Search

Many jurisdictions across the U.S. have adopted justice reinvestment initiatives (JRIs) as a strategy for reducing the use of incarceration and mitigating large correctional budgets. In spite of this widespread adoption, little empirical research has explored the impacts of justice reinvestment policies. In response, this study employed quasiexperimental, interrupted time-series regression analyses using a decade of monthly court and corrections data to assess if JRI legislation in Oregon was effective. Results show decreased prison usage and recidivism, as well as reveal delayed and significant trend changes for felony jail admissions and community corrections populations as a result of the JRI legislations. A course for future research to further advance understanding of reinvestment and resource reallocation is outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The State of Oregon has operated an early prison release program called Short-Term Transitional Leave (STTL) since 1989. The program was designed to improve prison releasee reentry planning and reintegration in the community. In the last 10 years, Oregon expanded STTL several times, with individuals now being released up to 120 days early. We assessed whether differences in recidivism existed between STTL and those completing their planned sentence and if the length of their leave is associated with differential recidivism. We used propensity-score matching (PSM) to create quasi-experimental models. The results indicate no appreciable observed associations between STTL and rearrest, reconviction, or reincarceration. However, there were higher rates of technical violations among STTL participants, especially for those with the longest release time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While correctional scholarship emphasizes the importance of addressing dynamic risk factors in changing behavior, a debate continues on the role of gendered effects relating to such factors and supervision strategies. This study advances the debate and approach to violators by examining factors that reduce recidivism among technical violators. Using a large purposive sample of people on supervision, this study assesses differences between men and women in violating behavior, the sanctions used, and subsequent responses. To isolate effects of gender, we employ propensity score modeling coupled with a doubly robust design. Findings suggest that while some gendered differences exist, effect sizes are generally small and suggest responses to violators may be best focused on dynamic factors generally, rather than gender specific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sexual assault has come to the forefront in terms of prevention and education for many social institutions such as college campuses. However, with a growing body of research highlighting the importance and effectiveness of interventions, research examining the impact of sexual assault education (SAE) on altering rape myth acceptance (RMA) among nonstudent populations is severely lacking. This is particularly problematic when considering that the issue of sexual assault extends well beyond academia in the United States. Accordingly, this study aims to fill this gap by employing an experimental design with repeated measures. Using a sample of 137 nonstudents surveyed via Amazon's Mechanical Turk, participants were randomly assigned to a treatment (rape myth intervention) or control (unrelated video content) group. To detect changes in RMA after a short rape myth education intervention, pretest and posttest RMA scores were generated for all participants using an altered version of the Updated Illinois Rape Myth Adherence scale. The treatment video was roughly 10 min in length and constructed by the lead author for the current research. All participants were presented with common rape myths, and then, the treatment group was provided with information (e.g., available research and statistics) to "debunk" these myths, and ultimately decrease acceptance of myths. Analyses indicate support for a significant change in RMA scores from pretest to posttest in the treatment group, finding support for the use of informal rape myth education in altering immediate RMA scores of a nonstudent sample. The RMA difference scores were also examined through a demographic lens to determine if the inclusion could further explain score changes. Demographics were not deemed significant predictors. Limitations and implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Actuarial assessments provide standardized scores for use in assigning client risk levels and identifying needs that can be matched with intervention. Drawing from an established theory and findings from tangential justice studies, the current study argues that using standardized instruments to predict recidivism everywhere is potentially problematic because the determination of conviction/incarceration has been shown to vary by jurisdiction and culture. Our exploratory analysis of a standardized assessment finds that when controlling for nation, age, and gender, heterogeneity in effect sizes is significantly reduced. Implications for the field of justice assessment are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creating offender typologies has become a growing interest and a potential method of improving understanding of programming needs and potential placements. Most typological research has only explored and described potential offender types. Relatively few studies have attempted to confirm the existence of created typologies or examine how offenders in each type predict important outcomes. Utilizing a large sample (N = 37,111) of reentering male offenders from Washington State Department of Corrections, we computed both an exploratory and confirmatory latent class analysis. After the confirmation of six offender types, we examined each type's likelihood of several recidivistic outcomes. We anticipate that the described typology will assist case management, prioritizing offender needs, optimizing treatment services, and determining sequencing of multiple treatment types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States of America, often a paragon of the rule of law, has a long-established tradition of providing legal regimes and mechanisms that are the inspiration for other legal frameworks around the world. However, even the oldest traditions sometimes require occasional contemporary modification. Such is the case in the U.S. as it pertains to confidentiality and privacy in commercial arbitral proceedings. As it stands today, even if the parties to an arbitration originally contemplated having wholly confidential proceedings, should those sentiments change upon the arrival of the inevitable dispute, one party can unilaterally destroy that confidentiality by filing documents in U.S. courts in accordance with the public's right to access judicial documents. Although noble in its intention, this vulnerability potentially injures the interest of parties opting for arbitration for no convincing reason. Instead, the U.S. should consider the approaches taken by other national jurisdictions, which offer more limited public review of court documents. Such review is usually after the judiciary has had a chance to determine the fairness and prejudicial effect of revealing the contentious documents. This article discusses the interplay between the public's right to access court documents and the parties' right to confidentiality in commercial arbitration in the U.S. and around the world, and then offers amendments to U.S. federal and state law to address this gap in U.S. civil procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While many great strides have been made in supervision generally toward more evidence-based practices, the primary tenets of conditional release have remained unchanged, untested, and assumption based. This essay examines the fundamental tenets of conditional release and how they have been widely overlooked in spite of the evidence-based movement. By laying out the problems in practice, recording, and definition, as well as gaps in the literature, I display several areas where future research can progress both knowledge and policy. I argue that the crux of issues surrounding conditional release is the notion that it is a test of readiness and should be regarded as such. By viewing the practice from this perspective, the inadequacies of state systems to address criminogenic needs become glaringly apparent. Following this explication, it is consequently clear as to why the released person may not be ready and how successful reentry may have less to do with individual accountability and more to do with a rehabilitative ideal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The level of influence public discourse has on policy can vary widely. Research has noted that while it is largely dependent on the topic, frequency, and severity of the message, political rhetoric has the potential to sway public opinion and support. Particularly true for crime policy, rhetoric has historically been a strong factor for many countries such as the United States and England often understood as popular punitivism. However, popular punitivism has not been empirically characterized with specific focus given to political discourse, especially in international context. This paper attempts to capture the scope and relationship between rhetoric, political gain, crime policy, and public response in the Netherlands. Using the context of popular punitivism, we analyze rhetoric from three different political outlets (party platforms, coalition agreements, and statements of the throne) and triangulate the codes with passed policies, voter support, and systemic action. Findings suggest that recent rhetoric often exaggerates observed crime in society, consistent with expectations of popular punitivism perspectives. However, such exaggeration does not necessarily correlate with public support and system response patterns. Implications for discourse theory and popular punitivism are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]