General risk and need, gender specificity, and the recidivism of female offenders

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 29-46

  Rettinger, L Jill ^a   Andrews, D A ^a  

^a University Partnership Centre   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adult female offenders; Gender specific; Recidivism; Risk factors

Indexed keywords

EID: 72449172489     PISSN: 00938548     EISSN: 15523594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0093854809349438     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Andrews, D.A. (1982). The Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI): The first follow-up. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Ministry of Correctional Services.
2. Andrews, D.A. (2001). Principles of effective correctional programs. In L. L. Motiuk & R. C. Serin (Eds.), Compendium 2000 on effective correctional treatment (pp. 9-17). Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service Canada, Research Branch.
3. Andrews, D.A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
4. Andrews, D.A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Newark, NJ: Lexis Nexis /Mathew Bender.
5. Andrews, D.A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R.D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19-52.
6. Andrews, D.A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S.J. (2004). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
7. Andrews, D.A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S.J. (2006). Recent past and near future of risk/need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7-27.
8. Andrews, D.A., Bonta, J., Wormith, S.J., Guzzo, L., & Brews, A. (2008). The relative and incremental predictive validity of gender-neutral and gender-informed risk/need. Unpublished manuscript, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
9. Andrews, D.A., Kiessling, J.J., Mickus, S., & Robinson, D. (1986). The construct validity of interview-based risk assessment in corrections. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 18, 460-470.
10. Baumeister, R.F., & Vohs, K.D. (2004). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. New York: Guilford.
11. Belknap, J., & Holsinger, K. (2006). The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1, 48-71.
12. Blanchette, K., & Brown, S.L. (2006). The assessment and treatment of women offenders: An integrative perspective. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
13. Bloom, B., Owen, B., Piper Deschenes, E., & Rosenbaum, J. (2002). Improving juvenile justice for females: A statewide assessment in California. Crime & Delinquency, 48, 526-551.
14. Bonta, J., Pang, B., & Wallace-Capretta, S. (1995). Predictors of recidivism among incarcerated female offenders. Prison Journal, 75, 277-294.
15. Chesney-Lind, M., & Pasko, L. (2004). The female offender: Girls, women, and crime (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. Covington, S.S., & Bloom, B. (1999). Gender-responsive programming and evaluation for women in the criminal justice system: A shift from what works? to what is the work? Paper presented at the 51st annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
17. Daly, K. (1992). Women's pathways to felony court: Feminist theories of law-breaking and problems of representation. Southern California Review of Law and Women's Studies, 2, 11-52.
18. Daly, K. (1994). Gender, crime and punishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19. Farrington, D., & Painter, K. (2004). Gender differences in risk factors for offending (Home Office RDS Online Report OLR09/04). Retrieved October 25, 2008, from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/onlinepubs1.html.
20. Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In F. X. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 117-130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 575-607.
22. Hannah-Moffat, K. (2009). Gridlock or mutability: Reconsidering gender and risk assessment. Criminology and Public Policy, 8, 209-219.
23. Hannah-Moffat, K., & Shaw, M. (2001). Taking risks: Incorporating gender and culture into the classification and assessment of federally sentenced women in Canada. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Status of Women Canada.
24. Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M.D., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, state capital, and recidivism among women offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 185-209.
25. Hubbard, D.J., & Mathews, B. (2008). Reconciling the differences between the gender-responsive and the what works literature to improve services for girls. Crime & Delinquency, 54, 225-258.
26. Hubbard, D.J., & Pratt, T.C. (2002). A meta-analysis of the predictors of delinquency among girls. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 34, 1-13.
27. Loucks, A., & Zamble, E. (1999). Predictors of recidivism in serious female offenders. Corrections Today, 61, 26-32.
28. Lovins, L.B., Lowenkamp, C.T., Latessa, E.J., & Smith, P. (2007). Application of the risk principle to female offenders. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23, 383-398.
29. Lowenkamp, C.T., Holsinger, A.M., & Latessa, E.J. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of childhood abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 543-563.
30. McGuire, J. (2004). Understanding psychology and crime: Perspectives on theory and action. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
31. National Institute of Corrections. (2004). Implementing evidence-based practice in community corrections: The principles of effective intervention. Washington, DC: Author.
32. Patton, P., & Morgan, M. (2002). How to implement Oregon's guidelines for effective gender-responsive programming for girls. Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://oregon.gov/OCCF/Documents/JCP/GenderSpecific.pdf.
33. Raynor, P. (2007). Risk and need assessment in British probation: The contribution of LSI-R. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 13, 125-138.
34. Reisig, M.D., Holtfreter, K., & Morash, M. (2006). Assessing recidivism risk across female pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23, 384-405.
35. Rettinger, L.J. (1998). A recidivism follow-up study investigating risk and need within a sample of provincially sentenced women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
36. Shaw, M. (1994). Ontario women in conflict with the law: A survey of women in institutions and under community supervision in Ontario. North Bay, Ontario, Canada: Ministry of the Solicitor General and Community Services.
37. Smith, P., Cullen, F.T., & Latessa, E.J. (2009). Can 14,737 women be wrong? A meta-analysis of the LSI-R and recidivism for female offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 8, 183-207.
38. Van Voorhis, P., Salisbury, E., Wright, E., & Bauman, A. (2008). Achieving accurate pictures of risk and identifying gender responsive needs: Two new assessments for women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.