USING RANDOM JUDGE ASSIGNMENTS TO ESTIMATE THE EFFECTS OF INCARCERATION AND PROBATION ON RECIDIVISM AMONG DRUG OFFENDERS*

Most prior studies of recidivism have used observational data to estimate the causal effect of imprisonment or probation on the probability that a convicted individual is rearrested after release. Few studies have taken advantage of the fact that, in some jurisdictions, defendants are assigned randomly to judges who vary in sentencing tendencies. This study investigates whether defendants who are assigned randomly to more punitive judges have different recidivism probabilities than defendants who are assigned to relatively lenient judges. We track 1,003 defendants charged with drug-related offenses who were assigned randomly to nine judicial calendars between June 1, 2002 and May 9, 2003. Judges on these calendars meted out sentences that varied substantially in terms of prison and probation time. We tracked defendants using court records across a 4-year period after the disposition of their cases to determine whether they subsequently were rearrested. Our results indicate that randomly assigned variations in prison and probation time have no detectable effect on rates of rearrest. The findings suggest that, at least among those facing drug-related charges, incarceration and supervision seem not to deter subsequent criminal behavior.     

THE EFFECT OF CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS ON HIRING EX‐OFFENDERS*

Research Summary The rapid increase in the nation's incarceration rate over the past decade has raised questions about how to reintegrate a growing number of ex‐offenders successfully. Employment has been shown to be an important factor in reintegration, especially for men over the age of 27 years who characterize most individuals released from prison. This article explores this question using unique establishment‐level data collected in Los Angeles in 2001. On average, we replicate the now‐common finding that employer‐initiated criminal background checks are negatively related to the hiring of ex‐offenders. However, this negative effect is less than complete. The effect is strongly negative for those employers that are legally required to perform background checks, which is not surprising because these legal requirements to perform checks are paired with legal prohibitions against hiring ex‐offenders. However, some employers seem to perform checks to gain additional information about ex‐offenders (and thus hire more ex‐offenders than other employers), and checking seems to have no effect on hiring ex‐offenders for those employers not legally required to perform checks. Policy Implications One public policy initiative that has received considerable attention is to deny employers access to criminal history record information, which includes movements to “ban the box” that inquires about criminal history information on job applications. The assumption underlying this movement is that knowledge of ex‐offender status leads directly to a refusal to hire. The results of this analysis show that policy initiatives aimed at restricting background checks, particularly for those firms not legally required to perform checks, may not have the desired consequences of increasing ex‐offender employment. This result is consistent with an alternative view that some employers care about the characteristics of the criminal history record and use information about criminal history in a more nuanced, nondiscrete way.     

RESTITUTION AND RECIDIVISM RATES OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS: RESULTS FROM FOUR EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES*

One of the major changes in juvenile justice during the past decade has been the increased reliance on restitution as a sanction for juvenile offenders. Although a great deal has been learned during the past 10 years about the operation of restitution programs, much remains unknown regarding its impact on recidivism rates. This report contains the results from four random-assignment experiments conducted simultaneously in four communities: Boise, Idaho, Washington, D. C., Clayton County, Georgia, and Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. In all four studies, youths were randomly assigned into restitution and into traditional dispositions. On the whole, the results show that restitution may have a small but important effect on recidivism. However, not all programs will be able to achieve this effect, either because of program management and strategy, community circumstances, or other factors. Youths in the restitution groups never had higher recidivism rates than those in probation or detention conditions. In two of the four studies, the juveniles in restitution clearly had fewer subsequent recontacts with the court during the two-to-three-year follow-up.     

ESTIMATING A DOSE‐RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LENGTH OF STAY AND FUTURE RECIDIVISM IN SERIOUS JUVENILE OFFENDERS*

The effect of sanctions on subsequent criminal activity is of central theoretical importance in criminology. A key question for juvenile justice policy is the degree to which serious juvenile offenders respond to sanctions and/or treatment administered by the juvenile court. The policy question germane to this debate is finding the level of confinement within the juvenile justice system that maximizes the public safety and therapeutic benefits of institutional confinement. Unfortunately, research on this issue has been limited with regard to serious juvenile offenders. We use longitudinal data from a large sample of serious juvenile offenders from two large cities to 1) estimate a causal treatment effect of institutional placement, as opposed to probation, on future rate of rearrest and 2) investigate the existence of a marginal effect (i.e., benefit) for longer length of stay once the institutional placement decision had been made. We accomplish the latter by determining a dose‐response relationship between the length of stay and future rates of rearrest and self‐reported offending. The results suggest that an overall null effect of placement exists on future rates of rearrest or self‐reported offending for serious juvenile offenders. We also find that, for the group placed out of the community, it is apparent that little or no marginal benefit exists for longer lengths of stay. Theoretical, empirical, and policy issues are outlined.     

PREDICTING THE RECIDIVISM OF SERIOUS YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS USING SURVIVAL MODELS*

Increases over the past decade in the number and seriousness of crimes committed by young offenders have resulted in renewed interest in control of the serious, violent, or chronic youthful offender. Recent research has established a number of theoretically relevant variables associated with persistent offending and offending defined recidivism. Few studies, however, have examined the individual characteristics that might predict the timing of youthful recidivism. This paper seeks to fill some gaps in knowledge of the serious youthful offender by estimating a multivariate survival model for a sample of youths paroled from California Youth Authority institutions. The model's results are then used to develop risk-assessment profiles for the sample. We suggest that these profiles may provide a reasonable approach for establishing treatment protocols or supervision requirements for paroled youths.     

PUNISHING POLITICAL OFFENDERS: THE EFFECT OF POLITICAL MOTIVE ON FEDERAL SENTENCING DECISIONS*

Although political motive is frequently avoided as an issue in the prosecution of terrorists, previous research indicates that these offenders consistently receive longer sentences than nonterrorists convicted of similar offenses (Smith, 1994). This study assesses the ability of three theoretical models (consensus, conflict, and structural-contextual) to explain these differences in sentencing patterns. Data on terrorists (N = 95), provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission, is matched with data on a sample of similarly convicted nonterrorists from the Federal Court Cases Integrated Data Base, 1970-1991 (N = 403). Controlling for a number of demographic and sentencing-related variables, the results indicate that the official label of “terrorist” is not only a significant predictor of sentence length, but emerges as the dominant explanatory variable in the analysis. The results provide general support for both consensus and conflict hypotheses, but only partial support for structural-contextual theory. The findings also raise procedural questions regarding the extensive variation in sentencing between similarly situated defendants when political motive is used as a primary criterion for sentence enhancements.     

RECIDIVISM AMONG PAROLED PROPERTY OFFENDERS RELEASED DURING A PERIOD OF PRISON REFORM*

Data from four successive yearly cohorts and one special early release cohort of parolees are used to explore the question of whether rapid statewide changes in the administration of criminal justice affected the patterns of recidivism among persons on parole for property offenses. Given the earlier broadly constructed research reported by Ekland–Olson et al. (1993), and their conclusion that variation in shifting policies would have different effects on different types of offenses, we decided to sharpen the focus of the research questions posed by concentrating on recidivism patterns among property offenders. Three alternative explanations—compositional effects, administrative discretion, and deterrence—are explored to interpret the differences found across cohorts While suggestive, these alternative explanations remain open to question given the limitations inherent in quasi-experimental research. Conclusions related to issues of prison construction policy suggest that more attention be paid to the “replacement factor,” whereby “vacancies” left by incarcerated offenders are rapidly filled by others. If future research supports the rapid replacement hypothesis, increased levels of incarceration will yield a larger, more experienced criminal “work force” and ironically a heightened collective potential for crime.     

EFFECTIVENESS OF DRUG TREATMENT COURTS: EVIDENCE FROM A RANDOMIZED TRIAL*

Research Summary: Study randomly assigned 235 offenders to drug treatment court (DTC) or “treatment as usual.” Analyses of official records collected over a two‐year follow‐up period show that DTC is reducing crime in a population of drug‐addicted offenders. DTC subjects who participated in treatment were significantly less likely to recidivate than were both untreated drug court subjects and control subjects. Policy Implications: Continued enthusiasm for DTCs is warranted. Both sanctions and treatment are important elements of the DTC model. However, DTCs will not necessarily result in cost reductions because DTC and control cases are incarcerated for approximately equal numbers of days. Implementation fidelity is important, and DTCs can be strengthened if they engage a higher percentage of their clients in drug treatment.     

AN ANALYSIS OF PAROLE DECISION MAKING USING A SAMPLE OF SEX OFFENDERS: A FOCAL CONCERNS PERSPECTIVE*

We use data from pre‐sentence investigations and official parole board records to study the correlates of parole release among a sample of men incarcerated for sexual offenses. Cox proportional hazard models are used to estimate change in the likelihood of parole over time, and the focal concerns theory provides the theoretical framework for the analyses. The findings suggest a complex interplay of legal and extralegal factors in understanding parole release decisions. Parole officials weigh heavily offense seriousness, institutional misconduct, and parole readiness scores in making release decisions. In addition, study results reveal that victim and offender age is a salient factor in determining parole judgments. Overall, the current analysis provides a baseline for future research on parole decision making in general, and sexual offenders, in particular.     

TESTING A BAYESIAN LEARNING THEORY OF DETERRENCE AMONG SERIOUS JUVENILE OFFENDERS*

The effect of criminal experience on risk perceptions is of central importance to deterrence theory but has been vastly understudied. This article develops a realistic Bayesian learning model of how individuals will update their risk perceptions over time in response to the signals they receive during their offending experiences. This model implies a simple function that we estimate to determine the deterrent effect of an arrest. We find that an individual who commits one crime and is arrested will increase his or her perceived probability of being caught by 6.3 percent compared with if he or she had not been arrested. We also find evidence that the more informative the signal received by an individual is, the more he or she will respond to it, which is consistent with more experienced offenders responding less to an arrest than less experienced offenders do. Parsing our results out by type of crime indicates that an individual who is arrested for an aggressive crime will increase both his or her aggressive crime risk perception as well as his or her income‐generating crime risk perception, although the magnitude of the former may be slightly larger. This implies that risk perception updating, and thus potentially deterrence, may be partially, although not completely, crime specific.     

DRUG TESTING FOR YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS ON PAROLE: AN EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION*

Research Summary: The present experimental study examined parole outcomes and arrests for 1,958 California Youth Authority parolees, randomly assigned to levels of routine drug testing ranging from “no testing” to two tests per month. Results showed no improved outcomes from more frequent drug testing. Early positive drug tests, however, indicated increased risk of recidivism. Policy Implications: Although limited in its scope, this study provided experimental evidence that little crime‐reduction benefit of routine drug testing above a minimum level exists for regular parolees. However, drug testing may serve as a relatively straightforward risk assessment procedure for future criminal behavior.     

PARTISAN POLITICS,ELECTORAL COMPETITION AND IMPRISONMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF STATES OVER TIME*

The now well‐documented explosion in prison populations over the last 30 years has spurred significant attention in the literature. Early research focused primarily on economic explanations. More recently it has focused on political explanations of prison growth. Here we extend research on political explanations of imprisonment by drawing on the literature on state politics and public policy. We argue that the effect of partisan politics on punishment is conditional on how much electoral competition legislators face. We test this hypothesis using annual state level data on imprisonment from 1978 to 1996. Our findings show that the effect of Republican state legislative strength on prison admissions depends on time and the level of competition in state legislative elections. We argue that these findings suggest the need for a more nuanced understanding of the link between partisan U.S. politics and imprisonment.     

THE IMPACT OF MEGAN'S LAW ON SEX OFFENDER RECIDIVISM: THE MINNESOTA EXPERIENCE*

Although Megan's Law was passed more than 10 years ago, very little is known as to whether it reduces sex offender recidivism significantly. Using a retrospective quasi‐experimental design, we examine whether community notification has a deterrent effect by comparing the recidivism rates of 155 level 3 (“high public risk”) sex offenders released from Minnesota prisons between 1997 and 2002 who were subject to broad notification with two separate control groups who were not. The first control group (referred to as the prenotification group) contained 125 sex offenders released between 1990 and 1996 (the 7 years preceding the implementation of the Community Notification Act) who likely would have been subject to broad community notification had the law been in effect at the time of their release. The second control group (referred to as the non‐notification group) was composed of 155 offenders (37 level 1 and 118 level 2) released between 1997 and 2002 who were not subject to broad community notification. The results from the Cox proportional hazards models reveal that broad community notification significantly reduced the risk of time to a sex reoffense (rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration) compared with both control groups. The findings were mixed, however, for both non‐sex and general reoffending. Whereas broad community notification significantly reduced the risk of timing to both non‐sex and general recidivism compared with the prenotification group, no such effects were found in the non‐notification group analyses. We discuss the implications of these results and attempt to explain why Megan's Law seems to reduce sex offense recidivism in Minnesota.     

PAROLEE RECIDIVISM IN CALIFORNIA: THE EFFECT OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT AND SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY CHARACTERISTICS*

We studied a sample of reentering parolees in California in 2005–2006 to examine whether the social structural context of the census tract, as well as nearby tracts, along with the relative physical closeness of social service providers affects serious recidivism resulting in imprisonment. We found that a 1 standard deviation increase in the presence of nearby social service providers (within 2 miles) decreases the likelihood of recidivating 41 percent and that this protective effect was particularly strong for African American parolees. This protective effect was diminished by overtaxed services (as proxied by potential demand). We found that higher concentrated disadvantage and social disorder (as measured by bar and liquor store capacity) in the tract increases recidivism and that higher levels of disadvantage and disorder in nearby tracts increase recidivism. A 1 standard deviation increase in the concentrated disadvantage of the focal neighborhood and the surrounding neighborhoods increases the likelihood of recidivating by 26 percent. The findings suggest that the social context to which parolees return (both in their own neighborhood and in nearby neighborhoods), as well as the geographic accessibility of social service agencies, play important roles in their successful reintegration.     

LEVELS AND PREDICTORS OF RECIDIVISM: THE MALTA EXPERIENCE*

Research on recidivism has been confined primarily to a few highly industrialized Western nations (e.g., United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Australia) in which the data and resources needed for such research are readily available. The restriction of recidivism research to such a small number of nations begs the question: Do these results reflect patterns of offending and products of the criminal justice systems unique to these nations, or do they describe patterns of recidivism across a much wider range of social and cultural contexts? In this study I extend the scope of recidivism research by examining levels and patterns of recidivism in the Republic of Malta, a small Mediterranean island that differs considerably from the typical context in which recidivism is studied. Specifically, I examine the likelihood of recidivism among persons released from Malta's only prison between 1976 and 1994. In addition, I examine factors shown in previous research to be strong predictors of recidivism to assess their value as predictors of recidivism among Maltese prisoners. Proportional hazards regression models reveal that levels and predictors of recidivism in Malta approximate those observed in societies that are socially and culturally quite different. The findings suggest that the role of social institutions in reintegrating offenders into society may be more complex than commonly believed.     

A REAPPRAISAL OF THE OVERLAP OF VIOLENT OFFENDERS AND VICTIMS*

Because research shows a close association between offending and victimization, recent work has argued that theories that account for crime should explain victimization as well. The current study uses a new approach to examine the extent of the overlap between offenders who commit violent crime and victims of violence to determine whether it is worthwhile to pursue separate theories to account for these phenomena. Specifically, we take the statistical approach that Osgood and Schreck (2007) developed for analyzing specialization in violent versus property offending and apply it to analyzing tendencies to gravitate toward violent offending versus victimization. In doing so, we treat the differentiation into victim and offender roles as an individual‐level latent variable while controlling for confounding between the likelihood that individuals will take either role in violent acts and their overall numbers of encounters with violence (as either offender or victim). Our purpose is to examine 1) whether significant differentiation can be observed between the tendency to be an offender versus the tendency to be a victim, 2) whether any such differential tendency is stable over time, and 3) if it is possible to predict whether individuals will tend toward violent offending versus victimization. Using two waves of data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to explore these objectives, we find significant and stable levels of differentiation between offenders and victims. Moreover, this differentiation is predictable with explanatory variables.