<p>The purpose of the study was, with initial position from two particular youth homes, to survey the staff’s experiences regarding different youth cultures that might occur at the institutions and how they react to them. The question formulations were as follows: What kind of youth cultures might occur at the institution and how are they being expressed, according to some of the staff members? How do the same staff members, individually, see their role and prospect to influence the type of youth culture that is developing on the institution? Earlier research in the field were used as theoretical starting positions as well as the concepts of “looking-glass self“, “the generalized other” and ”the overtaking of roles” in the symbolic-interactionism. Qualitative research interviews were carried through with three of the employees at the two youth homes and the results of the study evinced that both positive and negative youth cul-tures develops at both of the institutions, concluding the fact that youths affect each other both ways. The results of the positive culture is that the youths identifies themselves with other youths, support each other and by comprehending more might change their attitude toward different matters. The negative culture might be expressed with youths who bring their trou-bles to the institution, youths who discuss divergent subjects within the group, exposure to bad influence which leads to negative behaviour. Henceforth, the personnel considered that they have a propitious potential to influence the youths and the conditions between them. It was deemed crucial that the personnel group acted alike and kept a jointly approach toward the youths.</p>

The purpose of the study was, with initial position from two particular youth homes, to survey the staff’s experiences regarding different youth cultures that might occur at the institutions and how they react to them. The question formulations were as follows: What kind of youth cultures might occur at the institution and how are they being expressed, according to some of the staff members? How do the same staff members, individually, see their role and prospect to influence the type of youth culture that is developing on the institution? Earlier research in the field were used as theoretical starting positions as well as the concepts of “looking-glass self“, “the generalized other” and ”the overtaking of roles” in the symbolic-interactionism. Qualitative research interviews were carried through with three of the employees at the two youth homes and the results of the study evinced that both positive and negative youth cul-tures develops at both of the institutions, concluding the fact that youths affect each other both ways. The results of the positive culture is that the youths identifies themselves with other youths, support each other and by comprehending more might change their attitude toward different matters. The negative culture might be expressed with youths who bring their trou-bles to the institution, youths who discuss divergent subjects within the group, exposure to bad influence which leads to negative behaviour. Henceforth, the personnel considered that they have a propitious potential to influence the youths and the conditions between them. It was deemed crucial that the personnel group acted alike and kept a jointly approach toward the youths.