice. Upon completing the flexibility exercises, subjects moved to a strength training station of their choice. In each session, 12 specific strength training exercises were selected from a cluster of 12 manual resistance and 10 barbell exercises. For variety, some sessions were devoted only to barbell exercises, while on other occasions only manual resistance exercises were used. In all cases, each exercise was done in a prescribed routine by performing one set of between 8 and 12 repetitions with as much resistance as the lifter could handle. If the lifter could not perform 8 repetitions, the resistance was considered too great; if he could perform more than 12 repetitions, the resistance was deemed insufficient (Riley, 1977). The strength training component of the sessions lasted approximately 60 minutes. Pretest data were collected during the initial session. Upon completion of the strength training, STLC subjects met with their leader for 30 minutes of leisure counseling. The structured sequential topics introduced in the counseling sessions represented a modification of Loesch and Wheeler's (1982) Triangulation Leisure Counseling Model (TLC) of leisure counseling with youth. The TLC modification consisted of topics pertinent to adolescents. Four affective dimensions were covered: feelings, attitudes, values, and interests. Behavioral dimensions covered in the TLC were activities, choices, and uses of leisure time. Concepts of leisure and decision making were cognitive dimensions of the TLC and were interwoven throughout the leisure counseling components of the STLC sessions. Sessions 1,4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 20 focused on the progress made in the exercise program and the feelings of competence associated with doing well in a leisure activity. Other sessions focused on meanings of leisure, constructive/unconstructive uses of leisure, emotions related to likes and dislikes, feelings about leisure, problems associated with too much free time, everyday activities (those we like to do and those we have to do), building meaningful lifestyles, making choices, responsibility and choices, leisure choices and outcomes, decisions in our lives (educational, vocational, and recreational), and the process of leisure decision making. The leaders followed structured procedures for each session that included a statement related to the focus of the session, an objective of what was to be accomplished by students, and procedures for attaining the objective. The goal for all sessions was to create a situation in which positive psychological growth could occur. The leaders tried to facilitate open communication with the students by incorporating the "facilitative conditions" of a counseling relationship (i.e., using good attending and responding skills such as openended questions, paraphrasing, reflection of feeling, clarification, and summarization) so that students could freely express their feelings, beliefs, and values about themselves in relation to leisure. Strength Training and Informal Discussion (SlD). STD subjects received the same strength training regimen as did the STLC subjects. During the 30 minutes following strength training, STD subjects engaged in an informal discussion of topics generated by the group with suggestions from the leader. Examples of topics discussed were benefits of exercise, music, boxing, basketball, home visits, cottage/institutional routines, and the court system. This period fostered an atmosphere of uninhibited discussion. The goal was to allow students to speak freely about topics of interest and not feel restricted to leader direction and control. Control Group (NZJ. The control group participated in the regular institutional

STRENGTH TRAINING 71 routines during the 7-week experimental period. These activities included attending academic and vocational classes and participating in intramural and recreational programs. No formal group counseling or exercise programs were conducted with control group members during the period of the study. Monitoring Group Leader and Group Member Behaviors. Following each session, STLC and STD leaders completed a process monitor sheet which asked for attendance of subjects, note of the content of the discussion sessions, and an overall evaluation and impression of the session. These data aided the principal investigator to monitor the treatment group programs throughout the experiment. Design and Analysis. Analyses of the SEI, LAS (beliefs, feelings, and activities), and LBR variables were conducted on data gathered from the STLC, STD, and NT groups. To reduce the probability of a Type I error arising from independent analyses of the five dependent variables, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was first used to examine posttest effects. The design called for a significant MANOVA statistic to be followed by independent analyses of each variable: (a) analysis of variance with repeated measures (ANOVR) for the SEI and LAS since they represented a pretestlposttest control design, and (b) analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the LBR since it represented a posttest-only control group design. If no significant difference was found, no further analysis was made. Because the muscular fitness and ATT measures were not administered to the notreatment control group, STD served as the control group for STLC in these analyses, and they were computed independently of the MANOVA. Since the muscular fitness measure was applied in a pretestlposttest control group design, an ANOVR analysis was used. The ATT data were submitted to ANOVA because that scale was administered in a posttest-only control group design. In all ANOVR and ANOVA tests in which significant interactions occurred, follow-up t tests were used to determine sources of effects. Preliminary Analysis of Variables Results Before computing the MANOVA, posttest scores on the SEI, LAS, and LBR were submitted to a correlation analysis to determine whether the scales were assessing different constructs. Table 1 contains the Pearson product-moment correlations, and the results show Table 1 Intercorrelations Among Self-Esteem, Leisure Attitudes, and Leisure Behaviors Groups LAS (Be) LAS (Fe) LAS (Ac) LBR SEI -0.11-0.29-0.32 0.06 LAS (beliefs) - 0.76* 0.49 * 0.20 LAS (feelings) - 0.63 * 0.07 LAS (activities) - 0.09

72 Munson, Baker, and Lundegren no significant relationships among self-esteem (SEI), leisure attitudes (LAS scores), and leisure behaviors (LBR). This indicated that different constructs were being assessed. However, as expected, there were significant relationships among the LAS subtests (beliefs, feelings, and activities). Treatment Effects Combined Measures. The Hotelling-Lawley Trace, used to represent results of the MANOVA, indicated that there were no significant differences among posttest measures of the SEI, LAS, and LBR measures across the STLC, STD, and NT groups, TR =.777, Fapproxirnately (10,32) = 1.24, p =.302. Means and standard deviations for all variables and groups are shown in Table 2. Muscular Fitness. No significant interaction effect was found between STLC and STD subjects on the analysis of variance with repeated measures (ANOVR), F(l, 16) =.54, p =.473. However, there was significant within-group main effect, F(l, 16) = 31.88, p =.001. Follow-up t tests were performed on pre- to posttest results. For the STLC Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations for Dependent Measures by Groups Dependent measures Groups LAS (Be) (Fe) (Ac) SEI MF LBR ATT STLC Pretest M 57.50 56.50 45.50 19.00 130.50 - - SO 12.12 10.33 14.85 2.83 28.39 - - Posttest M 61.70 57.60 48.10 19.70 139.00 29.10 58.00 SO 8.58 6.96 11.65 2.45 30.90 6.82 6.87 STD Pretest M 50.38 53.25 37.00 19.62 135.00 - SO 8.12 7.57 9.68 1.92 18.71 - - Posttest M 52.50 53.50 50.88 19.88 151.88 27.50 51.78 SO 8.90 10.49 11.06 1.64 15.80 6.19 8.18 Control Pretest M 50.17 51.50 46.00 16.17 - - - SO 6.40 7.92 12.03 5.42 - - - Posttest M 58.67 56.17 55.50 18.83-28.50 - SO 8.04 10.32 9.83 3.54-3.73 LAS = leisure attitude scale; Be = beliefs; Fe = feelings; Ac = Activities; SEI = self-esteem inventory; MF = muscular fitness; LBR = leisure behavior rating; ATT = attitude toward treatment.

STRENGTH TRAINING 73 data the result was t(9) = -3.29, p <.05, and for STD the result was t(7) = -4.62, p <.01. Both STLC and STD subjects improved significantly on the muscular fitness measure. Attitudes Toward Treatments. Results of a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the ATT data indicated that there was no significant difference between subjects on their attitudes toward their programs, F(l, 16) = 3.08, p =.098. An examination of individual responses to ATT items indicated that both groups had relatively high ratings for all items. Discussion The systematic strength training and structured leisure counseling treatment did not lead to significantly higher scores on measures of self-esteem, leisure attitudes, or leisure behaviors. However, significant gains in muscular mess were made by the experimental groups, and both groups expressed positive attitudes toward their treatment programs. Many youths in the experimental groups believed their programs were beneficial and that they were better than doing nothing; the youths felt that the programs helped them to change their attitudes and behaviors. Circumstances surrounding the conduct of this study in an institutional setting seemed to have a negative effect on the training program and may have contributed to the nonsignificant findings. As pointed out earlier, leaders sometimes used coercion to get subject participation. The group leaders' reality approach to the treatment groups stressed that students should be responsible by fulfdling their original agreements to participate in the program for 7 weeks. Initially, all the subjects appeared to choose freely to participate in the program. Perhaps leader pressure to continue strength training turned a freely chosen activity into a forced one representing work. Intrinsic motivation could have been affected negatively by the elimination of the "threshold" or "all or nothing" condition for leisure-perceived freedom (Iso-Ahola, 1980). Suggestions for recreation specialists working with delinquent youths are that combining leisure activities with counseling may have potential if students are allowed to select freely their activities and are able to determine the extent of their participation. The restrictive, controlled nature of correctional institutions makes it imperative that students be allowed to decide for themselves what they would like to do in leisure and for how long. Leisure is an ideal time-perhaps the only time for free choice to occur within the confines of a restrictive environment-and it should be used to facilitate personal growth. Interviews with students and leaders following the program revealed that students enjoyed the freedom to express themselves in the counseling and discussion sessions. Perhaps the externally imposed commitment to complete the strength training portion of the program masked or cancelled out the positive effects that may have surfaced from counseling or discussion. Lack of treatment effect may also have been due to insufficient statistical power associated with small cell sizes. Insufficient statistical power not only prevents discovery of significant differences but also prevents concluding with confidence that the treatments were not successful. In this study, institutional restrictions caused by the complex interaction of leader schedules, subject living arrangements, and intramural professional rivalries initially limited researcher access to subjects. Following are recommendations for alleviating these problems and enhancing program effects. First, try to ensure that all leaders are skilled in establishing group rap-

74 Munson, Baker, and Lundegren port by increasing their training session or bringing in previously trained leaders. Second, when possible, use group leaders who not only are appropriately skilled but also who are not involved in punitive, coercive associations with the subjects. Perhaps the best way to accomplish this goal is to use trained outsiders. Third, consider lengthening the program, especially the counseling component. Fourth, try to identify less global, more specific outcome measures such as behavioral observations. In this study, pretest scores on some measures were already in the average range. Thus, there may have been a ceiling effect. Fifth, when combining leisure with an activity, allow students to select and determine the duration, frequency, and intensity of their participation. Finally, to ensure adequate statistical power, future studies in settings similar to this one should begin with larger sample sizes. The effectiveness of leisure counseling with juvenile delinquents has yet to be determined, either alone or in conjunction with other treatments. Therefore, further research is in order. And, because certain aspects of the program created excitement for both leaders and students, this excitement may relate to positive effects that are still to be demonstrated by significant improvement on treatments and on outcome measures. ~ References Adams, G., Carter, R., Gerietti, J., Pursuit, J., & Rogers, P. (Eds.) (1979). Juvenile justice management. Springfield, IL: Thomas. Brok, A.J. (1975). Issues in leisure relevant to counseling and applied human development. Symposium presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago. Collingwood, T.R., & Engelsgjerd, M. (1977). Physical fitness, physical activity and juvenile delinquency. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation, 48, 23. Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman. Eddefonso, E., & Hartinger, W. (1976). Control, treatment and rehabilitation of offenders. Beverly Hills, CA: Glencoe. Gleuck, S., & Gleuck, E. (1974). Delinquency and crime. Springfield, IL: Thomas. Hilyer, J.C., Wilson, D.G., Dillon, C., & Caro, L. (1982). Physical fitness training and counseling as treatment for youthful offenders. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 292-303. Hitzhusen, G. (1972). Youth recreation counseling: A necessity in therapeutic recreation. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 6, 78-82. Iso-Ahola, S.E. (1980). The socialpsychology of Zeisu?e and recreation. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown. Iso-Ahola, S.E. (1981). Leisure counseling at the crossroads. The Counseling Psychologist, 9,71-74. Kazdin, A.E. (n.d.). Client expectancy for change. Unpublished survey, The Pennsylvania State University. Loesch, L.C. (1981). Leisure counseling with youth. The Counseling Psychologist, 9, 55-67. Loesch, L.C., & Wheeler, P.T. (1982). Principles of leisure counseling. Minneapolis: Educational Media. Neulinger, J. (1974). The psychology of leisure. Springfield, IL: Thomas Neulinger, J. (1981). To leisure: An introduction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Ragheb, M.G., & Beard, J.G. (1982). Measuring leisure attitude. Journal of Leisure Research, 2, 155-167. Riley, D.P. (1977). Strength training by the experts. West Point, NY: Leisure Press. Siege], L.J., & Senna, J.J. (1981). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law. St. Paul, MN: West Publ. Sonstroem, R.J. (1982). Exercise and self-esteem: Recommendation for expositoty research. Quest, 34, 124-139.