Interpersonal communication among students in a state school for delinquent girls

Purpose: Interpersonal communication is the most important way to transfer ideas. The purpose of this study was to investigate the patterns of communication and the structuring influence on the campus of a State School for delinquent girls. It is thought that this study will contribute to the improvement of rehabilitation programs for children adjudicated delinquent. Method: The data for this study were taken from the 105 girls who were residents of the Brownwood State Home and School for Girls, a facility of the Texas Youth Council. The students were asked who they would choose to work with, who they would seek to verify information, and with whom they would attend a social function. Four personal attributes—namely, age, race, family income and Intelligence Quotient were involved in this interpersonal communication study. The research tried to determine if the attributes of race, age, socio-economic status and Intelligence Quotient structured communication patterns for the three types of communication, namely, work, information and social. Findings: 1. Students tended to choose other students from the same racial-ethnic background as work partners. 2. Students tended to go to other students of the same age for work partners. 3. Students tended to choose individuals with similar socio-economic background for work partners. 4. Students tended to select other students like them in intelligence level as work partners. 5. Students tended to go to other students of their own racial-ethnic groups for information. 6. Students tended to go to older students for information. 7. Students had no preference by socio-economic status for seeking information. 8. Students had no preference by intelligence for information exchange. 9. Students chose social partners from the same racial-ethnic group. 10. Students had no preference by age for social partners. 11. Students tended to choose individuals with similar socio-economic background for social partners. 12. Students tended to select other students with similar intelligence as social companions.