Elien Neimeijer

125 showing a responsive attitude (Knotter, 2019). Implications for future research It was not possible to derive causal relations between group climate, aggressive incidents and coercive measures, because of the cross-sectional design which we employed in our studies. Further studies with a longitudinal design are needed to explore causality be- tween group climate, aggressive incidents and coercive measures. The relation between perceived repression and aggression, and between aggression and coercive measures makes it clear that there is an urgency for further research on this topic. It seems nec- essary to develop interventions which target not only the aggressive incidents of indi- viduals with MID-BIF, but also focus on group climate and work climate factors and on multidisciplinary collaboration to meet the complex needs and behaviour of this target group. This might reduce the use of coercive measures. Dealing with this highly context-dependent target group places high demands on sociotherapists’ professional behaviour and knowledge, attitude and competences of all professionals involved Future studies might also explore from an ecological theoretical perspective (Bronfen- brenner, 1979; Olivier-Pijpers, 2020) how various aspects on different system levels (onto-, micro-, meso-, macro- and chronosystem) influence (aggressive) behaviour from clients and the use of coercive measures on the living group. If we want to understand the quality of group climate in relation to aggressive behaviour of clients and the use of coercive measures, it is necessary that the surrounding systems are taken into account. In the first place by examining how work climate or team climate factors (such as team functioning and leadership) interact with aggressive behaviour and the use of coercive measures. 3. Key finding three: Group climate is a dynamic concept in which sociotherapists must continuously attune their actions to the ambivalent signals of clients Although different theoretical frameworks have shown to be useful within forensic care (see chapter 1), it remains difficult to translate these frameworks from general direc- tions to specific guidance for the unique client in his or her specific context. The type of support offered in a secure forensic setting for individuals with MID-BIF does not fit