Moderating probation and parole officer attitudes to achieve desired outcomes

Prison Journal

Volumn 77, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 295-312

  Fulton, Betsy ^a   Stichman, Amy ^a   Travis, Lawrence ^a   Latessa, Edward ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039153049     PISSN: 00328855     EISSN: 15527522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0032855597077003005     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Andrews, D. A. (1979). The dimensions of correctional counseling and supervision process in probation and parole. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
2. Andrews, D., Zinger, I., Hoge, R., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically-relevant and psychologically-informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
3. Baird, S. C., & Wagner, D. (1990). Measuring diversion: The Florida Community Control Program. Crime & Delinquency, 28, 374-409.
4. Barkdull, W. (1976). Probation: Call it control and mean it. Federal Probation, 40, 3-8.
5. Blumberg, A. S. (1974). Criminal justice. New York: New Viewpoints.
6. Byrne, J., & Kelly, L. (1989). Restructuring probation as an intermediate sanction: An evaluation of the Massachusetts Intensive Probation Supervision Program (Final report to the National Institute of Justice, Research Program on the Punishment and Control of Offenders). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
7. Clear, T. R., & Latessa, E. J. (1993). Probation officer roles in intensive supervision: Surveillance versus treatment. Justice Quarterly, 10, 441-462.
8. Clear, T. R., & O'Leary, V. O. (1983). Controlling the offender in the community. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
9. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Dembo, R. (1972). Orientation and activities of the parole officer. Criminology, 10(2), 193-215.
11. Duffee, D. (1975). Correctional policy and prison organization. New York: Russell Sage.
12. Erwin, B. (1987). Final report: Evaluation of intensive probation supervision in Georgia. Atlanta: Georgia Department of Corrections.
13. Erwin, B. S., & Bennett, L. A. (1987). New dimensions in probation: Georgia's experience with intensive probation supervision (IPS). Research in brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
14. Fulton, B., Stone, S., & Gendreau, P. (1994). Restructuring intensive supervision programs: Applying what works. Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association.
15. Gendreau, P. (1994). Principles of effective intervention. In B. Fulton, S. Stone, & P. Gendreau (Eds.), Restructuring intensive supervision programs: Applying what works. Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association.
16. Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. (1990). Tertiary prevention: What the meta-analyses of the offender treatment literature tell us about "what works." Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 173-184.
17. Gendreau, P., & Goggin, C. (1997). Principles of effective intervention. In P. Van Voorhis, D. Lester, & M. Braswell (Eds.), Correctional counseling and rehabilitation. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
18. Gendreau, P., & Ross, R. R. (1987). Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s. Justice Quarterly, 4, 349-407.
19. Glaser, D. (1964). The effectiveness of a prison and parole system. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
20. Hardyman, P. (1988). No frills: A study of probation resources, activities and outcome. Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University.
21. Harris, M. K. (1987). Observations of a "friend of the court" on the future of probation and parole. Federal Probation, 51(4), 12-21.
22. Harris, P. M., Clear, T. R., & Baird, C. S. (1989). Have probation/parole officers changed their attitudes toward their work? Justice Quarterly, 6, 233-246.
23. Heise, D. J. (1971). The semantic differential and attitude research. In C. E. Osgood, G. J. Suci, & P. H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), The measurement of meaning (pp. 235-253). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
24. Jolin, A., & Stipak, B. (1992). Drug treatment and electronically monitored home confinement: An evaluation of a community-based sentencing option. Crime & Delinquency, 38, 158-170.
25. Katz, J. (1982). The attitudes and decisions of probation officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9, 455-475.
26. Klockars, C. B., Jr. (1972). A theory of probation supervision. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 63(4), 550-557.
27. Latessa, E. J. (1987). The effectiveness of intensive supervision with high risk probationers. In B. McCarthy (Ed.), Intermediate punishments: Intensive supervision, home confinement and electronic surveillance (pp. 99-112). New York: Criminal Justice Press.
28. McCleary, R. (1978). Dangerous men: The sociology of parole. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29. Mueller, D. J. (1986). Measuring social attitudes: A handbook for researchers and practitioners. New York: Teachers College Press.
30. Ohlin, L. E., Piven, H., & Pappenfort, D. M. (1956). Major dilemmas of the social worker in probation and parole. National Probation and Parole Association, 11, 211-225.
31. O'Leary, V., & Duffee, D. (1971). Correctional policy: A classification of goals designed for change. Crime & Delinquency, 17, 373-386.
32. Paparozzi, M. (n.d.). An evaluation of the New Jersey Board of Parole's intensive supervision program. Unpublished report.
33. Pearson, F. S. (1987). Final report of research on New Jersey's intensive supervision program. Institute for Criminological Research, Rutgers University.
34. Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1993). Evaluating intensive supervision probation/parole: Results of a nationwide experiment. Research in brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
35. Rowan, J. R. (1956). Let's define surveillance and treatment in parole. Proceedings of the American Correctional Association. College Park, MD: American Correctional Association.
36. Shichor, D. (1978). The people changing versus people processing organizational perspective: The case of correctional institutions. LAE-Journal of the American Criminal Justice Association, 41(3), 37-44.
37. Sluder, R. D., & Reddington, F. P. (1993). An empirical examination of the work ideologies of juvenile and adult probation officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 20(1-2), 115-137.
38. Sluder, R. D., Shearer, R. A., & Potts, D. W. (1991). Probation officers' role perceptions and attitudes toward firearms. Federal Probation, 55(3), 3-11.
39. Studt, E. (1978). Surveillance and service to parole. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
40. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1993). Intensive probation supervision: Crime-control and cost-saving effectiveness. Washington, DC: Author.
41. Wagner, D., & Baird, C. (1993). Evaluation of the Florida Community Control Program. Research in brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
42. Whitehead, J. T. (1989). Probation mission reform: Implications for the forgotten actor-The probation officer. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 12, 15-21.
43. Whitehead, J. T., & Lindquist, C. A. (1985). Job stress and burnout among probation/parole officers: Perceptions and causal factors. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 29, 109-119.