How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know! Follow this and additional works at: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/jj_pubs Part of the Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Criminology Commons, Judges Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, Legislation Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, and the Race and Ethnicity Commons

/pdf/the-growth-of-incarceration-in-the-united-states-exploring-212x90j52g.pdf

The growth of incarceration in the United States: exploring causes and consequences

Prior studies of recidivism have focused almost exclusively on individual-level characteristics of offenders and their offenses to explore the correlates of reoffending. Notably absent from these studies are measures reflecting the neighborhood contexts in which individuals live. The current research addresses this shortcoming. Using data on a sample of ex-offenders in Multnomah County, Oregon (Portland and surrounding area) in conjunction with 2000 census data, we answer two questions. First, which individual-level factors influence rates of recidivism? Second, to what extent does neighborhood socioeconomic status account for variation in the reoffending behavior of ex-prisoners that is not explained by their individual-level characteristics? We find that those who return to disadvantaged neighborhoods recidivate at a greater rate while those who return to resource rich or affluent communities recidivate at a lesser rate, controlling for individual-level factors.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2028183_code1815930.pdf?abstractid=2028183&mirid=1&type=2

Predicting Who Reoffends: The Neglected Role of Neighborhood Context in Recidivism Studies

Predicting who reoffends: the neglected role of neighborhood context in recidivism studies*

MORE THAN 600,000 individuals will leave state prisons and return home this year. That is 1,600 a day, and a sixfold increase in prisoner releases since 1970. Of course, inmates have always been released from prison, and corrections officials have long struggled with how to facilitate successful transitions. But the current situation is decidedly different. The increase in number of releasees has stretched parole services beyond their limits, and officials worry about what assistance can be provided at release. Research confirms that returning prisoners need more help than in the past, yet resources have diminished. Returning prisoners will have served longer prison sentences than in the past, be more disconnected from family and friends, have a higher prevalence of untreated substance abuse and mental illness, and be less educated and employable than their predecessors. Legal and practical barriers facing ex-offenders have also increased, affecting their employment, housing, and welfare eligibility. Without help, many released inmates quickly return to crime.

What Works in Prisoner Reentry? Reviewing and Questioning the Evidence.

In this research the authors examine the reentry of 51 parolees during the 3 years following their release from prison. The objective is to gain increased understanding of what differentiates successful parolees from those who fail. Success is defined as being discharged from parole by 3 years after release. The study examines the extent to which drug treatment, friendships, work, family bonds, and age are associated with reentry success. Contrary to expectations, it is found that closeness to mother, closeness to father, having a partner, being a parent, and education level are not associated with parole success. Those who succeed on parole are more likely to have taken a substance abuse class while in prison and on release tend to spend more time in enjoyable activities with friends. Among the employed, those that worked at least 40 hours a week are more likely to complete parole successfully. Qualitative data indicate that successful parolees had more support from family and friends and had more self-efficacy, which help them stay away from drugs and peers who use drugs. The findings are consistent with an integrated life course theory.

Successful Reentry: What Differentiates Successful and Unsuccessful Parolees?

During the past decade, there has been a renewed interest in prisoner reentry. This is due to a change in many of the factors surrounding the release of prisoners and their reentry to the community. These changes include a modification of sentencing from the use of parole to determinate release with fewer ex-offenders having supervision in the community, an increased emphasis on surveillance rather than assistance for those under supervision, less community stability and availability of community social service support, and dramatically larger numbers returning to the community. More releasees are being violated and returned to the community than ever before. Therefore, it is important to identify prisoner reentry programs that work. We define reentry, categorize reentry programs, and use the Maryland Scale of Scientific Method to determine the effectiveness of program categories. We conclude that many such categories are effective in aiding reentry and reducing recidivism.

/pdf/prisoner-reentry-what-works-what-does-not-and-what-is-4ewr232s9t.pdf

Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising

Saint Louis UniversityThis article analyzes whether state-approved jury instructions adequately guide jurydiscretion in the penalty phase of ﬁrst-degree murder trials. It examines EighthAmendment jurisprudence regarding guided jury discretion, emphasizing the use of“empirical factors” to examine the quality of state-approved instructions. Psycho-logical research and testimony on the topic of the comprehensibility of juryinstructions are reviewed. Data from a recently completed simulation with 80deliberating juries showed that current instructions do not adequately convey theconcepts and processes essential to guiding penalty phase judgments. An additionalsimulation with 20 deliberating juries demonstrated that deliberation alone does notcorrect for jurors’ errors in comprehension. The article concludes with recommen-dations for policy and future research.

GUIDED JURY DISCRETION IN CAPITAL MURDER CASES The Role of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge

Three studies used videotaped harassment complaints to examine the impact of legal standards on the evaluation of social-sexual conduct at work. Study 1 demonstrated that without legal instructions, college students' judgment strategies were highly variable. Study 2 compared 2 current legal standards, the "severity or pervasiveness test" and a proposed utilitarian alternative (i.e., the rational woman approach). Undergraduate participants taking the perspective of the complainant were more sensitive to offensive conduct than were those adopting an objective perspective. Although the utilitarian altemative further increased sensitivity on some measures, it failed to produce a principled judgment strategy. Finally, Study 3 examined the kinds of errors that full-time workers make when applying the "severity or pervasiveness" test to examine more closely the sensitivity of the subjective approach.

Karen Kadela

Papers

Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising

GUIDED JURY DISCRETION IN CAPITAL MURDER CASES The Role of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge

The fit and implementation of sexual harassment law to workplace evaluations.

Evaluating Published Research in Psychology and Law