The purpose of this dissertation was to expand the understanding of youth in psychiatric residential treatment facilities by using psychosocial indicators to develop subgroup profiles. Additionally, differences in treatment outcomes between subgroups and the extent to which within-treatment factors accounted for observed differences in treatment outcomes between subgroups were examined. Data were extracted from the case records of 447 youth who were served in psychiatric residential treatment facilities over a seven year span of time. A latent class analysis was used to identify and describe subgroups. A series of multivariate regression analyses were used to examine group differences in functional impairment at discharge. Next, a path analysis was used to determine if there were differences in average change in functional impairment from admission to discharge between subgroups and to test within treatment factors as potential mediators of group differences. Finally, a logistic regression was used to determine if there were differences between groups in the probability of discharging to a community-based placement or discharging to another congregate care facility. The latent class analysis revealed four distinct subgroups of youth. The analyses of treatment outcomes revealed statistically significant differences in the level of functional impairment at discharge and average change in impairment between groups. Results from the path model of indirect effects supported that within treatment factors accounted for a statistically significant proportion of the observed difference in change between groups. No differences were found in discharge placement outcomes between groups. Implications for future research, practice and policies focused on youth in residential treatment are discussed.

Magister Artium - MA (Psychology) / Honours students in Psychology typically form larger cohorts with numbers ranging from 20 to 40 students in comparison to other disciplines that have fewer than 10 students in a cohort. The National Qualifications Framework (NQF) requires Honours students to complete a thesis that is equivalent to 300 notional hours or 30 credits. The learning outcome is that students conduct low level research that prepares them for conceptualizing, executing and writing up a research project. The thesis requirement should also prepare them for future studies. The larger cohorts and revised NQF thesis requirement places increased pressure on the staff compliment of Psychology departments. Some of the ways in which departments have attempted to cope with this increased demand include conducting group-based research projects, and secondary research projects. One of the concerns raised is whether these particular types of methodology prepared students adequately for reactive research in further studies. This study aimed to explore students' subjective perceptions about the extent to which group-based systematic review methodology in the Honours year adequately prepared students for conducting research during their masters-level studies. An explorative study was conducted to explore the experiences of purposively selected recent graduates from two identified Honours programmes that have progressed to Masters level studies. Participants were invited on the basis of being graduates or alumni rather than their registration status as Masters students at particular universities.