THE SIX-SIDED MENTORING BOX
Timothy A. Cavell, PhD
Professor and Director of Clinical Training
Department of Psychology
University of Arkansas
What I hope to cover…
—  Factors that can make or break long-term mentoring
relationships with high-risk children
—  The difficulties of socializing children at risk
—  The Six-Side Mentoring Box
—  How the framework fit my own mentoring
experiences
SAMF 5-13-14
But first, meet Andrew
—  10 years old; 5th grader
—  Diagnosed with ADHD
—  Lives with maternal
grandmother
—  Bio-dad is incarcerated
—  Bio-mom has struggled
with drugs/alcohol; has 2
younger half-siblings
—  Note: The boy in the photo is Asa
Butterfield, star of Hugo—not
Andrew!
SAMF 5-13-14
Children of incarcerated parents are at risk
— More than 1.7 million children
— At risk for emotional, behavioral, school
problems; insecure relationships
— Likely to live in disadvantaged, single
parent homes
— Caregivers often experience poor mental
and physical health
SAMF 5-13-14
Makariev & Shaver (2010)’s attachment-focused model of
processes affecting incarcerated parents and their children
“The model is necessarily complex because one of our goals is to
indicate, while maintaining high hopes for successful
interventions, that the factors impinging on children of
incarcerated parents are numerous and difficult to ameliorate.”
SAMF 5-13-14
Mentoring children of incarcerated parents
—  Poehlmann et al. (2009) studied 57 matches and found
¡  >
1/3 of terminated before 6 months
¡  30 of the 57 unavailable by 6 months
—  Reasons for terminating
¡  Child
and mentor did not hit it off
¡  Child saw mentors as a source of $, not friendship
¡  Mentor underestimated the required commitment
¡  Families moved and appointments were forgotten
—  But children with more contacts had less problem
behavior
SAMF 5-13-14
Now, meet his mentor
—  55 year-old man
—  Married, father of 3
children (22, 19, 18)
—  Clinical child/family
psychologist
—  Mentoring researcher
—  But…
—  http://vimeo.com/30197676
SAMF 5-13-14
3 key players in the mentoring relationship
¡  MENTEE
÷ Age,
factors
gender, culture/race/ethnicity
÷ Level of risk
÷ Type of risk (individual vs. environmental)
÷ Relationship history/competence
SAMF 5-13-14
Effects of Mentoring on Youth with Different Relational Profiles
Quality of
Prior
Relationships
Poor Relationships
Satisfactory but Strong
not Strong
Relationships
Overall
Academics
.00
.21***
.05
Prosocial
.04
.19*
.04
Effort
.05
.18*
.00
Self-Esteem
-.04
.07
-.01
(Schwartz, Rhodes, & Chan (2011). Developmental Psychology
SAMF 5-13-14
3 key players in the mentoring relationship (cont.)
¡  MENTOR
÷ Age,
factors
gender, culture/race/ethnicity
÷ Occupation, education, marital status
÷ Relationship history/competence
SAMF 5-13-14
Mentor Attachment & Relationship Quality
Successful*
Unsuccessful
F
Ambivalence 2.65 (0.91)
3.13 (0.97)
4.36*
Avoidance
3.05 (1.04)
3.03+
2.55 (1.22)
Note. Successful mentors had both child and mentor
ratings of relationship support above the sample mean.
* p < .05; + p < .10
SAMF 5-13-14
3 key players in the mentoring relationship (cont.)
¡ 
PROGRAM STAFF factors??
÷ Background
(e.g., age, gender)
÷ Training/education, professional experience
÷ Their relationship history/competence
÷ Skills, experience, time available for
¢  Screening mentors
¢  Training mentors
¢  Supporting mentors
÷ Understanding the challenge of forming and
sustaining a long-term mentoring relationship
with a child at risk
SAMF 5-13-14
3 Key Goals for Long-Term Mentoring
—  Can I form a relationship with my mentee?
¡  Can I start this relationship off well?
¡  Will I matter to him/her?
—  Can I maintain that relationship?
¡  Will I be able to follow through, avoid burning out?
¡  Will I continue to matter over time?
—  Can the relationship have a positive influence?
¡  How can I use the relationship as a positive force?
¡  Will I be around when it matters (critical incident mentoring)?
SAMF 5-13-14
Socialization: Two Definitions
—  For parents, teachers, mentors, &
other adults
¡ socialization
is the process
of helping children
participate in positive
contexts while limiting
their involvement in
contexts that promote
negative or deviant
behavior.
SAMF 5-13-14
Socialization: Two Definitions (cont.)
— For children,
¡ socialization is the
process of finding
and participating
in contexts that
offer
opportunities for
success and a
sense of
belonging.
SAMF 5-13-14
Implications?
—  Socialization is not a simple top-down process
(adult à child)
—  Children shape their own development
—  Children invest in contexts that offer
¡  a
sense of belonging
¡  opportunities for success
—  Parents, families, & schools compete for
children’s time and attention
—  Competition = appealing, deviant contexts
SAMF 5-13-14
Socialization Can Go Awry
SAMF 5-13-14
Children are at risk if they…
—  Struggle to access positive contexts (e.g., sports)
but can easily access deviant contexts (gangs)
—  Struggle to succeed in positive contexts (e.g.,
school) but find “success” in more deviant
contexts (e.g., hanging out)
—  Spend more time in deviant contexts than in
positive contexts
—  Children of incarcerated parents tend to carry
all of these risks
SAMF 5-13-14
Availability
of Prosocial
Contexts
Seek, Access,
and Participate
in Prosocial
Contexts
Relative Benefits of
Participating in Prosocial
vs. Deviant Contexts
Availability
of Deviant
Contexts
SAMF 5-13-14
Seek, Access,
and Participate in
Deviant Contexts
But positive contexts often require self-regulation
—  Self-regulation involves
¡  Managing
emotions
¡  Inhibiting impulsive behavior
¡  Planning and communicating
SAMF 5-13-14
And that can make it hard to fit in.
SAMF 5-13-14
Children At Risk Make Adults Look Less Positive:
Negative Parenting by Adoptive Parents
32
Mean
level of
negative
control
30
28
At risk
Non-risk
26
24
22
20
7
9
10
Age in years
SAMF 5-13-14
11
12
Some high-risk children come to view
—  Coercion as a good influence strategy
—  Interpersonal situations as win or lose
—  Other people as hostile and rejecting
—  Themselves in an overly positive light, and
—  Adults as lacking power
SAMF 5-13-14
At school, these children are
—  Socially rejected by peers
—  Disliked by teachers
—  Disengaged from school
and school work
—  At risk for dropping out
SAMF 5-13-14
Their options become…
—  Divesting from positive
contexts and investing in
deviant contexts
—  Identifying and
associating with deviant
peers
—  Engaging in delinquent
acts with peers
SAMF 5-13-14
The Risk of Early Deviant Behavior
≈75% 3 or more arrests
by age 18 years
≈ 50%
Aggressive
@ age 9-10 years
SAMF 5-13-14
Arrested
by age 14 years
Availability
of Prosocial
Contexts
SelfRegulatory
Skills
Availability
of Deviant
Contexts
SAMF 5-13-14
Seek, Access,
and Participate
in Prosocial
Contexts
Sustained
Success in
Prosocial
Contexts
Investment in
Systems of
Shared,
Prosocial
Commerce
Relative Benefits of
Participating in Prosocial
vs. Deviant Contexts
Seek, Access,
and Participate in
Deviant Contexts
Antisocial
Behavior
Long-Term Mentoring
—  Outcomes depend on
match length and strength
—  Managing the mentor-
mentee relationship, over
time, becomes critical
—  Needed is a plan for
sustaining mentors over the
long haul
SAMF 5-13-14
SAMF 5-13-14
The 6-Sided Mentoring Box?
—  Accepting
—  Containing
(Relationship
Conditions)
—  Leading
—  -------------- ► --------—  Goals
—  Structure
—  Health
SAMF 5-13-14
(Relationship
Foundations)
Relationship Foundations: Goals
—  Are your goals workable? Are your expectations
realistic?
—  Gettings & Wilson (2014)
¡ 5-item measure of commitment predicted
whether mentors stayed or left
¡ A better predictor than satisfaction with the
relationship
¡ Sample items
÷ I
want our relationship to last as long as possible. ÷ I am committed to maintaining my relationship with my
mentee. SAMF 5-13-14
Relationship Foundations: Structure
—  Routines – predictable visits
—  Rules – what won’t happen during a visit
—  Roles – clear boundaries, vertical relationship
—  Rituals – structured activities that have special
meaning for mentees
SAMF 5-13-14
Relationship Foundations: Health
—  The foundation of good, long-term mentoring
—  Prevents burn out
—  Recognizes mentoring as a relationship that is
¡  Long
term
¡  Has costs
÷ Emotional
÷ Financial
÷ Time
SAMF 5-13-14
Relationship Conditions: Accepting
—  A consistent message that mentees are valued; they
matter to you; they are worth your time
—  The default mode of mentoring
—  Often relies on the principle of “Less is more”
—  What does acceptance look like?
¡ 
The Story of Little Raccoon and Standing Tree
SAMF 5-13-14
Relationship Conditions: Containing
—  A clear message that certain behaviors are not
allowed
—  Effective limit setting usually means raising the cost
of misbehavior while also increasing the value of a
more positive behavior
—  But limit setting must also be selective, at least a 4:1
ratio of positive to negative interactions
SAMF 5-13-14
Relationship Conditions: Leading
—  Looms large when your relationship is going well
—  Think of leading as 3 types of carrying
¡  Carry the water (support)
¡  Carry a message (values)
¡  Carry your self (example)
The 3rd Option
I noticed you __________.
¡  I believe __________.
¡  STOP
¡ 
SAMF 5-13-14
So what about me and Andrew?
—  Goals?
—  Structuring?
—  Health?
—  Accepting?
—  Containing?
—  Leading?
SAMF 5-13-14
My Initial Goals
—  Try to form a relationship that matters to Andrew
—  Specific goals
¡  Like
him
¡  Like what he likes
¡  Try to make each visit have more positive than
negative emotional experiences
SAMF 5-13-14
Structure?
—  Routines – Cici’s or McDonald’s
—  Rules – Safety, seat belts
—  Roles – Collaborative but still hierarchical
—  Rituals– FM 105.7
SAMF 5-13-14
Health
—  Giving to Andrew
¡  Time, fun, attention
¡  Acceptance
÷  “50
and boring”
÷  “fish in the sea”
—  But also giving to Tim
¡  My marriage
¡  My family
¡  My work
¡  My exercise
¡  My friends
SAMF 5-13-14
Leading?
—  What did he see?
¡  My family
¡  My friends
¡  My work
¡  How I treated others
—  What did he think ?
¡  Who knows?
¡  “You have a weird voice mail message”
¡  “I’m with him” (at HS basketball game with my son)
SAMF 5-13-14
Was I Accepting? The #s after 4 months
—  2 (# of Halloween shops visited first outing)
—  2 (# of hours spent looking for his costume)
—  1.5 (# of hours I researched Dragon Ball Z)
—  4 (# of weeks my background picture was à)
—  3 (# of sporting events attended)
—  2.5 (# of hours spent at Chuck E Cheese)
—  3.5 (# of hours spent at the roller skating rink)
—  2.25 (cost of the big order of fries he ordered
at our last visit)
—  6 (# of fries he actually ate)
SAMF 5-13-14
Containing: Only 2 issues
—  Knowing where he was
—  Throwing
¡ Rocks
¡ F
SAMF 5-13-14
bombs
So, did I meet my initial goal? Did I matter to Andrew?
—  Clues against
¡  Skating hiatus
¡  “Na”
¡  Moved away
—  Clues for
¡  In the window, “Sup?”
¡  Real Steel
¡  “Had fun hanging out”
¡  Asked for me again
SAMF 5-13-14
Contact Information
Timothy A. Cavell, PhD
Professor & Director of Clinical Training
Department of Psychology
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701
479/575-4256
479/575-3219 (fax)
[email protected]
SAMF 5-13-14