Sample Response To Assignmentin My Webinar I Chose To Discuss Cogniti ✓ Solved

In my webinar, I chose to discuss cognitivism, as presented to individuals who work with justice engaged youth. This audience would be composed of judges, attorneys – both prosecution and defense, mitigation specialists, probation officers, detention officers, intervention specialists, diversion programs and treatment providers who are involved in the judicial processes of juvenile offenders. As a mitigation specialist, I work with both adults and juveniles facing felony charges that are not pending capital punishment or the death penalty. I compose a biopsychosocial profile of the individual to advocate for reduced charges, mitigated sentences, diversion programs and interventions to reduce recidivism upon release that convicted felons can engage in during incarceration.

I work with the defense attorneys, judges, prosecutors and detention staff to assess and aid clients in this endeavor, which is why I chose this population. I plan to first introduce myself and my career, including my experience in the field. I would like to explain how my experience and job is integrated with that of the audience. For instance, how my reports are used by judges and attorneys to devise an appropriate sentence for the client that would best serve justice and society, as well as the individual. I can appeal to the detention officers, probation, and treatment providers by explaining how my report can be used to devise treatment objectives to reduce behaviors within the facility and upon release.

I would also like to review main objectives during introductions for the webinar. Following this, I plan to introduce cognitivism and the history of emergence and development from psychoanalytic theory, to behaviorism and ultimately to understanding unobservable mental processes. I reviewed an article by Woolfolk-Hoy and colleagues (2013) that discussed the shortcomings of behaviorism and how cognitivism evolved from this theoretical perspective. I also plan to refer to the article from the reading on Guercio (2020) that explains how the cognitive revolution was not necessarily a revolution as an evolution of behaviorism. Finally, I refer to Butts (2019) to provide a basic overview of cognitive theory on information processing through stages of sensory stimuli, processing, storage and retrieval, similar to a computer model.

I have several different applications from various studies to discuss that explain the versatility of cognitive treatments, assessments and applications. Many juvenile offenders struggle with substance abuse issues (Apsche, 2004), trauma exposure and PTSD (Calleja, 2019), physical and sexual abuse (Apsche, 2004), educational deficits and learning disorders (Woolfolk-Hoy, et al., 2013, Nouwens, et al., 2017) and depression or other psychological disorders (Strand, et al., 2013) that can be addressed through various types of cognitive interventions. While much of the research referred to in this presentation is not focused on juvenile offenders, it is my intention to tie each of these types of intervention into justice engaged youth.

Each child’s treatment plan should be client centered, according to the APA ethical standards (2016) and cognitive interventions allow the versatility of this population’s needs to be addressed utilizing methods and theoretical approaches of cognitivism.

Outline: Introduction · What is cognitivism · Woolfolk, et al., (2013) · Thinking, decision making, remembering, creating and problem solving · History of cognitivism · Psychoanalytic · Behaviorism · Importance of unobservable processes · Cognitive Revolution · Guercio (2020) – evolution rather than revolution · Woolfolk, et al. (2013) – innate processes regulate thought and emotion · Butts (2019) – Information processing · Diversity · Woolfolk, et al. (2013) – theory into practice · Objectives · Research · General application · Specific application to justice engaged juveniles Research · Apsche, et al. (2004) – CBT in juvenile sex offenders · Calleja (2020) – Trauma Focused CBT in justice involved juveniles · Lou (2020) – cognitive and neuroscience in civil court proceedings · Nouwens, et al., (2017) – working memory and learning deficiencies · Parong & Mayer (2020) – cognitive brain training games · Strand, et al., (2013) – depression and information processing Application · Apsche, et al. (2004) and Calleja (2020) – justice engaged youth are target population · Lou (2020) – understanding the pitfalls of eyewitness testimony and first-hand accounts · Nouwens, et al., (2017) – juveniles in custody struggle with LD and other educational barriers that can be addressed utilizing these strategies · Parong & Mayer (2020) – these tools are ineffective but other cognitive training mechanisms are effective in strengthening cognitive ability in this population · Strand, et al., (2013) – many incarcerated juveniles struggle with depression; understanding how and what type of information they are processing can aid in understanding their motivations and how best to provide services.

Conclusion · Diversity of cognitivism · Application in myriad facets of life · Application to juvenile justice.

In each of my slides, I would like to address main points of each article and the research therein. I would like to provide highlights for them to refer, with relevant visual queues on each slide. During the section on applicability, I would like to refer back to these main points with the reasons they are applicable to each level of juvenile justice. Finally, I would like summarize the webinar and provide resources for the audience to review the information independently. I don’t have any questions at this point, but I certainly welcome any criticism and suggestions on how to bolster my project.

References:

• Apsche, J. A., Evile, M. M., & Murphy, C. (2004). The thought change system an empirically based cognitive behavioral therapy for male juvenile sex offenders a pilot study. Behavior Analyst Today, 5(1).
• Butts, R. (2019). Information processing. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
• Calleja, N. G. (2020). Assessing and Treating Trauma in Detained Adolescents: A pre -post within subjects evaluation. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 29(4).
• Guercio, J. M. (2020). The importance of a deeper knowledge of the history and theoretical foundations of behaviorism and behavior therapy: Part 2—1960–1985. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice.
• Lou, Q. (2020). Legality analysis of civil litigation judgements based on cognitive neuroscience and cognitive psychology. Revista Argentina de Clànica Psicolà³gica, 29(2).
• Nouwens, S., Groen, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2017). How working memory relates to children’s reading comprehension: the importance of domain-specificity in storage and processing. Reading & Writing, 30(1).
• Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Cognitive consequences of playing brain training games in immersive virtual reality. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(1).
• Strand, M., Sà¦trevik, B., Lund, & A., Hammar, A. (2013). The relationship between residual symptoms of depression and emotional information processing. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 67(4).
• Woolfolk Hoy, A., Davis, H. A., & Anderman, E. M. (2013). Theories of learning and teaching in TIP. Theory Into Practice, 52(1), 9-21.

Paper For Above Instructions

The webinar discussed cognitivism and its application within the realm of justice-engaged youth, emphasizing its relevance for professionals involved in the juvenile justice system. Cognitivism—the understanding of mental processes—emerged as a reaction against the dominant behaviorist paradigms and highlights the importance of unobservable mental processes such as decision-making, memory, and problem-solving.

The primary goal of this webinar was to introduce cognitivism and its historical evolution from earlier psychological theories such as psychoanalysis and behaviorism. Contrary to the rigid methodologies of behaviorism, cognitivism posits that human behavior cannot be fully understood without considering internal mental processes. As explained by Woolfolk-Hoy et al. (2013), merely observing behavior fails to capture cognitive elements affecting individuals’ actions and decisions.

The cognitive revolution, which Guercio (2020) described as an evolution rather than a revolution, indicates a shift towards integrating cognitive processes into therapy and treatment. This transition is particularly relevant for justice-engaged youth, whose behaviors often stem from cognitive distortions and maladaptive thought patterns.

In clinical practice, treatments stemming from cognitivism—like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)—have shown effectiveness with diverse populations, including juvenile offenders (Apsche et al., 2004). Such individuals frequently grapple with trauma, PTSD (Calleja, 2020), and educational deficits (Woolfolk-Hoy et al., 2013; Nouwens et al., 2017). Cognitive treatments provide structured interventions tailored to meet these adolescents' needs, addressing both their psychological and behavioral anomalies.

Research consistently reveals that many juveniles are detached from academic and emotional support systems, exacerbating their behavioral issues (Strand et al., 2013). The implementation of cognitivism allows practitioners to construct individualized plans that emphasize self-reflection and critical thinking skills that can alter their path away from re-offending.

Importantly, ethical guidelines from the APA (2016) dictate that all treatment plans for juveniles should be client-centered. This aligns well with cognitive approaches, emphasizing adaptability and responsiveness to the unique needs of each individual. A client-centered approach encourages collaborative strategies through which treatment protocols can be aligned with juveniles' inputs, making therapy more effective.

In terms of practical application, the insights provided through the webinar align well with the therapeutic strategies utilized within the juvenile justice system. For example, cognitive assessments can facilitate the identification of specific cognitive distortions, which can directly impact intervention strategies used by probation and intervention specialists. Further, as discussed, addressing co-occurring issues such as substance abuse and mental health disorders using cognitive frameworks enhances rehabilitation efforts (Apsche et al., 2004; Calleja, 2020).

Looking forward, this presentation aimed to equip participants with concrete applications of cognitive theories in the juvenile justice setting. As discussed by Lou (2020), understanding the cognitive processes involved in decision-making among youth is crucial for shaping legal outcomes and improving rehabilitation. Furthermore, interventions that focus on cognitive skills development can aid in addressing educational deficits and ultimately promote better long-term outcomes for youths in custody (Nouwens et al., 2017).

The evidence presented shows that cognitive models facilitate not just understanding behavior, but also instigating meaningful change. Thus, the impact of cognitivism is seen not only in theoretical discussions but is ingrained in the functionalities of effective therapeutic frameworks within juvenile justice.

In conclusion, the relevance of cognitivism in addressing the needs of justice-engaged youth stands evident. Participants in the webinar were encouraged to apply these concepts in their professional practices, enhance collaboration across different roles within juvenile justice, and ultimately contribute to more effective rehabilitation strategies. Further exploration and adaptation of cognitive techniques signify a valuable avenue for improving juvenile justice outcomes and reducing recidivism among this vulnerable population.

References

• Apsche, J. A., Evile, M. M., & Murphy, C. (2004). The thought change system an empirically based cognitive behavioral therapy for male juvenile sex offenders a pilot study. Behavior Analyst Today, 5(1).
• Butts, R. (2019). Information processing. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
• Calleja, N. G. (2020). Assessing and Treating Trauma in Detained Adolescents: A pre -post within subjects evaluation. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 29(4).
• Guercio, J. M. (2020). The importance of a deeper knowledge of the history and theoretical foundations of behaviorism and behavior therapy: Part 2—1960–1985. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice.
• Lou, Q. (2020). Legality analysis of civil litigation judgements based on cognitive neuroscience and cognitive psychology. Revista Argentina de Clànica Psicolà³gica, 29(2).
• Nouwens, S., Groen, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2017). How working memory relates to children’s reading comprehension: the importance of domain-specificity in storage and processing. Reading & Writing, 30(1).
• Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Cognitive consequences of playing brain training games in immersive virtual reality. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(1).
• Strand, M., Sà¦trevik, B., Lund, & A., Hammar, A. (2013). The relationship between residual symptoms of depression and emotional information processing. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 67(4).
• Woolfolk Hoy, A., Davis, H. A., & Anderman, E. M. (2013). Theories of learning and teaching in TIP. Theory Into Practice, 52(1), 9-21.