Meta-analysis and its discontents

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 23-40

  Pratt, Travis C ^a  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Correctional rehabilitation; Meta analysis; Michael Gottfredson

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009647951     PISSN: 10509674     EISSN: 15408558     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J076v35n01_02     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Andrews, D.A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R.D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & and Cullen, F.T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology 28:369-404.
2. Begg, C.B., & Berlin, J.A. (1988). Publication bias: A problem in interpreting medical data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 151:419-463.
3. Byrne, J.M., Lurigio, A.J., & Petersilia, J. (1992). Smart sentencing: The emergence of intermediate sanctions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Revised edition. New York: Academic Press.
5. Conrad, J. (1973). Corrections and simple justice. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 64:208-217.
6. Cooper, H.M. (1979). Statistically combining independent studies: A meta-analysis of sex differences in conformity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:131-146.
7. Cullen, F.T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. In Criminal Justice 2000, Horney, J. (Ed.), Vol. 3 (pp. 109-175). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
8. Cullen, F.T., & Gilbert, K.E. (1982). Reaffirming rehabilitation. Cincinnati: Anderson.
9. Cullen, F.T., Wright, J.P, Brown, S., Moon, M.M., Blankenship, M.B., & Applegate, B.K. (1998). Public support for early intervention programs: Implications for a progressive policy agenda. Crime and Delinquency 44:187-204.
10. Currie, E. (1998). Crime and punishment in America. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
11. Dilulio, J.J. (1999). Two million prisoners are enough. The Wall Street Journal, March 12.
12. Doleschal, E., & Klamputs, N. (1973). Toward a new criminology. Crime and Delinquency Literature 5:607-627.
13. Feinberg, S, & Grambasch, P. (1979). Appendix: An assessment of the accuracy of The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment. In Sechrest, L. et al. (Eds.), The rehabilitation of criminal offenders: Problems and prospects (pp. 119-147). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
14. Friedman, L.M.(1993). Crime and punishment in American history. New York: Basic Books.
15. Fulton, B., Latessa, E.J., Stichman, A., & Travis, L.F. (1997). The state of ISP: Research and policy implications. Federal Probation 61 (4):65-75.
16. Furby, L., Weinrott, M.R., & Blackshaw, L. (1989). Sex offender recidivism: A review. Psychological Bulletin 105:3-30.
17. Gaes, G.G. (1998). Correctional treatment. In Tonry, M. (Ed.), The handbook of crime and punishment (pp. 712-738). New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Garland, D. (1990). Punishment in modern society: A study in social theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. Garrett, C.J. (1985). Effects of residential treatment of adjudicated delinquents: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 22:287-308.
20. Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In Harland, A.T. (Ed.), Choosing Correctional Options That Work (pp. 117-130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D.A. (1990). Tertiary prevention: What the meta-analysis of the offender treatment literature tells us about “what works.” Canadian Journal of Criminology 32:173-84.
22. Gendreau, P., Cullen, F.T., & Bonta, J. (1994). Intensive rehabilitation supervision: The next generation of community corrections programs? Federal Probation 58(1):72-78.
23. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., Cullen, F.T., & Andrews, D.A. (2000). The effects of community sanctions and incarceration on recidivism. Forum on Corrections Research 12(2):10-13.
24. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., Cullen, F.T., & Paparozzi, M. (Forthcoming). The common sense revolution and correctional policy. In McGuire, J. (Ed.), Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment: Effective Programs and Policies to Reduce Re-Offending. Chichester, UK: Wiley and Sons.
25. Gendreau, P., & Ross, R. (1987). Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s. Justice Quarterly 4:349-407.
26. Gensheimer, L.K., Mayer, J.P., Gottschalk, R., & Davidson, W.S. (1986). Diverting youth from the juvenile justice system: A meta-analysis of intervention efficacy. In Apter, S.J., & Goldstein, A.P. (Eds.), Youth Violence (pp. 39-57). New York: Pergamon Press.
27. Gilliard, D.K. (1998). Prison and jail inmates atmidyear 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
28. Glass, G.V. (1977). Integrating findings: The meta-analysis of research. Review of Research in Education 5:351-379.
29. Glass, G.V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M.L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
30. Gottfredson, M.R. (1979). Treatment destruction techniques. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 16:39-54.
31. Gottschalk, R., Davidson, W.S., Mayer, J., & Genshemier, L.K. (1987). Behavioral approaches with juvenile offenders: A meta-analysis of long-term treatment efficacy. In Morris, E.K., & Brackman, C.J. (Eds.), Behavioral approaches to crime and delinquency: A handbook (pp. 399-422). New York: Plenum.
32. Hollin, C. (1999). Treatment programs for offenders: Meta-analysis, “what works,” and beyond. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 22:361-372.
33. Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
34. Hunter, J.E., Schmidt, F.L., & Jackson, G.B. (1982). Meta-analysis: Cumulating research findings across studies. Beverly Hills: Sage.
35. Izzo, R., & Ross, R.R. (1990). Meta-analysis of rehabilitation programs for juvenile delinquents. Criminal Justice and Behavior 17:134-142.
36. Jackson, G.B. (1980). Methods for integrative reviews. Review of Education Research 50:438-460.
37. Kingdon, J.W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd ed. New York: Harper Collins.
38. Kraemer, H.C., & Andrews, G. (1982). A nonparametric technique for meta-analysis effect size calculation. Psychological Bulletin 91:404-412.
39. Kulik, J. (1983). Book review: G.V. Glass et al., Meta-Analysis in Social Research (Sage, 1981). Evaluation News 4:101-105.
40. Lab, S.P., & Whitehead, J.T. (1990). From “nothing works” to the “appropriate works”: The latest stop on the search for the secular grail. Criminology 28:405-417.
41. Langan, P.A., Fundis, J.V., Greenfield, L.A., & Schneider, V.W. (1988). Historical statistics on prisoners in state and federal institutions, 1925-1986. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
42. Latessa, E.J., & Moon, M.M. (1992). The effectiveness of acupuncture in an outpatient drug treatment program. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 8:317-331.
43. Latessa, E.J., & Travis, L.F. (1991). Halfway house or probation: A comparison of alternative dispositions. Journal of Crime and Justice 14:53-75.
44. Light, R., & Smith, P. (1971). Accumulating evidence: Procedures for resolving contradictions among different research studies. Harvard Education Review 41:429-471.
45. Lipsey, M. (1992). Juvenile delinquency treatment: A meta-analytic inquiry into the variability of effects. In Cook, T.D. et al. (Eds.), Meta-analysis for explanation (pp. 83-127). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
46. Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D.B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment. American Psychologist 48:1181-1209.
47. Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D.B. (1998). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders: A synthesis of research. In Loeber, R., & Farrington, D.P. (Eds.), Never too early, never too late: Risk factors and successful interventions for serious and violent juvenile offenders (pp. 313-345). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Lipton, D.S. (1995). CDATE: Updating the Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment 25 years later. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 22(1/2):1-20.
49. Lipton, D.S. (1998). Treatment for drug abusing offenders during correctional supervision: A nationwide overview. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 26(3/4):1-45.
50. Lipton, D.S., Martinson, R., & J. Wilks. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies. New York: Praeger.
51. Logan, C.H., & Gaes, G.G. (1993). Meta-analysis and the rehabilitation of punishment. Justice Quarterly 10:245-263.
52. Losel, F. (1995). The efficacy of correctional treatment: A review and synthesis of meta-evaluations. In McGuire, J. (Ed.), What works: Reducing reoffending (pp. 79-111). New York: Wiley.
53. Losel, F., & Koferl, P. (1989). Evaluation research on correctional treatment in West Germany: A meta-analysis. In Wegener, H. et al. (Eds.), Criminal behavior and the justice system: Psychological perspectives (pp. 334-355). New York: SpringerVerlag.
54. Lurigio, A.J., & Petersilia, J. (1992). The emergence of intensive probation supervision programs in the United States. In Byrne, J.M. et al. (Eds.), Smart sentencing: The emergence of intermediate sanctions (pp. 3-17). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
55. MacKenzie, D.L. (1997). Criminal justice and crime prevention. In Sherman, L. et al. (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising-A report to the United States Congress. Unpublished Report, University of Maryland.
56. Mann, C.C. (1994). Can meta-analysis make policy? Science 266:960-962.
57. Martinson, R. (1974). What works?-Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest (spring):22-54.
58. Martinson, R. (1979). New findings, new views: A note of caution regarding sentencing reform. Hofstra Law Review 7:243-258.
59. Mayer, J.P, Gensheimer, L.K., Davidson, W.S., & Gottschalk, R. (1986). Social learning treatment within juvenile justice: A meta-analysis of impact in the natural environment. In Apter, S.J., & Goldstein, A.P. (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 24-38). New York: Pergamon Press.
60. Miethe, T.D., Lu, H., & Reese, E. (2000). Reintegrative shaming and recidivism risks in drug court: Explanations for some unexpected findings. Crime and Delinquency 46:522-541.
61. Nagayama Hall, G.C. (1995). Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent treatment studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 63:802-809.
62. Niemi, R.G. (1986). Series editor’s introduction. In Wolf, F.M., Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis (pp. 5-6). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
63. Palmer, T. (1975). Martinson revisited. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 12:133-152.
64. Palmer, T. (1992). The re-emergence of correctional intervention. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
65. Pearson, F.S., & Lipton, D.S. (1999). A meta-analytic review of the effectiveness of corrections-based treatments for drug abuse. The Prison Journal 79:384-410.
66. Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1993). Intensive probation and parole. In Tonry, M. (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research, Vol. 17 (pp. 281-335). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
67. Pillemer, D., & Light, R. (1980). Synthesizing outcomes: How to use research from many studies. Harvard Education Review 50:176-195.
68. Pratt, T.C., & Cullen, F.T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology 38:931-964.
69. Pratt, T.C., Maahs, J., & Stehr, S.D. (1998). The symbolic ownership of corrections “problem”: A framework for understanding the development of corrections policy in the United States. The Prison Journal 78:451-464.
70. Prentky, R., & Burgess, A.W. (1990). Rehabilitation of child molesters: A cost-benefit analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 60:108-117.
71. Presby, S. (1978). Overly broad categories obscure important differences between therapies. American Psychologist 33:514-515.
72. Redondo, S., Garrido, V., & Sanchez-Meca, J. (1997). What works in correctional treatment in Europe: A meta-analytical review. In Redondo, S. et al. (Eds.), Advances in psychology and law: International contributions (pp. 499-523). New York: Walter de Gruyter.
73. Redondo, S., Sanchez-Meca, J., & Garrido, V. (1999). The influence of treatment programmes on the recidivism of juvenile and adult offenders: An European meta-analytic review. Psychology, Crime and Law 5:251-278.
74. Renzema, M. (1992). Home confinement programs: Development, implementation, and impact. In Byrne, J.M. et al. (Eds.), Smart sentencing: The emergence of intermediate sanctions (pp. 41-53). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
75. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The “file drawer” problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86:638-641.
76. Sherman, L.W., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D.L., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S.D. (1998). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
77. Stone, D.A. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. New York: Harper Collins.
78. van den Haag, E. (1975). Punishing criminals. New York: Basic Books.
79. Vito, G. (1984). Developments in shock probation: A review of research findings and policy implications. Federal Probation 48(2):22-27.
80. Wells-Parker, E., & Bangert-Drowns, R. (1991). Meta-analysis of research on DUI remedial interventions. Alcohol, Drugs and Driving 6:147-160.
81. Whitehead, J.T., & Lab, S.P. (1989). A meta-analysis of juvenile correctional treatment. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26:276-295.
82. Wolf, F.M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.