The Effect of a Self-Compassionate Mindfulness Psychoeducation Program Implemented in Prison on Internalized Stigma, Emotion Regulation, and Forgiveness in Juvenile Delinquents

1. Type of the Study This study was conducted using a single-blind, randomized controlled experimental design. 2. Location and Time of the Study This study was carried out between March 2025 and May 2025 with adolescents in solitary confinement who had been driven to delinquency, in the Kavak Juvenile and Youth Closed Penal Institution located in Kavak district, Samsun province. The institution consists of two separate units, Block A and Block B, with a total capacity of 350 individuals and accepted its first inmates in 2022. The Kavak Juvenile and Youth Closed Penal Institution holds the distinction of being the first and only juvenile and youth closed penal facility in the Black Sea Region.

The self-compassionate mindfulness psychoeducation program was conducted in the group workroom located within the institution. 3. Study Population and Sample The population of the study consisted of adolescents in solitary confinement in the aforementioned penal institution, while the sample was composed of individuals meeting the study inclusion criteria. The sample size was calculated using the G\*Power 3.1 program. For the variable of internalized stigma, mean scores were taken as 106.67±29.48 (group 1) and 90.00±16.91 (group 2). Based on these values, with a 95% confidence interval, 5% margin of error, 0.98 effect size, and 95% power, the required sample size was calculated to be 56.

For the variable of emotion regulation, mean scores were 2.25±0.78 (measurement-1) and 1.91±0.75 (measurement-2) . With the same confidence interval and error rate, but a 0.45 effect size and 90% power, the required sample size was calculated as 54.

For the forgiveness variable, mean scores were 57.92±13.34 (group-1) and 48.95±9.37 (group-2) , with a 0.78 effect size and 85% power, yielding a required sample size of 62.

Based on these calculations, the target sample size was determined as 62 participants (31 in the experimental group and 31 in the control group). Considering possible dropouts, the study aimed to include 68 participants (34 in each group), including approximately 10% as reserves.

Adolescents who met the inclusion criteria were assigned to the experimental or control groups based on the institution's physical layout. Participants in Block A were randomly assigned to the experimental group, and those in Block B were randomly assigned to the control group using a simple randomization method.

The psychoeducation program for the experimental group was conducted weekly in three separate group sessions at different time slots. Each session was limited to a maximum of 11-12 participants, and groups were planned in a way to ensure that they would not see each other.

Inclusion Criteria

Literacy

Ability to speak and understand Turkish

Aged between 12 and 18

Convicted and currently incarcerated

Willingness to participate in the study

Exclusion Criteria

Unwillingness to participate

Diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder that may disrupt group dynamics

Younger than 12 or older than 18

Having a physical disability that may affect participation (e.g., hearing or speech impairment)

Withdrawal Criteria

Requesting to withdraw during the study

Not participating in at least one of the pre- or post-tests

Failure to attend all sessions

Ending of solitary confinement before the study concludes 4. Randomization and Blinding To prevent bias and increase internal validity, the processes of randomization and blinding were structured based on the institution's physical layout. The institution comprises two blocks (A and B), which were used as the basis for randomization. A total of 68 eligible adolescents were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups based on their blocks. From Block A, 34 participants were randomly selected for the experimental group, and from Block B, 34 were selected for the control group using simple randomization.

Block assignments were made without considering individual characteristics, and capacity equality between blocks was ensured for homogeneity. The physical separation of the blocks enabled effective blinding, preventing direct contact between the groups and ensuring participants were unaware of each other's group affiliation.

Data collected were coded as Group A and Group B and entered into SPSS. An independent statistician analyzed the coded data. After the analysis and reporting were completed, group codes were revealed. Thus, selection bias, statistical bias, and detection bias were controlled. 5. Variables of the Study Dependent Variables

Level of Internalized Stigma

Level of Emotion Regulation

Level of Forgiveness

Independent Variable

Self-Compassionate Mindfulness Psychoeducation Program

Control Variables

Age

Type of Offense 6. Data Collection Tools Data were collected using the "Adolescent Demographic Information Form," "Emotion Regulation Scale for Children and Adolescents," "Forgiveness Scale for Adolescents," and the "Internalized Stigma Scale for Children and Adolescents."

6.1. Adolescent Demographic Information Form This form was developed based on the literature and includes questions about age and type of offense .

6.2. Emotion Regulation Scale for Children and Adolescents

Developed by Phillips and Power 2007 and validated in Turkish by Yıldız and Duy 2014. It consists of 18 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale and has four subscales:

Internal Functional Emotion Regulation (IFER)

External Functional Emotion Regulation (EFER)

Internal Dysfunctional Emotion Regulation (IDER)

External Dysfunctional Emotion Regulation (EDER) Higher scores indicate more frequent use of the respective regulation strategy. Test-retest reliability coefficients range between 0.51 and 0.70.