Thinking for a Change 4.0 (T4C) is an integrated cognitive behavioral change program authored by Jack Bush, Ph.D., Barry Glick, Ph.D., and Juliana Taymans, Ph.D., under a cooperative agreement with the National Institute of Corrections (NIC). T4C incorporates research from cognitive restructuring theory, social skills development, and the learning and use of problem solving skills.
Last reviewed: 2024
Intended Outcomes:
Development of social skills and problem-solving skills.
Continuum of Care:
Indicated Prevention
Topic Areas:
Disruptive Behaviors
Ages:
Adult (25+), Young Adult (19-24)
Geographic Locations:
Rural, Urban
Delivery Settings:
Congregate Care Facility
Cultural Considerations:
Limited research found involving diverse populations
Audience:
The program is designed to be provided to justice-involved adults and youth, males and females.
Credentials:
T4C is provided by corrections professionals in prisons, jails, detention centers, community corrections, probation, and parole settings.
Manuals:
Yes
Is Training Required?
Yes, see developer info
Who can provide the required training?
A certified/qualified trainer. Visit the following site for more information: https://t4c.nicic.gov/t4c-facilitator/thinking-change-40
Program Costs (materials, training, etc.):
No
Program/Practice Website:
https://nicic.gov/resources/nic-library/web-items/thinking-change-40
Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research:
Golden, L. S., Gatchel, R. J., & Cahill, M. A. (2006). Evaluating the Effectiveness of the National Institute of Corrections’ “Thinking for a Change” Program Among Probationers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 43(2), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1300/
Hinsberger, M., Holtzhausen, L., Sommer, J., Kaminer, D., Elbert, T., Seedat, S., Wilker, S., Crombach, A., & Weierstall, R. (2017). Feasibility and effectiveness of narrative exposure therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy in a context of ongoing violence in South Africa. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 9(3), 282–291. https://doi.org/10.1037/
Hinsberger, M., Holtzhausen, L., Sommer, J., Kaminer, D., Elbert, T., Seedat, S., Augsburger, M., Schauer, M., & Weierstall, R. (2020). Long-term effects of psychotherapy in a context of continuous community and gang violence: Changes in aggressive attitude in high-risk South African adolescents. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 48(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/
LaPlant, E. G., Bellair, P. E., Kowalski, B. R., Addison, D., & Starr, S. (2021). Assessing the Delivery of the Thinking for a Change Program in Modified Formats: An Experimental Approach. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 65(8), 832–857. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Lowenkamp, C. T., Hubbard, D., Makarios, M. D., & Latessa, E. J. (2009). A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of Thinking for a Change: A “Real-World” Application. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(2), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Wilson, A. B., Phillips, J., L. Villodas, M., Parisi, A., Dohler, E., & Ginley, C. (2023). Assessing the Potential Efficacy of an Intervention for Incarcerated People With Mental Illness. Psychiatric Services, 74(10), 1072–1076. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.
Additional Sources:
https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedprograms/thinking-change
WV Rating:
Supported by Research
»WV Ratings Info
Rationale for Rating:
Thinking for Change is intended for use in small groups with incarcerated adults or adults on parole. There are no peer reviewed studies conducted in USA with adolescents. The indicated population studied was consistently male at study rates of 70-100%. The program did tend to demonstrate statistically significant changes in social problem solving skills, interpersonal problem solving, criminal thinking, severity of aggression in the majority of studies. In studies tracking recidivism, most showed no statistically significant change in those rates. As Thinking for Change states program intended outcomes are social skills development and problem solving skills, we rated the program accordingly. It should be noted that multiple studies with positive outcomes excluded persons with active substance use, unstable mental illness, or history of serious mental illness. This program would best be used with the specific population for which it was researched.
Contraindications or Concerns:
None identified
Other Registries/Ratings
The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare:
Not On Registry
Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development:
Not On Registry
Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness:
Promising
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Model Programs Guide:
Not On Registry
Washington State Institute for Public Policy:
Found on the registry. See link for more information.
Washington State Institute for Public Policy Registry Link:
https://www.wsipp.wa.gov/BenefitCost/Program/1034