Caleb D. Lloyd

Examining the process of offender change: the transition to crime desistance

Abstract Prior research focusing on crime acquisition and crime desistance has advanced the theoretical understanding of the psychology of crime and overcome many of the practical challenges of crime management. This paper, however, aims to encourage more detailed examination of the process through which offenders transition from crime to desistance. Desistance occurs when external and internal variables align in such a way that an offender with a history of multiple offences ceases all criminal activity. It is argued that systematic examination of behaviour change among offenders will complement current approaches to offender rehabilitation, risk assessment and community supervision. Previous research on crime acquisition, crime desistance and behaviour change are briefly reviewed. In addition, the theoretical assumptions of leading models of rehabilitation are examined. Finally, strategies to further integrate various research findings are discussed and several broad research hypotheses are offered.

ENHANCING OFFENDER RE-ENTRY An integrated model for enhancing offender re-entry

Notwithstanding diminishing crime rates in many countries, high rates of incarceration continue to engage political and public scrutiny in the management of (increasing) correctional populations. It appears such interest is driven by the competing concerns of fiscal pressures and ideological shifts: essentially lack of funds and, in many jurisdictions, a lean towards more conservative doctrines regarding offender care. Perhaps not completely surprisingly, these two themes can also actually work in harmony. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the United States, where spiralling costs of corrections appear to have seduced politicians to consider less punitive models which, ironically, are more effective at reducing crime and costs. At present, various states have embraced what has often been referred to as the Canadian model, that is, a less punitive and more empirically-grounded rehabilitative approach to addressing crime. Indeed, the number of U.S. citizens involved in the criminal justice system is staggering (7.3 million adults), with approximately 700,000 individuals returning home each year to their communities from prison. Encouragingly, recent legislation and funding such as the Second Chance Act have put a spotlight on offender re-entry. The purpose of this paper is to critically examine how well the field is positioned to meet proffered expectations for re-entry regarding risk reduction and public safety and to debate whether existing conceptualizations of offender change can adequately inform offender re-entry initiatives.

Rehabilitation group coparticipants' risk levels are associated with offenders' treatment performance, treatment change, and recidivism

OBJECTIVE Exposure to antisocial others within treatment group sessions may have negative impact. We extend prior research with adolescents by examining rehabilitation group composition among adult male incarcerated offenders. METHOD Data were gathered from institution files of rehabilitation completers (N = 1,832; M age = 33.5; 19% Aboriginal, 68% Caucasian), including general, substance, violent, and sex offenders. Capacities for treatment (including motivation, learning ability, and inhibitory control) were gathered from intake assessments. At the beginning and end of rehabilitation, providers rated program performance. Risk for recidivism and postrelease recidivism were gathered from official files, up to 3 years following release. RESULTS Group effects accounted for up to 40% of variance in program outcomes. Group features (average group participant risk to reoffend and risk score diversity) significantly interacted with treatment capacities to explain program outcomes. Most models revealed a dampening effect whereby the positive association between capacities and outcome was reduced in groups of higher risk and more risk diverse coparticipants. Group composition typically accounted for 30-38% of variance between groups, but total variance in outcome explained was generally small. Higher average group risk predicted postrelease recidivism among family violence offenders. CONCLUSIONS Coparticipants should be considered when researching and providing group programs to adult offenders, with specific attention toward how positive outcomes may be attenuated in the presence of criminogenic coparticipants.

What and Who Might Enhance Offender Compliance: Situating Responsibilities

Recent legislative interest in decarceration (Gartner et al. 2011) and spiralling costs of incarceration have led to community corrections enjoying a kind of renaissance. Indeed, various researchers have implemented empirically informed training and intervention strategies that are changing probation policy and practice. To a large extent, the focus of such training is to give probation staff the necessary skills to better manage their face to face contacts with their clientele beyond a simple check-in and review of supervision conditions. This recent evolution in probation practice has yielded modest but replicable reductions in probation failures (i.e. breaches for technical violations and rates of reoffending (Bonta et al. 2008; Robinson et al. 2011) and has been described as core correctional practice (Dowden and Andrews 2004).