No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Twelve People Who Saved Rehabilitation: How the Science of Criminology Made a Difference
Abstract
Three decades ago, it was widely believed by criminologists and policymakers that “nothing works” to reform offenders and that “rehabilitation is dead” as a guiding correctional philosophy. By contrast, today there is a vibrant movement to reaffirm rehabilitation and to implement programs based on the principles of effective intervention. How did this happen? I contend that the saving of rehabilitation was a contingent reality that emerged due to the efforts of a small group of loosely coupled research criminologists. These scholars rejected the “nothing works” professional ideology and instead used rigorous science to show that popular punitive interventions were ineffective, that offenders were not beyond redemption, and that treatment programs rooted in criminological knowledge were capable of meaningfully reducing recidivism. Their story is a reminder that, under certain conditions, the science of criminology is capable of making an important difference in the correctional enterprise, if not far beyond.
... Most recently, correctional rehabilitation has transitioned into an era of 'reaffirming rehabilitation' (Cullen, 2006(Cullen, , 2007 that has focused on identifying 'what works.' This era has been defined by the collective effort of a number of scholars (see Cullen, 2005) pushing back on 'nothing works' rhetoric and empirically establishing the specific elements of effective treatment (Lipsey & Cullen, 2007;Smith et al., 2009) and public support for rehabilitative efforts (Blevins et al., 2007;Nagin et al., 2006.) These recent developments have led to celebratory declarations that rehabilitation has been saved and that the science of criminology played a critical role in its resurgence (Cullen, 2005). ...
... This era has been defined by the collective effort of a number of scholars (see Cullen, 2005) pushing back on 'nothing works' rhetoric and empirically establishing the specific elements of effective treatment (Lipsey & Cullen, 2007;Smith et al., 2009) and public support for rehabilitative efforts (Blevins et al., 2007;Nagin et al., 2006.) These recent developments have led to celebratory declarations that rehabilitation has been saved and that the science of criminology played a critical role in its resurgence (Cullen, 2005). Since rehabilitation has been renewed as a guiding correctional principle, the field has progressed to debating how to best achieve this outcome. ...
At this point it is clear that the pursuit of the rehabilitative ideal is stitched into the DNA of American corrections. However, in our collective quest to establish and defend ‘what works,’ correctional rehabilitation has lingered in a state of preoccupation with risks, deficits, and individual pathology. The framework of Positive Psychology provides an alluring blueprint for an approach to correctional rehabilitation where people are not considered different humans who are reduced to their deficits and their worst decisions. In the current paper we explore the possibilities of incorporating the principles of Positive Psychology into correctional rehabilitation to help promote a notion of correctional success that is more dynamic, humanizing, and inclusive. We begin by discussing the development, progression, and current state of correctional rehabilitation. We then turn to discussing the development, progression, and current state of Positive Psychology, suggesting that there is a missed opportunity in applying its principles to people who are impacted by the criminal justice system. We conclude with a section discussing the opportunities and challenges of bringing correctional rehabilitation and Positive Psychology together.
... As such, as time progressed, the presidents increasingly used their platform to call for more macro analysis (we shall elaborate more on this point later). In this respect, it appears that a sizeable number of the Presidential Addresses react directly and indirectly-and both positively and negatively-to the managerial movement and the dominant pragmatic evidence-based research paradigm (see, e.g., the following addresses: Belknap, 2015;Chilton, 2001;Clear, 2010;Cullen, 2005;Farrington, 2000;Laub, 2004;Sherman, 2003;Skolnick, 1995;Wellford, 1997;Zahn, 1999). For example, these thoughts from Francis T. Cullen and Todd R. Clear: ...
... The average weight of this factor in the last period of the study (2013-2017) is very close to its average at the end of the 1980s, with a peak towards the end of the millennium. All told, a sizable proportion of the addresses (see, Belknap, 2015;Blumstein, 1993;Chilton, 2001;Cullen, 2005;Peterson, 2017;Skolnick, 1995;Tonry, 2008;Wellford, 1997) include a call to roll back or even reverse the current penal agenda. But, from the general low ranking of this factor over the years, it is also clear that the presidents are by no means the main driving force against these developments and programs, most notably, capital punishment and mass incarceration. ...
The field of criminology has experienced rapid growth in the last three decades. During this time the field has become institutionally independent, but at the same time, the impact of criminological research on policy has been declining in the face of a populist punitive turn. These developments call for a reflexive introspective account of the state of the discipline. Using qualitative methods, we analyse the Presidential Addresses given at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology (ASC) over 30 years. This analysis yields factors that pertain to normative questions, research orientations, and policy that speak to the state of the field today. We assess changes in the relative weights of these factors over time, corresponding to changes and historical developments in world affairs. In addition, we compare the ASC addresses to a limited number of recently published addresses given at the annual meetings of the European Society of Criminology. Our results critically expose trends and tensions in criminology, and point to a rise in the importance attributed to “big picture” analysis, with increasing attention to normative considerations and social context.
... The ACJS and the ASC presidents concur that both organizations, and criminology as a discipline, have not been particularly effective in shaping crime policy in the U.S. (McCord, 1990). There is also consensus that the efforts of individual criminologists, the policy recommendations made by the ACJS, and the ASC may be futile if politicians willfully ignore sound research and act in their political interests (Cullen, 2005). The presidents of the ACJS and the ASC have opined that both organizations should take a position on crime and policy matters rather than leaving the business of implementation of findings from crime-related research to politicians. ...
... One could argue that criminologists have an obligation to ensure that published results are substantively important and that the claim being made in a research paper is warranted (Gorard 2014). As discussed below, this kind of assessment ought to be performed to justify calling criminology a science -and certainly, those unwilling to classify criminology as involving a scientific approach to the etiology of crime (at least in the social science sense) are likely to object to the idea of ZC (for discussions of criminology and science see for example , Cullen 2005;Davie 2005;Jeffery 1959). The focus of the present work on identifying criminological zombies is not meant to imply that all aspects of criminology are a science. ...
This manuscript introduces zombie criminology (ZC). ZC draws upon zombie arguments made in other disciplines (e.g. physics), and makes reference to historical/cultural meanings associated with zombies. ZC argues that there are living-dead etiological explanations within criminology with empirically weak, inconsistent, and contradictory support. These living-dead zombie explanations live an unconscious existence within the criminological landscape, and in so doing shape the scope of etiological criminology and the knowledge base of criminology. The purpose of ZC is to identify criminological zombies to facilitate ‘cleaning up’ the criminological literature and performing disciplinary boundary maintenance by putting zombie explanations to rest. Zombie arguments allow numerous, conflicting, empirically weak explanations of crime to coexist and compete for attention, impacting disciplinary knowledge. This article explores the meaning of zombie ideas relative to normal science, paradigms, and ideological commitments. Doing ZC requires the conscious efforts of active criminologists to identify and ‘kill’ zombie explanations. A handful of initial examples of zombie explanations in criminology are provided, with a more extensive examples focused on super-predator and race-crime research.
... The most promising seem to be programs delivered in an individual format over multiple sessions (Carney & Myers, 2012). In particular for young offenders, provisions by healthcare and social services are likely to be more helpful than fining (Cullen, 2005;Sandøy et al., 2022). ...
Aims: Involvement in minor drug offences at an early age can be a signal of the onset of a potential drug issue. This is why Sweden has considered the criminalization of personal use as a strategy to deter the progression of drug use. This study investigated how the judiciary and social services succeed in identifying and providing support to adolescents convicted of drug offences. Methods: Characteristics of all 15–17-year-olds convicted of offences against the Act on Penal Law on Narcotics (drug offence) in 2017 were examined using Swedish longitudinal registry data ( N = 1847). Furthermore, the decision process rendering different legal responses was examined by use of social services files for a subsample of 189 adolescents. Results: About two-thirds of the adolescents had their first conviction for the index offence and the majority received legal responses consisting of rehabilitative measures. Background factors indicated that those with severe drug and criminal issues encounter risk factors relating to their upbringing (e.g., neuropsychiatric disorders were notably more prevalent in this group than among similar peers). Around 61% of adolescents were reconvicted for new drug offences during the three-year study period, but with variations among subgroups. Younger boys who received rehabilitative measures had lower reconviction rates compared to those without. Conclusions: Addressing the underlying factors contributing to adolescent drug offences requires a multifaceted approach that prioritizes early intervention, personalized support, and collaboration across systems to promote positive outcomes and reduce recidivism rates.
... Ya en el siglo XX, y con posterioridad a los antecedentes forenses impregnados de psicoanálisis de Luis Jiménez de Asúa (1889Asúa ( -1970 o César Camargo (1880-1965) y a la obra de Emilio Mira y López (1896-1964), señalamos con otros (Garrido, 1982;Redondo, 2006) Pero, mientras en España se llevaba a cabo la reforma penitenciaria e impulsaba el tratamiento psicológico en las prisiones, el ideal rehabilitador se sumía en una crisis más que epistémica bajo la etiqueta de hagamos lo que hagamos para rehabilitar al delincuente, "nada funciona" (Cullen, 2013;Garland, 2005). Pesimismo contrarrestado por el liderazgo adquirido de un grupo de psicólogos partícipes en la denominada escuela canadiense de rehabilitación (Cullen, 2005;Cullen y Gendreau, 2006), cuya identificación de cuatro factores predictores de la reincidencia (cogniciones antisociales, redes y vínculos antisociales, historial de comportamiento antisocial, patrón de personalidad antisocial) condujo a trazar el modelo Riesgo-Necesidad-Responsividad sustentado en lo criminal, rehabilitador y tecnológico como componentes centrales (Bonta y Andrews, 2024). ...
... Critics have raised concerns that RNR was punitive and 'doing things to' offenders rather than 'with' them, a notion that is not only currently incorrect but also historically inaccurate (Cullen, 2005). It is crucial to remind the reader that cognitive-behavioural therapy, one of RNR's preferred methods, is entirely collaborative and empowering (Beck, 2021). ...
... Contemporary rehabilitative theory and practice, in contrast, targets specific criminal traits through interventions, for instance through risk and needs assessment. [22] In what follows the discussion shifts to early Christian penology, which manifests continuity regarding the antiretributive stance evidenced in Plato. In the New Testament, as well as in other early Christian texts, we find mentions of the retributive conception of justice. ...
... Francis Cullen (2005) listou 12 estudiosos que, com base em ciência estrita, demonstraram que intervenções punitivistas populares eram inefetivas, mas que os ofensores podiam ser resgatados por meio de programas de atendimentos baseados no conhecimento criminológico, que tinham potencial para reduzir a reincidência. ...
O presente trabalho tem como objetivo analisar qualitativa e quantitativamente os critérios utilizados pelos magistrados na definição da medida socioeducativa e a importância de a decisão judicial ser fundamentada em evidências. Com base em uma pesquisa empírica, verificou-se a discricionariedade dos juízes, a disparidade de tratamento tanto na forma como no rigor na aplicação das medidas socioeducativas e a não utilização de um instrumento de avaliação de risco e necessidades, o que acarreta uma prevalência do viés punitivista em detrimento do ressocializador, além da subvalorização de fatores associados à reincidência. A adoção de um instrumental é medida premente que pode contribuir para a efetividade das medidas socioeducativas, potencializando a integração social do adolescente e a garantia de seus direitos individuais e sociais.
... It could happen in both correctional settings where a prisoner completes their sentence, or in community settings where individual offenders experience positive reinforcement through community-based activities [64] and volunteer activities [82]. The field of criminology has existed for hundreds of years, and yet it has taken researchers and policymakers decades to recognize the philosophy and benefits of rehabilitation over punishments [23]. ...
... Skirtingais laikotarpiais resocializacijos idėja buvo vertinama skirtingai, t. y. XX a. nuo šeštojo iki septintojo dešimtmečio pateisinta kaip veikianti (Garland, 2001), aštuntame dešimtmetyje pripažinta kaip neveikianti (,,nothing works" doktrina) (Martinson, 1974) ir XXI a. reabilituota keliant klausimus, kas veikia ir kokie resocializacijos metodai yra tinkami skirtingoms nuteistųjų grupėms bei kokiomis aplinkybėmis ir sąlygomis šie metodai yra veiksmingiausi (Cullen, 2005). Galiausiai, vėl sukritikuota klausiant, ar apskritai resocializacija gali būti sėkmingai įgyvendinama įkalinimo įstaigose (Christie, 1999;1981;Mathiesen, 2006;Sykes, 2007). ...
Lithuania‘s strategic documents point out that the main purpose of the execution of sentences is the resocialisation of convicts. The article analyses the problems and possibilities of the implementation of resocialisation of convicts in Lithuanian prisons today, based on the ideas of positivist and critical criminology. The research comprised an analysis of scientific literature and strategic documents in Lithuania, and an empirical qualitative study, which included twenty semistructured interviews with Lithuanian prison staff and experts from the penitentiary system. The data analysis was based on thematic analysis. The study reveals that resocialisation as a priority becomes a secondary goal of imprisonment during implementation, pursued in a demotivating and desocialising prison environment and punitive culture. The gap between the prison‘s stated objectives of resocialising prisoners and the human and financial capacity to achieve this is noted. Positivist and critical criminology ideas broaden the perception and analysis of resocialisation as a phenomenon and make it possible to rethink the functional and institutional distinction between the punishment of convicted persons and their treatment, assistance, and motivated personal transformation as different activities. The study suggests that the success of resocialisation of an individual requires the disaggregation and implementation of the stages of resocialisation, not only in prison but also in institutions that focus on helping without retribution and punishment.
... white men make up most positions of prestige and receive the most prestigious research awards in the largest U.S. scholarly organization in criminology (Chesney-Lind & Chagnon, 2016). Even among the twelve people who saved rehabilitation through their commitment to science (Cullen, 2005 In this chapter I adopt the posture of a constructively critical friend who is also a bit apologetic. For years, I have tried to champion What Works, especially as it relates to application of good social cognitive interventions to change offenders. ...
Engaging with the voices of people who live and work in prisons and jails could include their perspective on what is ‘known’ in correctional research. Theories, programs, and policies based on the evidence for what works to reduce recidivism could produce an artificial ceiling for the potential impact of our correctional system and, worse, could unintentionally produce harm to the people who live and work within it. Including people most impacted by the problem in developing solutions could bring together the inside knowledge of lived experience with the outside knowledge of what works to produce a more complete approach for corrections moving forward. I explore the possibility of improving the integration of lived experience with evidence-based corrections through a critical examination of the concept of risk in corrections. The current metric of system success is reduced recidivism as achieved through individual risk reduction. A reimagined definition of correctional success could be achieved by putting the people back in to leverage both research and experience. I end with a reflection on how my own professional lived experience has changed the way that I think about and approach my work as a scholar.
... Joan and her colleagues, therefore, concluded that ISP was effective as an intermediate sanction (Petersilia & Turner 1993b, Turner 2020; see also Petersilia & Turner 1990a,c, 1993aTurner et al. 1992; for follow-up study, see Deschenes et al. 1995). Joan's work on this study led Frank Cullen to name her as one of the twelve people who saved rehabilitation because the evaluation science showing that ISP did not reduce recidivism likely reduced ISP's future use (Cullen 2005). ...
This review focuses on the life and career of Joan Petersilia, one of the most important corrections scholars of the past fifty years. The article discusses her formative years, her career spanning from college through her final appointment at Stanford Law School, her major research projects, and her impact on policy, practice, and the academic field of criminology. For more than forty years, Joan chose to do research that affected the real world, treating policymakers and practitioners as equal partners in efforts to improve the implementation of justice, especially that occurring postconviction. Her unique style allowed her to easily communicate the ideas and research from academe to a wide range of audiences, including the general public, policymakers, and practitioners. By doing so, Joan made a significant impact on the criminal justice system and was recognized for her body of work by receiving the 2014 Stockholm Prize, arguably the most prestigious recognition in criminology.
Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 7 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
... This change in findings from "nothing works" to now having repositories devoted to disseminating information on the effectiveness of prevention programs and practices is the result of both major improvements in the quality of evaluation research and improved program design and implementation (MacDonald 2023). These disciplinary developments clearly signal a commitment to the development, organization, and dissemination of evidence to inform policy, a commitment that is similarly reflected in the addresses of many past presidents of the ASC (see, e.g., Clear 2010, Cullen 2005, Nagin 2022, Petersilia 1991, Rosenfeld 2011, Skolnick 1995). Yet despite these developments and disciplinary discourse, we have a long and challenging road ahead. ...
The relevance of criminology to matters of public policy has been hotly debated throughout the history of the discipline. Yet time and again, we have borne witness to the consequences of harmful criminal justice practices that do little to reduce crime or improve the lives of our most vulnerable populations. Given the urgent need for evidence-informed responses to the problems that face our society, we argue here that criminologists can and should have a voice in the process. Accordingly, this review describes challenges and prospects for evidence-informed policymaking on matters of crime and justice. In terms of challenges, we review discourse on what constitutes evidence, issues with providing guidance under conditions of causal uncertainty, and practical constraints on evidence-informed policymaking. For prospects, we consider the important roles of institutional support, graduate training, and multiple translational strategies for the evidence-informed movement. Finally, we end with several considerations for advancing translational criminology through expanded promotion and tenure criteria, curricula revision, and prioritizing the organization of knowledge. More broadly, our goals are to stimulate disciplinary thinking regarding the ways in which criminology may play a more meaningful role in effectively confronting the ongoing challenges of crime in society.
Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 7 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
... However, both disciplines suffer from a significant lack of knowledge sharing each other, which supposes a severe weakness in responding to crime [2]. Likewise, as with forensic science, there is also a call of attention for greater criminology involvement in crime prevention policy development [84][85][86][87]. Criminology is being encouraged to become more public-oriented and build a broad and forwardlooking evidentiary base for innovation in justice policy [86], promoting social justice and human rights [88]. ...
This work explores the potentially broader contribution of forensic science to preventive public health through the proactive view promoted by forensic intelligence. For that purpose, a new working framework is applied as a strategic tool that channelizes forensic intelligence in a more understandable and didactic way for decision-makers, guiding preventive crime processes. Concretely, the implementation of this operational framework focuses on preventing drug-facilitated sexual assaults in the nightlife context. Through a two-stage research scheme, the working framework is used as a study tool for understanding this violent phenomenon and as a strategic thinking and action platform for overcoming it. Forensic intelligence-guided actions significantly enhanced institutional and direct support facing this specific form of sexual violence. Awareness messages targeting potential assailants, witnesses, and victims reached more than half a thousand students from the university and pre-university education through a preventive intervention within the educational system. Moreover, the inter-professional dialogue between forensic science and other health, security, and education disciplines shows the broader proactive role of forensic science beyond the traditional retroactive view limited to courtrooms and intelligence-led policing. This study demonstrates as forensic intelligence becomes applicable for civilians, who participate as decision-makers in intelligence-led preventive processes, anticipating the need for intervention by police and judicial authorities.
... early intervention targeting assessed risk factors), which became a popular model/strategy of youth justice across Anglophone countries, alongside the responsibilising and managerialist 'new youth justice' (Tompson, et al., 2020), which shaped the newly-constructed the Youth Justice System (YJS) of England and Wales (Case, 2022), with its primary aim to prevent youth re/offending. The 'What Works' promise of reducing recidivism through experiment-based treatment programmes 'rooted in criminological knowledge' and evaluated using 'rigorous science' (Cullen, 2005: 1) complemented neo-liberal and risk-based thinking, which was exponentially influencing the direction of youth justice policy from the late 1990s. The 'What Works' framework was immediately attractive to politicians because these reviews presented quick, apparently evidence-based, off-theshelf solutions that prescribed 'effectiveness' grounded in risk management/reduction. ...
Purpose
This study aims to examine the extent to which “What Works” reviews in youth justice enable understanding of the features of effectiveness (what works, for whom, in what circumstances and why?) specified in the Effects–Mechanisms–Moderators–Implementation–Economic cost (EMMIE) framework.
Design/methodology/approach
The EMMIE framework examined findings within a sample of “What Works” style reviews of preventative youth justice intervention effectiveness.
Findings
“What Works” style reviews of evaluations of preventative youth justice interventions often omit the requisite details required to examine all of the necessary elements of effectiveness contained within the EMMIE framework. While effectiveness measures were typically provided, the dominant evaluation evidence-base struggles to consider moderators of effect, mechanisms of change, implementation differences and cost-effectiveness. Therefore, “What Works” samples cannot facilitate sufficient understanding of “what works for whom, in what circumstances and why?”. The authors argue that Realist Synthesis can fill this gap and shed light on the contexts that shape the mechanisms through which youth justice interventions work.
Originality/value
The authors extended the approach adopted by an earlier review of effectiveness reviews (Tompson et al. , 2020), considering more recent reviews of the effectiveness of preventative interventions using the EMMIE framework. Unlike previous reviews, the authors prioritised the utility of the EMMIE framework for assessing the factors affecting the effectiveness of preventative interventions in youth justice.
... And because we also care about the safety of youths in schools, we felt that our contribution could be to systematically take stock of this remarkable body of literaturevia the quantitative methods of meta-analysisto give a clear empirical account of what is known about the sources of school violence and victimization. Good science, we are convinced, is a means for doing good (Cullen, 2005). Yet, underneath all of the effect size estimates in the data are the lives of childrenthe human side of the statistics we present. ...
School violence is a significant social concern. To better understand its sources, a comprehensive meta-analysis of the school violence and victimization literature was undertaken. Across 761 studies, the relative effects of 30 different individual, school, and community level correlates were assessed (8,790 effect size estimates). Violence and victimization were conceptualized broadly to include various forms of aggression and crime at school. The results revealed that the strongest correlates of school violence perpetration were antisocial behavior, deviant peers, antisocial attitudes, victimization, and peer rejection; and that the strongest correlates of school victimization were prior/other victimization, social competence, risk avoidance, antisocial behavior, and peer rejection. Extracurricular activities and school security devices had among the weakest associations in the meta-analysis, and several traditional criminological predictors did not perform well in the school context. We conclude with recommendations for theory, future research, and policy.
... This body of research indicates that diversion programmes with services are more effective in preventing future crime than formal system processing, and, according to systematic review data, also release (Petrosino et al., 2010). In light of this literature, it appears sensible to offer correctional rehabilitation measures for young people (Cullen, 2005). ...
This study examines and compares the effects on recidivism of the three most common legal responses to minor drug offences for adolescents in Norway. The essential question is whether alternative sanctions are more effective in preventing any reoffending in young people than the traditional fine. Using a longitudinal register data set, comprising all 15- to 17-year-old, first-time drug offenders in the 2000–2015 period (N = 3276), we investigate differences in duration between first legal decision and second arrest and the number of offences during follow-up. Our findings suggest that rehabilitative measures, in the form of a conditional waiver of prosecution with specified conditions, were more effective in preventing recidivism in adolescent drug offenders than a fine. Given the design of this sanction, which includes follow-up by social services and monitoring of drug use by health services, deferrals in recidivism may be caused by both positive rehabilitation experiences and negative punishment experiences.
... This promised criminology, and in particular youth criminology, 'robust' explanations such as those achieved in the natural sciences, therefore, the associated experimental methods became dominant in these disciplines [58]. The 'What Works' promise of reducing recidivism through treatment programmes 'rooted in criminological knowledge' and evaluated using 'rigorous science' [59] p. 1 chimed with the neo-liberal and risk-based thinking, which was influencing the direction of youth justice policy during the late 1990s, most notably due to its genesis in a single, hugely influential study (Box 1): Box 1. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. ...
This article examines the problematic reductionism and decontextualising nature of hegemonic youth justice intervention evaluation and offers a way ahead for a realistic, context-sensitive approach to intervention evaluation in the youth justice field. It opens by considering how the development of risk-based youth justice interventions in England and Wales flowed from and fed into the modernisation and resultant partiality of the ‘evidence-base’, which shaped youth justice practice. It then moves to a critical review of the emergence and continued influence of risk-based interventions and the ‘What Works’ intervention evaluation framework in youth justice. In the closing discussion, this article envisages the potential of taking a realist approach to the evaluation of youth justice interventions to mitigate the limitations of current approaches to intervention selection and the evaluation of their ‘effectiveness’.
... By the 1980s, the "get tough" movement was well underway. Fortuitously, Ed, Frank Cullen, and Patricia Van Voorhis were all at the University of Cincinnati during this time and became part of the group of scholars that "saved rehabilitation" (Cullen, 2005). They, with others, began to document the failures of "get tough" programs (e.g., boot camps, shock incarceration) and began to identify and describe characteristics of effective interventions, or "what works" with offenders. ...
The importance of researcher-practitioner collaborations is at the core of Edward J. Latessa’s work. He has been at the forefront of this domain by creating and disseminating evidence-based tools and practices throughout his career. His work with agencies has undoubtedly changed the face of correctional practices in America and throughout the world. The current essay outlines the work that Ed did to propagate the “what works” movement by doing translational criminology work, and the lessons learned from him on the road.
... Žmonės nusikalsta dėl tol, kad jiems trūksta įgūdžių realizuoti visuomenėje priimtinus tikslus teisėtais būdais, todėl reabilitacijos tikslas -lavinti gebėjimus, reikalingus bendražmogiškiems poreikiams įgyvendinti. Šios paradigmos šalininkai teigia, kad tokių poreikių kaip sveikata, žinios, pasisekimas darbe, laisvalaikis, vidinė ramybė, draugystė ir santykiai, bendruomeniškumas, laimė, kūryba, savivertės ir nepriklausomybės jausmų užtikrinimas -būtinos reabilitacijos sąlygos 11 . ...
... (M.14. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Visi SR specialistai pažymėjo, kad aprobuotų programų veiksmingumo vertinimai jų įstaigose nėra atliekami, daugumoje įstaigų (išskyrus vieną) programų dokumentacija (išskyrus sutikimus dalyvauti programose) nėra kaupiama ir archyvuojama. ...
... After the decline in the support for rehabilitation as the guiding philosophy of the American penitentiary system (Bushway & Paternoster, 2009;Cullen & Jonson, 2011), there has been a resurgence of interest in and support for rehabilitation in recent decades brought about by new research on corrections programs (Cullen, 2005;Cullen & Jonson, 2011). A general conclusion of this research is that there are successful programs that curb recidivism, but their effectiveness hinges on the way they are matched to the needs of individual offenders and the extent to which they maintain program integrity (Bushway & Paternoster, 2009;Cullen & Jonson, 2011). ...
My dissertation covers topics in the economics of crime and the interesction between behavioral and development economics. The first chapter provides causal evidence that sentencing low-level offenders in the State of Michigan to prison rather than probation lowers their future criminal behavior but only through incapacitation, that is, during the time they spend in prison. We identify two sources of incapacitation: primary, from the original sentence, and secondary, from higher rates of future imprisonment among those who were initially sentenced to prison. The second chapter studies how economic decision making changes along the transition from college to the labor market. By collecting panel data from students in a university in Colombia, we are able to track changes occurring after students who are in their last semester of college receive and accept a job offer, and after they receive a paycheck relative to a comparison group of students who remain in college. We find evidence that students who transition to the labor market are less present-biased, more generous, and report having lower stress about finances and higher access to resources after the job offer. After starting to work and receiving a paycheck, they perform worse on cognitive tasks and report being more worried and frustrated than students in the comparison group. This suggests that there may be greater cognitive load associated with becoming more independent and earning money. We also highlight the role of incorporating phychological measures in experimentally-elicited preference tasks. Even though it seems that last-semester students become less risk averse when receiving and accepting a job offer, this result vanishes when controlling for psychological factors. In the third chapter, we study gender differences in beliefs regarding performance and in the updating process in the developing country context. Students in the sample are enrolled in a test-preparation course to take a high-stakes college entrance exam. They are randomized into receiving or not receiving feedback about their relative ability in the five areas covered by the exam. The findings suggest that there are substantial biases in assessing own ability. Across all areas of the test, between 50 and 70 percent of the students fail to correctly predict the quartile in which their score will be. Moreover, women are more biased and more likely to underestimate their performance in math and overestimate in text analysis relative to men. I show evidence that feedback may help close the gender in gap in confidence as women report being more positive about their chances of admission to this university while the men seem less sure of this outcome.
... Martinson found that aspects of the application of a behavioural correction programme do not create a positive impact on preventing re-offending, and inferred that rehabilitation ideology should step down from its dominant position in criminal policy practice. Martinson's statements have begun to be questioned by reformulating his essential points; that is, instead of the question "what is effective and appropriate for all offenders", the new question is: "which methods are the most appropriate for different groups of offenders, including minors" 110 . Canadian researchers, Andrews and Bonta, played a significant role in reviving rehabilitation ideas. ...
This chapter aims to set out the main concepts, approaches, and debates arising both in the academic field and amongst practitioners. The goals, principles, and instruments of forensic assessment and juvenile forensic assessment are the focal point of the chapter and the main theoretical paradigms, such as the Risk-Need- Responsivity Model (RNR) and the Good Lives Model (GLM), are presented and analysed. Finally, the challenges and future perspectives presented by the implementation of juvenile forensic assessment are addressed and considered.
... Martinson found that aspects of the application of a behavioural correction programme do not create a positive impact on preventing re-offending, and inferred that rehabilitation ideology should step down from its dominant position in criminal policy practice. Martinson's statements have begun to be questioned by reformulating his essential points; that is, instead of the question "what is effective and appropriate for all offenders", the new question is: "which methods are the most appropriate for different groups of offenders, including minors" 110 . Canadian researchers, Andrews and Bonta, played a significant role in reviving rehabilitation ideas. ...
This chapter describes the key legal acts that form the framework of the juvenile justice system in Croatia. It also describes the criminal proceedings towards juvenile offenders, as well as the legal elements and provisions for conducting an individual assessment. In addition to the legal basis, the theoretical and scientific foundations regarding individual assessment are presented and described in detail. Furthermore, the main difficulties as well as examples of good practice in the implementation of individual assessment in Croatia, obtained through research by project team members from Croatia, are presented.
... Widespread increases in mandatory minimum sentencing laws, harsher punishments, and "supermax" prison facilities resulted in more people serving time behind bars, for longer periods of time, and in more severe settings. Correctional rehabilitation fell out of favor for "coddling" offenders (Cullen, 2005;Pratt, 2019), and the rhetoric of "let 'em rot" became popular among the American public (DiIulio, 1994). However, the policies aimed at "getting tough" on prisoners ultimately did little to enhance public safety or reduce recidivism-to be sure, 79 percent of released prisoners are estimated to be rearrested within six years (Alper et al., 2018). ...
While in prison, incarcerated persons can be subjected to qualitatively different conditions of confinement ranging from minimum to maximum security settings. In this study, we use data on 17,542 incarcerated men to assess whether the relationship between visitation and recidivism varies across the types of settings (i.e., minimum, medium, close, and maximum custody units) in which individuals are housed and receive their visits. We find that the relationship between prison visitation and rearrest varies across conditions of confinement, and that this association is highly attenuated for individuals confined in close and maximum security units. We also find that these patterns are robust to alternate various measures of recidivism (reconviction and return to prison) and visitation (frequency and timing). These results raise questions about the nature and effectiveness of visitation in highly restrictive settings, and suggest that an ecological framework should be applied to future studies of prison visitation and recidivism.
... 4 However, as of Fall 2018, the sum total of students enrolled in SCP nationwide was just under 8,800 students (Government Accountability Office, 2019). At first glance, the low enrollment in the SCP pilot is somewhat surprising given the reasonable expectation that opportunities for educational programming in prison would be in high demand (Berman et al., 2005;Cullen, 2005;Phelps, 2011;Scales, 2018). It is uncelar if the low program uptake reates were a function of the characteristics of SCP program implementation, a lack of interest among the incarcerate dpopulation, or the influence of other factors not accounted for in the SCP design. ...
Since the mid-1990s scholars, practitioners and policy-makers have consistently identified the ban on Pell eligibility for prisoners as the primary cause for the decline of post-secondary education programs in prisons nationwide. In 2015, the Second Chance Pell (SCP) pilot program authorized reinstatement of Pell eligibility for prisoners with the goal of providing post-secondary educational opportunities in prisons. However, SCP programs used fewer than half of the available Pell grants in the first three years of the program. We analyze novel data from a sample of individuals in Pennsylvania prisons to estimate population-level eligibility for SCP. We find demand in excess and uptake far below availability, which is a consequence of multiple barriers to eligibility. In the absence of significant reforms designed to address collateral ineligibility for Pell grants among the population of incarcerated individuals there will be systematically low utilization of Pell-funded higher education programming in prisons.
... 660; véase también Butts & Mears, 2001). De manera paralela, los expertos han probado, a partir de la mejor metodología de la que puede disponerse en la actualidad, que los programas de rehabilitación bien implementados reducen de forma sustancial la reincidencia (Cullen, 2005;Lipsey, 2009;Lipsey & Cullen, 2007), incluso de los delincuentes graves y violentos (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998). ...
Este artículo es el número cinco de la serie especial sobre Transición desde la delincuencia juvenil a la delincuencia adulta. El primer trabajo de esta serie (sobre transición delictiva) se publicó en esta misma revista en el número 9 (2011); el segundo (sobre patrones de la carrera delictiva) y el tercero (sobre explicaciones teóricas de las transiciones delictivas) en el número 11 (2013); y el cuarto (sobre predicción de riesgo) antecede al presente trabajo, en el presente número 13 (2015) de la Revista. Por su parte, este quinto artículo versa sobre la delincuencia juvenil en Estados Unidos y sobre la particularidad existente en ese país relativa a la intervención combinada con menores delincuentes tanto del sistema de justicia juvenil como del sistema penal adulto. Se analizan los debates jurídicos y las circunstancias históricas que dieron lugar a que los jóvenes puedan ser transferidos, en determinados casos, a la justicia adulta; así como los problemas e inconvenientes graves que pueden derivarse de ello. Y se revisan diversos resultados de investigación y otras consideraciones racionales (sobre maduración cerebral y desarrollo personal, sobre programas de rehabilitación eficaces, sobre la responsabilidad disminuida de los menores, etc.) que amparan el que los jóvenes deban ser tratados preferiblemente en contextos de justicia juvenil más que de la justicia penal adulta.
Resumen
Este artículo pretende poner de relieve la importancia de la criminología en la sociedad actual, dado que la complejidad y celeridad de las transformaciones sociales requiere de una ciencia mejor, y no de soluciones basadas en lo que el público “parece que quiere” o en aquello que “parece mejor”. Con ese fin divido mi trabajo en tres apartados : los dos primeros señalan los caminos que, a mi juicio, debería seguir la criminología para progresar como ciencia capaz de dar respuestas válidas a los problemas del crimen (la investigación y la acción). En un tercer apartado analizo las razones por las que la criminología tiene muchas dificultades para influir sobre la política criminal de los países, y los modos en que podría obtenerse un mayor acceso a la toma de decisiones relevantes en la prevención de la delincuencia. Concluyo señalando las principales funciones que hoy en día puede desempeñar un criminólogo en el servicio que presta a la sociedad.
First articulated more than 250 years ago, deterrence remains a central theory in criminology and continues to be the bedrock of the vast bulk of criminal justice policy. But few updates to the original theory of deterrence have been made, and crime-based punishment has only grown tougher, resulting in a historically unprecedented growth in imprisonment and an even greater reliance on deterrence to justify all kinds of punishment. These changes have occurred despite consistent or strong evidence to show that such punishments actually deter crime. In this book, renowned criminologists Daniel P. Mears and Mark C. Stafford provide an in-depth understanding of the classical account of deterrence theory, its limitations, and a reconceptualized version that establishes a more complete and powerful picture of how legal punishments can deter crime. Thorough and corrective, Comprehensive Deterrence Theory gives readers a new way of thinking about and understanding legal punishment.
The reinstatement of Pell grant eligibility for incarcerated individuals marks a pivotal moment in the landscape of higher education in prison (HEP) programming in the United States. However, despite this promising development, financial barriers persist, hindering the growth and sustainability of HEP initiatives. This qualitative study delves into the challenges faced by faculty, staff, and administrators within Pennsylvania's colleges and universities as they establish and operate HEP programs amidst an evolving funding environment. Drawing on interviews with nine HEP administrators across the state, we explore obstacles they confront, ranging from the Pell grant funding gap to logistical hurdles such as access to educational materials and technology. Moreover, demographic disparities and security concerns emerge as significant factors impacting the relationship between HEP programs and the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (DOC). Our findings extend beyond financial constraints, revealing broader systemic barriers to equitable and accessible HEP programming. We provide potential policy solutions to address these multifaceted challenges and foster a more supportive institutional environment for post-secondary education in Pennsylvania's carceral system.
Studies on recidivism in prisons that provide correctional education (job skills and certifications, career counseling, and academic education) and job preparation (career counseling, interviewing skills, communication skills, and other soft skills) have yielded promising results, showing that they can help decrease recidivism. Policies, laws, research, and a variety of figures in corrections and criminology have influenced public and governmental support for education within prisons. The history does suggest, however, missed opportunities to influence correctional education and job preparation from psychologists. This chapter presents an overview of the history and future implications of correctional education and the contributions of correctional psychologists and their colleagues in related disciplines. These contributions can largely be categorized into three eras: the 1940s–1960s (A Promising Beginning), the 1970s–1990s (A Noticeable Decline), and the 2000s–present (A Hopeful Future). We use this framework to put the history of this area within the political, social, research, and educational contexts of the United States during these time frames. Additionally, it highlights the need for future contributions from psychologists to help those leaving prison with employment issues.KeywordsCorrectional educationPsychologyHistoryJob preparationEducationPrisonReentryCollege educationFutureVocational psychology
In a career that spanned four decades, Donald Arthur Andrews (1941–2010) had a profound influence in the field of correctional psychology. He was among a critical few psychologists and criminologists in the 1970s who rebuffed Martinson's popular, but now infamous, “nothing works” doctrine. He expanded the early and relatively simple, static risk assessment of offenders by introducing dynamic risk variables, also known as “criminogenic needs,” into the assessment process. He did this in large part through the development of the widely popular Level of Service scales. A review of his own research and that of others on treatment effectiveness led to his theoretical General Personality and Cognitive Social Learning perspective of criminal behavior and the principles of Risk–Needs–Responsivity, which is now commonly used around the world to guide the development, implementation, and delivery of offender treatment programs in a more efficacious manner.
Paul Edouard Gendreau (1940–), OC PhD, is a Canadian psychologist who has worked in corrections as an experimental scientist and clinician since the early 1960s. His contributions to correctional theory and practice have had a measurable impact on government policy, resulting in meaningful improvements to correctional systems throughout North America and around the world. Having held academic appointments in a number of universities, he has also played a seminal role in mentoring successive cohorts of students who have gone on to careers in correctional psychology.
This entry reviews the work of Professor Joan Petersilia, an award‐winning and highly impactful applied criminologist with expertise in corrections and public policy. The focus is on the content and impact of her research on crime control in general and corrections in particular, as well as her standing in the field of criminology and among criminal justice practitioners.
The integration of evidence-based policy into criminal justice reform – and into police reform specifically – is a daunting but necessary endeavor. In this essay, we examine police reform, including a review of the literature, which is summarized and guided by our experiences and thoughts into a broad conceptual framework for what we believe is needed to realize true change in the policing profession. This essay provides a brief review of the history of police reform and explores three primary reasons why it has failed so far: (1) the tendency to implement reactionary (i.e., knee-jerk) reforms; (2) the reliance on non-aspirational reforms; and (3) a lack of necessary evidence to guide reforms. We then provide what we believe to be the path forward – the co-ownership of evidence-based police reform by police executives and researchers. We encourage and advise police executives to be proactive, strategic, and courageous in owning reform, see greater value in being users and builders of evidence, and educate the public and their own officers. We also call on researchers to do better by creating the knowledge needed for the field and packaging it in a way that can be more easily consumed by practitioners, policymakers, and the community. We believe it is through this co-ownership that police reform efforts have the greatest potential for success.
This report focuses on the first of three phases across the project and it describes the methods used in the project and the activities undertaken in order to decide the project focus and scope.
This report outlines the detail relating to the Phase 2 project activities and findings, which involved testing and refining programme theories. It includes a review of effectiveness reviews undertaken using the EMMIE Framework and a realist synthesis review of the effectiveness evidence on the use of Referral Order and Intensive Supervision and Surveillance in youth justice.
Over the past four decades, the field of community corrections has evolved considerably. The “tough on crime” movement of the 1980s propelled an increase across the board in justice-involved populations, one that has seen a slow descent in the last 13 years. This essay will trace the work of Edward J. Latessa – a scholar whose work helped redefine the field of community corrections. Ed’s mission has been to help agencies apply scientific knowledge to everyday practices by operationalizing the principles of effective intervention into practical strategies agencies can employ. He has accomplished this by producing work that has been pragmatic, evolving, and accessible to practitioners and policymakers. This essay explores the mechanisms Ed has used to help change the field of community corrections from one focused on monitoring and sanctioning, to using research-supported rehabilitative practices.
Against the backdrop of a strengthening of security concerns in the context of contemporary penalties (Feeley and Simon 1992; Garland 2001), this article takes as its subject the administrative investigation report written following a recent tragic incident in French-speaking Switzerland (“the Payerne drama”). It aims to analyse the discursive functioning of this document and the performative effects that the scripting of the production of security, organised therein, has on socio-judicial supervision practices.
This chapter provides an overview of the historical origins, development, and future of the field of forensic psychology. The definition and scope of forensic psychology will be discussed with attention to the range of disciplines in the behavioral and social sciences, key theorists and researchers, and the role and importance of forensic psychology in criminal justice and forensic practice. Topics include: early development of the field and terminology, definition, and scope of the body of work at the intersection of psychology, criminology, and law. The role of forensic psychology and assessment in criminal justice decision-making in policing, courts, corrections, and victim services will be examined. Challenges and promises for the future of forensic psychology will be explored.
A large social science research literature examines the effects of prisons on crime and socioeconomic inequality, but the penal institution itself is often a black box overlooked in the analysis of its effects. This paper examines prisons and their role in rehabilitative programs and as venues for violence, health and healthcare, and extreme isolation through solitary confinement. Research shows that incarcerated people are participating less today than in the 1980s in prison programs, and they face high risks of violence, disease, and isolation. Prison conditions suggest the mechanisms that impair adjustment to community life after release provide a more complete account of the costs of incarceration and indicate the performance of prisons as moral institutions that bear a responsibility for humane and decent treatment.
Researcher–policymaker/practitioner partnerships (RPPs) have emerged as a successful tool for translating research into policy and practice. However, the available research has focused on RPPs with law enforcement and correctional agencies. Notably absent are studies that describe and evaluate RPPs between researchers and legislative bodies. Specifically, questions remain about the establishment, unique constraints, best practices for effective implementation, and sustainability of partnerships between researchers and policymakers. This study contributes to the literature by describing a unique RPP between a university and a state legislature. Through this retrospective case analysis, we describe the steps taken to initiate the partnership, its implementation, and outcomes. Importantly, in the context of the prior research, we describe the lessons learned, next steps, and implications for partnerships with policymakers.
Nationwide, prison populations have declined nearly 5% from their peak, and 16 states have seen double-digit declines. It is unclear, though, how decarceration has affected racial disparities. Using national data, we find substantial variation in state prison populations from 2005–2018, with increases in some states and declines in others. However, although declines in the overall state prison population were associated with declines for all groups, states with rising prison populations experienced slight upticks in prison rates among the white population, while rates among Black and Latinx populations declined. As a result, greater progress in overall decarceration within states did not translate to larger reductions in racial disparities. At the same time, we do not find evidence that a decline in prison populations is associated with a rise in jail incarceration for any racial/ethnic group. In additional exploratory analyses, we suggest that recent incarceration trends may be driven by changes in returns to prison for probation and parole violations, rather than commitments for new crimes. Our results make clear that while efforts to reverse mass incarceration have reduced the size of prison populations in some states, they have not yet made substantial progress in resolving the crisis of race in American criminal justice.
A synthesis of 319 meta-analyses of psychological, behavioral, and educational treatment research was conducted to assess the influence of study method on observed effect sizes relative to that of substantive features of the interventions. An index was used to estimate the proportion of effect size variance associated with various study features. Study methods accounted for nearly as much variability in study outcomes as characteristics of the interventions. Type of research design and operationalization of the dependent variable were the method features associated with the largest proportion of variance. The variance as a result of sampling error was about as large as that associated with the features of the interventions studied. These results underscore the difficulty of detecting treatment outcomes, the importance of cautiously interpreting findings from a single study, and the importance of meta-analysis in summarizing results across studies.
Conventional reviews of research on the efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatments often find considerable variation in outcome among studies and, as a consequence, fail to reach firm conclusions about the overall effectiveness of the interventions in question. In contrast meta-analytic reviews show a strong, dramatic pattern of positive overall effects that cannot readily be explained as artifacts of meta-analytic technique or generalized placebo effects. Moreover, the effects are not so small that they can be dismissed as lacking practical or clinical significance. Although meta-analysis has limitations, there are good reasons to believe that its results are more credible than those of conventional reviews and to conclude that well-developed psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment is generally efficacious.
This book presents a comprehensive overview of anti-social behavior prevention programs in pregnancy and infancy, pre-school, parent education and school programs (including the prevention of bullying). It emphasizes preventing the intergenerational transmission of antisocial behavior by focusing on family violence. It reviews whether risk factors and prevention programs have different effects on females as compared to males. Cost-benefit analyses of early prevention programs conclude that adult antisocial behavior can be counteracted effectively and cost-efficiently. © Cambridge University Press 2004 and Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Careful reading of the literature on the psychology of criminal conduct and of prior reviews of studies of treatment effects suggests that neither criminal sanctioning without provision of rehabilitative service nor servicing without reference to clinical principles of rehabilitation will succeed in reducing recidivism. What works, in our view, is the delivery of appropriate correctional service, and appropriate service reflects three psychological principles: (1) delivery of service to higher risk cases, (2) targeting of criminogenic needs, and (3) use of styles and modes of treatment (e.g., cognitive and behavioral) that are matched with client need and learning styles. These principles were applied to studies of juvenile and adult correctional treatment, which yielded 154 phi coefficients that summarized the magnitude and direction of the impact of treatment on recidivism. The effect of appropriate correctional service (mean phi = .30) was significantly (p
Although numerous studies recently have appeared that identify the most-cited scholars and works in the general criminology and criminal justice literature and in several specialty areas, no previous citation study has specifically examined the corrections literature. Through an analysis of 209 articles and research notes appearing from 1992 to 1996 in the area of corrections, the authors list the 50 most-cited scholars and the 25 most-cited works. The lists of the most-cited scholars and works in corrections are compared to general lists taken from leading criminology and criminal justice journals and introductory textbooks. The authors' analysis uncovers certain citation trends relating to pivotal controversies in correctional research.
Do we know what “works” in the way of rehabilitative treatment in corrections? Not yet. Has the old “nothing works” literature been invalidated by new reviews of research claiming to show, through meta-analysis, that treatment really does work, at least when it is “appropriate?” Not likely. Would production of this knowledge enhance the ability of prison officials to do their job? Not ever. Their job, and their highest duty, is to administer justice, not treatment. Individualized treatment muddles the message of punishment, making it less principled and not necessarily more humane. A “confinement model” of imprisonment is proposed, which rejects rehabilitation as an official goal and yet allows for programs of work, education, and other activities within the mission of a prison.
During the past 20 years, there have been significant developments in the area of offender assessment. As a result, this knowledge has placed the field in a position to construct guidelines as to what should characterize useful and effective offender assessment instruments. The author’s suggestions as to what constitutes good assessment ranges from the noncontroversial (e.g., actuarial instruments) to the more contentious (e.g., lessening one’s reliance on static risk scales). Whether the reader agrees with the views expressed, it is hoped that the force of the empirical arguments will at least provoke some careful consideration rather than summarily dismissing them.
In recent years, the sustained criticism leveled at juvenile rehabilitation has raised the question of whether the public continues to endorse the correctional policy of saving youthful offenders. However, in a 1998 statewide survey of Tennessee residents, the respondents indicated that rehabilitation should be an integral goal of the juvenile correctional system. They also endorsed a range of community-based treatment interventions and favored early intervention programs over imprisonment as a response to crime. Taken together, these findings revealed that the public's belief in “child saving” remains firm, and that citizens do not support an exclusively punitive response to juvenile offenders.
A systematic review using meta-analytic techniques was conducted with 14 studies selected to provide the best evidence on the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral programs for reducing the reoffense recidivism of criminal offenders. The results indicated that, overall, cognitive-behavioral programs are effective, and the best of them are capable of producing sizable reductions in recidivism. Many of the available studies, however, investigate research-oriented demonstration programs; the effects found for routine practical programs were notably smaller. Moreover, the research coverage of both juvenile and adult programs in institutional and noninstitutional settings is uneven and leaves troublesome gaps in the evidence.
A systematic review incorporating meta-analytic techniques of correctional boot camps studies was conducted. An intensive search identified 771 documents of which 144 were deemed potentially relevant, located, and evaluated for eligibility. In 37 documents, 29 studies were judged eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. The 29 studies resulted in 44 samples providing the primary unit of analysis. Quasi-experimental and experimental studies evaluated a residential program with a militaristic environment and compared the recidivism of participants to a comparison group receiving another correctional sanction. In 9 studies, boot camp participants had lower recidivism than did comparison groups; in 8, comparison groups had lower recidivism; and in the remaining studies, no significant differences were found. A meta-analysis found no overall significant differences in recidivism between boot camp participants and comparison samples. Further analyses indicated the results cannot be explained by differences in study methodology, offender characteristics, or boot camp program components.
Much contemporary discussion of the future of the juvenile court revolves around the balance between rehabilitation and punishment, especially with regard to the most serious juvenile offenders. Political forces increasingly press in the direction of punitive approaches, while the historical orientation of the court has been rehabilitative. This article addresses the question of whether rehabilitative treatment can be effective for the most serious offenders. Meta-analysis techniques were used to synthesize the large body of empirical research on the effects of rehabilitative programs in community and institutional settings. The results show that well-designed rehabilitative strategies do reduce recidivism for such offenders and cannot be dismissed on the grounds that they are ineffective.
For a variety of reasons, some valid, many irrelevant, it has become fashionable within sociological criminology to condemn juvenile diversion. Participants in the condemnatory rituals identify each other as insiders by catchy words and phrases (like “widening the net”), and frequently substitute rhetoric for logic in their argumentation aimed both at gaining cultic recognition and winning over the unwary. Perhaps the most damaging consequence is the forfeiture of influence in an important social process by a large array of social scientists. Contrary to the predictions of some in the cult, diversion remains a flourishing mode of serving young offenders, as indeed it must so long as the present juvenile justice system remains in operation.
From its inception in the 1820s, the American prison was meant to be more than a sturdy cage of high, thick, stone walls in which the wayward could be restrained. The prison’s founders called their invention a “penitentiary,” a label that embodied their optimism that this carefully planned social institution had the power to reform even the most wicked spirit (Rothman, 1971).
Experimental research has recently shown a powerful impact on legal policy. An experiment demonstrating a deterrent effect of arrest on domestic violence has shaped public policy. Stimulated by efforts to publicize the results of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (Sherman and Berk, 1984a), police departments were persuaded to adopt an arrest policy for misdemeanor domestic violence. Over one-third of respondents from U.S. police departments in 117 cities said their policy had been influenced by the experiment, although respondents from some departments that adopted an arrest policy did not recognize the experiment or its results. Lempert (1987, 1984), citing medical research as precedent, suggests that this impact is premature and inappropriate until replications are completed. However, we find no indication that medical research employs a standard of delaying adoption of research results prior to replication. Our analysis suggests that publicity can encourage replication of legal research at other sites and thus improve the knowledge base for policy recommendations.
The sociology of deviance faces two basic and interrelated problems: How and/or why some people engage in deviant acts. The
meaning of these two problems, the nature of theories and research revolving around them, and their implications for the future
direction of the sociology of deviance are explored. The goal is not to account for either social definitions or deviant behavior, but rather to account for both and ultimately to specify the interaction and integrate explanations of behavior and social definitions.
Several meta-analytic reviews strongly support the Sclinically relevant and psychologically informed principles of human service, risk, need and general responsivity. More recently, meta-analyses have demonstrated that these principles are applicable to female offenders 2 and are effective in reducing both general 3 and violent 4 recidivism. The current investigation provides an in-depth examination of the principles of human service, risk, need and general responsivity for young offenders (younger than 18 years). Further analyses are conducted on the "more promising" and "less promising" treatment targets outlined by Andrews and Bonta. 5 The results demonstrate that the mean effect size under conditions of adherence to each of the principles is significantly higher than for conditions of non-adherence. These results have important implications for both correctional administrators and front-line staff involved in delivering correctional treatment programs to young offenders.
Prior reviews and meta-analyses have supported the hypothesis that offender rehabilitation programs based on cognitive-behavioral principles reduce recidivism. This article quantitatively synthesizes the extant empirical evidence on the effectiveness of structured cognitive-behavioral programs delivered to groups of offenders. The evidence summarized supports the claim that these treatments are effective at reducing criminal behavior among convicted offenders. All higher quality studies reported positive effects favoring the cognitive-behavioral treatment program. Specifically, positive reductions in recidivism were observed for moral reconation therapy, reasoning and rehabilitation, and various cognitive-restructuring programs. The evidence suggests the effectiveness of cognitive skills and cognitive restructuring approaches as well as programs that emphasize moral teachings and reasoning.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
This paper presents a review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of family-based crime prevention programs.Programs were included in this review if (a)the family was the focus of the intervention,(b)there was an outcome measure of delinquency or antisocial child behaviour, (c)the evaluation used a randomised or well controlled experiment and (d)the original sample size was at least 50 persons.Forty evaluations were found that met the criteria for inclusion.In general,these family- based programs had desirable effects in reducing delinquency (especially) and antisocial child behaviour.Over all delinquency outcomes,the weighted mean effect size of .321 corresponds approximately to a decrease in offending from 50%in a control group to 34%in an experi- mental group.Furthermore,the effects on delinquency persisted in long- term evaluation studies.The most effective types of programs used behavioural parent training,while the least effective types were those based in schools.Home visiting,day care/preschool,home/community and multi-systematic therapy programs were generally effective.Effect sizes were greater in smaller scale studies.Research on the monetary costs and benefits of family-based programs is also reviewed.
Although the question of what works for general offender populations has received considerable attention within the rehabilitation literature, very little research has examined female offenders. The present investigation examined the principles of effective correctional treatment for female offenders through a meta-analytic review. The results indicated that the clinically relevant and psychologically informed principles of human service, risk, need, and responsivity identified in past meta-analytic reviews were associated with enhanced reductions in reoffending.
This paper examines rising crime rates, findings on the relative effectiveness of deterrence and rehabilitation, and the rise of a civil rights movement in correction, all of which have led to greater emphasis on deterrence and incapacitation and less emphasis on rehabilitation in correctional philosophy and practice. The conclusiveness of the findings that "nothing rehabilitates" and "deterrence works" is questioned. A more careful reading of existing evidence leads to no decisive conclusion on the relative effectiveness of these two philosophies of correction. Much of the failure of rehabilitative programs to date stems from programs limited in duration and quality and evaluated for their ability to alter lifestyles dramatically; many that have been shown to be failures are the result of an inadequate tailoring to offender problems. The great increase in economic crimes points to the need to improve the economic opportunities of offenders rather than altering personality. The civil rights movement in correction alerts us to the need for curbs on certain types of rehabilitative programs, but it should not force us to abandon all attempts at rehabilitation. Adherence to a strict deterrence philosophy because of its economic and humanistic cost is questioned. Finally, a more careful application of rehabilitative programs and their continued use are called for as one approach to the crime problem.
Five major delinquency prevention experiments conducted in the open community among voluntary juvenile subjects reveal uniformly disappointing results: the provision of a preventive service seems no more effective in reducing delinquency than no service at all. The controlled procedures governing these experi ments make these negative findings particularly convincing and thus constitute a challenge to services offered in the name of "delinquency prevention."
Much of the survey data on public knowledge and attitudes to sentencing and punishment gathered over recent years have suggested that the public in western jurisdictions support harsher punishment and have diminishing confidence in the criminal courts. The results of research on the same issues using focus groups, deliberative polls or other methods which provide more information or allow respondents to discuss their views with others, appear to suggest that these punitive attitudes become more moderate as well as more complex and contradictory. Recent research in Scotland has produced similar results. What do these results mean? Are the public punitive or not?
The argument presented here is that punitive attitudes exist alongside more rational and more reflective attitudes. Part of the explanation for this is that attitudes are, at least in part, an artefact of the methodology used to discover them. This does not mean that they are not real and substantial, but rather that public opinion is much more nuanced and contradictory than it appears from survey research. This interpretation raises different challenges for political leadership and policy making.
The authors explore changes over time in criminologists' “professional ideology”—a core set of underlying beliefs that focuses academic thinking along certain lines but not others. Until the late 1960s, criminologists believed that the scientific study of the causes of crime would form the basis of individualized treatments that would reduce offender recidivism. By the mid-1970s, this view had collapsed and had been replaced by a professional ideology emphasizing that “nothing works” in corrections, that the causes of criminality are structural, and that crime can only be reduced through social justice. Although not without its merits, the authors suggest that this professional ideology has had the unfortunate consequence of legitimating “knowledge destruction” (showing what does not work) as the core intellectual project of criminology and thus of undermining efforts at “knowledge construction” (showing what does work). A “what works” movement within corrections, however, is advancing an alternative professional ideology that, once again, endorses the use of science to solve crime-related problems. The authors believe that, if embraced, this vision will improve criminology as a discipline and contribute more than “nothing works” scholarship to the commonweal of both offenders and the public order.
For three decades, American correctional policy has focused on “getting tough” with offenders, and recent innovations continue this trend. It is unclear, however, that the public desires such a singularly punitive approach to crime. This study reports results from a statewide, contemporary assessment of citizens' attitudes toward rehabilitation. The results indicate that the public still believes that rehabilitation should be an integral part of correctional policy. Furthermore, support for a treatment approach is fairly consistent across demographic groups and across different types of questions used to tap citizens' views. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.
Recent decades have seen juvenile justice broaden its focus from the child and treatment to include offenses and accountability. This expansion, manifest in juvenile codes that support punishment and doctrines that include transfers to adult criminal court, has had significant caseload and fiscal impacts. However, a scarcity of pertinent research and of cost-benefit analyses leaves unclear whether this newer, get tough focus achieves greater delinquency reduction than previously attained. Combined with a quasi-experimental empirical simulation of the effects of punitive sanctions, a cost-benefit analysis of alternative dispositions in Dallas County, Texas, suggests that harsher sentencing can indeed prevent some offenses. The value of this gain, however, is much less than its cost to produce. As a result, by consuming public resources that might otherwise be invested in more productive purposes within or outside the justice system, the policy of toughness visits substantial opportunity costs on communities that embrace it.
The conventional wisdom in criminology is that treatment programs have been found to be ineffective. This paper outlines several methods that may be used to defend this wisdom: (1) contaminate the treatment, (2) stress the criterion problem, (3) appeal to common sense, (4) demonstrate that re habilitation is premised on faulty theory, and (5) seek universals. In addition, methods for uncovering the tyranny inherent in all treatment programs are discussed briefly.
This research examines the behavior of shock incarceration releasees during two years of community supervision, and compares their performance with that of similar offenders serving time on probation or parole. Using survival analyses, we examined differences between shock releasees, probationers, parolees, and shock dropouts in technical or new crime arrests, technical or new crime revocations, and new criminal convictions. In general, the shock offenders had higher rates of technical arrests and revocations than the probationers and parolees, lower rates of new convictions, and, in some of the analyses, lower rates of arrests and revocations for new crimes. No differences in performance were found between shock graduates and dropouts. Possible reasons for these differences in recidivism among groups were discussed.
Effects of the Georgia Cognitive Skills Program, a replication of Ross and Fabiano’s Reasoning and Rehabilitation, were examined for 468 parolees randomly assigned to treatment and comparison groups between May 1997 and July 1998. The evaluation tested the effects on arrests/revocations, technical violations, and employment at 9 months and returns to prison at 18 to 30 months. Survival analysis found slightly lower (statistically insignificant) recidivism rates for experimental participants than comparisons. No significant differences were found between experimental and comparison participants on technical violations and employment. Statistically controlling for offender risk factors, program completers had significantly fewer rearrests/revocations and returns to prison and more favorable employment outcomes than comparisons and dropouts. Results were similar for low-risk and medium/high-risk parolees.
Previous research has shown that the public endorses rehabilitation as a core goal of corrections. Over the past decade, however, the campaign to get tough on crime has grown in strength. In this context, the question emerges as to whether support for rehabilitation has diminished or maintained its hold on public thinking. The authors address this issue by replicating a 1986 study by Cullen, Skovron, Scott, and Burton that explored attitudes toward correctional treatment. The data reveal that citizens' support for rehabilitation has declined meaningfully. Even so, the public continues to view treatment as a legitimate correctional objective, especially for juvenile and nonviolent offenders.
We reviewed the offender rehabilitation literature for the period 1981–87 and assessed the following types of interventions: biomedical, diversion, early/family intervention, education, getting tough, individual differences, parole/probation, restitution, and work. We evaluated treatments applied to specific subgroups of offender populations: sexual offenders, substance abusers, and violent offenders. The hypothesis that the “nothing works” credo has had a pervasive influence and has suppressed the rehabilitative agenda was not borne out when we examined the number and variety of successfully reported attempts at reducing delinquent behavior. In fact, the rehabilitative literature is growing at a noticeable rate; moreover, it suggests several strategies for developing more effective programs. Finally, we speculated why the “nothing works” doctrine continues to receive support in spite of empirical evidence to the contrary.
Corrections-based education, vocation, and work programs are a major rehabilitative component of our correctional system. Recent reviews of the research literature raise doubt about the effectiveness of these programs in reducing recidivism. This study meta-analyzed the recidivism outcomes of 33 independent experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of education, vocation, and work programs and found that program participants recidivate at a lower rate than nonparticipants. The generally weak methodological character of these studies, however, prevents attributing this observed effect on criminal behavior to the activities of the programs. Future evaluative research in this area could be strengthened through the incorporation of theoretical links between the program activities and future criminal involvement and through designs that control for self-selection bias beyond basic demographic differences.
This paper presents recent evidence, obtained from a review of the liter ature on correctional treatment published since 1973, appealing the ver dict that correctional rehabilitation is ineffective. Questions are raised about the quality of the research that led to the conclusion that "nothing works." Recent research on family intervention, contingency man agement, counseling, diversion, and biomedical techniques is discussed, as is the efficacy of treatment of such problems as alcoholism, drug addic tion, and sexual deviations. It is concluded that there are several types of intervention programs that have proved successful with offender popu lations. These intervention programs illustrate pointedly why there have been so many failures reported in correctional treatment.
For the past decade or so, scholars have joined with politicians in suggesting that citizens manifest little support for correctional treatment. Based on a 1986 survey of Cincinnati and Columbus residents, we present data that question this broad assumption. The data indicate that rehabilitation receives considerable support, though this is most pronounced for certain offenders and for certain treatment modalities. In general, the study reinforces the finding of a growing body of revisionist research that the public retains faith in rehabilitation as a legitimate goal of the correctional process.