Electronic monitoring: Philosophical, systemic, and political issues

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

Volumn 31, Issue 3-4, 2000, Pages 93-111

  Payne, Brian K ^a   Gainey, Randy R ^a  

^a OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative sanctions; Electronic monitoring; House arrest

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008831944     PISSN: 10509674     EISSN: 15408558     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J076v31n03_06     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Andrews, D.A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R.D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
2. Beccaria, C. (1764). On Crimes and Punishments, translated by Henry Paolucci. Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill. (Reprinted 1963).
3. Blalock, H.M., Jr. (1969). Theory Construction: From Verbal to Mathematical Formulations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4. Brown, M.P., & Elrod, P. (1995). Electronic house arrest: An examination of citizen attitudes. Crime and Delinquency, 41, 332-346.
5. Charles, M.T. (1989). The development of a juvenile electronic monitoring program. Federal Probation, 53, 3-11.
6. Clayton, S. (1998). Implementing innovative approaches to community corrections. Corrections Today, 60, 26.
7. Clear, T.R. (1994). Harm in American Penology. Albany: State University of New York Press.
8. Cobb, R.W. & Elder, C.D. (1983). Participation in American Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
9. Cohn, A.W. (1996). Development of an Agency Based Self-Evaluation Instrument for Electronic Monitoring Programs. Rockville, MD: Administration of Justice Services.
10. Corbett, R.P., & G.T. Marx. (1992). Emerging technofallacies in the electronic monitoring movement. In J. Byrne, A. Lurigio, and J. Petersilia (Eds.), Smart Sentencing: The Emergence of Intermediate Sanctions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 85-102.
11. Courtright, K.E., Berg, B.L., & Mutchnick, R. (1997a). The cost effectiveness of using house arrest with electronic monitoring for drunk drivers. Federal Probation, 61, 19-22.
12. Courtright, K.E., Berg, B.L., & Mutchnick, R. (1997b). The effects of house arrest with electronic monitoring on DUI offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 25, 35-47.
13. Crouch, B.M. (1993). Is incarceration really worse: Analysis of offenders’ preferences for prison over probation. Justice Quarterly, 10, 67-88.
14. Del Carmen, R., & Vaughn, J. (1986). Legal issues in the use of electronic surveillance in probation. Federal Probation 50, 60-69.
15. Dillingham, S.D., Montgomery, R.H., & Tabor, R.W. (1990). Probation and Parole in Practice. Cincinnati: Anderson.
16. Freese, L. (1980). Formal Theorizing. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 187-212.
17. Gainey, R.R., Payne, B.K., & O’toole, M. (1998). Time in jail, time on electronic monitoring, and recidivism: An event history analysis. Paper presented at the Southern Conference on Corrections, Palm Beach, September.
18. Gainey, R.R. & Payne, B.K. (2000). A quantitative and qualitative consideration of offenders’ experiences on electronic monitoring. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(1), 84-96.
19. Grace, A.M. (1990). Home incarceration under electronic monitoring: A statutory review. New York Law School Journal of Human Rights, 7, 285-314.
20. Houk, J.M. (1984). Electronic monitoring of probationers. Golden Gate University Law Review, 14, 431-446.
21. Inciardi, J. (1996). Criminal Justice. 5th edition. New York: Harcourt Brace.
22. Jackson, K.M. (1998). Technology: past, present, & future. Corrections Today, 60, 8-9.
23. Jolin, A., & Stipak, B. (1992). Drug treatment and electronically monitored home confinement: An evaluation of a community-based sentencing option. Crime and Delinquency, 38, 158-170.
24. Jones, M., & Sims, B. (1997). Recidivism of offenders released from prison in North Carolina. The Prison Journal, 77, 335-348.
25. Josephs, R. (1959). Robert Frost’s secret. In W. Nichols (Ed.) Words to Live By. New York: Simon and Schuster. Pp. 172-173.
26. Larivee, J.J. (1993). Community programs: A risky business. Corrections Today, 55, 20-24.
27. Lilly, J.R., & Ball, R. (1987). A brief history of house arrest. Northern Kentucky Law Review, 13, 343-374.
28. Lilly, J.R., & Ball, R. (1993). Selling justice: Will electronic monitoring last? Northern Kentucky Law Review, 20, 505-530.
29. Lilly, J.R., Ball, R., Curry, D., & Smith, R. (1992). The Pride, Inc., Program: An evaluation of 5 years of electronic monitoring. Federal Probation, 56, 42-53.
30. Lilly, J.R. & Knepper, P. (1992). An international perspective on the privatization of Corrections. Howard Journal, 31, 174-91.
31. Loconte, J. (1998). Making criminals pay: A New York County’s bold experiment in biblical justice. Policy Review, 87, 26-32.
32. Maineprize, S. (1992). Electronic monitoring in corrections: Assessing cost effectiveness and the potential for widening the net of social control. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 34, 161-180.
33. Maxfield, M.J., & Baumer, T.L. (1990). Home detention with electronic monitoring: Comparing pretrial and postconviction programs. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 521-36.
34. Merker, S.L. (1986). Living system’s theory: A framework for management. Behavioral Sciences, 31, 187-204.
35. Muncie, J. (1990). A prisoner in my own home: The politics and practice of electronic monitoring. Probation Journal, 37, 72-77.
36. O’toole, M. (1999). Predictors of recidivism in an electronic monitoring program. Unpublished manuscript.
37. Papy, J.E., & Nimer, R. (1991). Electronic monitoring in Florida. Federal Probation, 55, 31-33.
38. Parent, W.A. (1983). Privacy, morality, and the law. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12, 269.
39. Payne, B.K., & Gainey, R.R. (1998a). A qualitative assessment of the pains experienced on electronic monitoring. International Journal ofOffender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 42, 49-163.
40. Payne, B.K., & Gainey, R.R. (1998b). Electronic monitoring program directors’ attitudes about good time: A useful strategy? Unpublished manuscript.
41. Payne, B.K., & Gainey, R.R. (2000). Attitudes toward electronic monitoring among criminal justice and monitored offenders and criminal justice students. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 29(3/4), 195-208.
42. Petersilia, J. (1986). Exploring the option of house arrest. Federal Probation, 50, 50-59.
43. Petersilia, J. (1997). Probation in the United States. Crime and Justice: A Review ofResearch, 22, 149-200.
44. Petersilia, J., & Deschenes, E.P. (1994a). What punishes? Inmates rank the severity of prison vs. intermediate sanctions. Federal Probation, 58, 3-8.
45. Petersilia, J., & Deschenes, E.P. (1994b). Perceptions of punishment: Inmates and staff rank severity of prison vs. intermediate sanctions. Prison Journal, 74, 306-329.
46. Rackmill, S.J. (1994). An analysis of home confinement as a sanction. Federal Probation, 58, 45-52.
47. Renzema, M. (1999). How monitoring punishes: Editor’s Note. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 12, 23.
48. Roberts, J.V. (1992). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. Crime and Justice: A Review ofResearch, 16, 99-180.
49. Rogers, J.L. (1991). Missed opportunities: Politics, research and public policy. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 35, 279-282.
50. Roy, S. (1997). Five years of electronic monitoring of Adults in Lake County, Indiana: A comparative study on factors related to failure. Journal ofCrime and Justice, 20, 141-160.
51. Schmallager, F. (1997). Criminal Justice Today. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Simon and Schuster.
52. Schmidt, A.K. (1991). Electronic monitors: Realistically, what can be expected? Federal Probation, 55, 47-53.
53. Shafritz, J.M., & Whitbeck, P. (1978). Classics of Organization Theory. Chicago, IL: Moore.
54. Sigler, R.T., & Lamb, D. (1995). Community-based alternatives to prison: How the public and court personnel view them. Federal Probation, 59, 3-9.
55. Spelman, W. (1995). The severity of intermediate sanctions. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32, 107-135.
56. Sykes, G. (1958). The Society of Captives. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
57. Tansik, D.A., & Elliot, T. (1981). Managing Police Organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Druxbury.
58. Tonry, M., & Lynch, M. (1996). Intermediate sanctions. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 20, 99-144.
59. Van Gigch, J.P. 1978. Applied General Systems Theory. New York: Harper and Row.
60. von Hirsch, A. (1990). The ethics of community-based sanctions. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 162-173.
61. Walker, J.L. (1990). Sharing the credit, sharing the blame: Managing political risks in electronically monitored house arrest. Federal Probation, 54, 16-20.
62. Warr, M., & Stafford, M. (1984). Public goals of punishment and support forthe death penalty. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21, 95-111.
63. Whitman, C.T (1998). Bringing balance to the criminal justice system. Crime and Delinquency, 44, 70-74.
64. Zahn, M. (1999). Thoughts on the future of Criminology: The American Society of Criminology 1998 Presidential Address. Criminology, 37, 1-16