A random study of staff training aimed at reducing re-arrest (starr): Using core correctional practices in probation interactions

Journal of Crime and Justice

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 167-188

  Robinson, Charles R ^a   Lowenkamp, Christopher T ^a   Holsinger, Alexander M ^b   VanBenschoten, Scott ^a   Alexander, Melissa ^c   Oleson, J C ^d  

^a Administrative Office of the United States Courts   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY   (United States)

^c US Probation North Carolina Middle   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Officer training; Probation; Recidivism; RNR

Indexed keywords

EID: 85064024862     PISSN: 0735648X     EISSN: 21589119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0735648X.2012.674823     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Administrative Office of the US Courts. 2009a. “ Guide to judiciary policy. Vol. 8, Part C ”. Vol. 8, Unpublished/intranet document.
2. Administrative Office of the US Courts. 2009b. “ Guide to judiciary policy. Vol. 8, Part E ”. Vol. 8, Unpublished/intranet document.
3. Alexander, M., and Vanbenschoten, S., 2008. The evolution of supervision in the federal probation system. Federal Probation, 72 (2): 15–21.
4. Andrews, D. A., and Bonta, J., 2003. The psychology of criminal conduct (3rd ed.), Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
5. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., and Hoge, R., 1990. Classification for effective rehabilitation: rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17: 19–52.
6. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., and Wormith, J. S., 2011. The risk–need–responsivity (RNR) model: does adding the good lives model contribute to effective crime prevention?. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38 (7): 735–755.
7. Andrews, D. A., and Carvell, C., 1998. Core correctional treatment — core correctional supervision and counseling: theory, research, assessment and practice, Ottawa: Carleton University.
8. Andrews, D. A., and Kiessling, J. J., 1980. “ Program structure and effective correctional practices. A summary of CaVIC research ”. In Effective correctional treatment, Edited by: Ross, R. R., and Gendreau, P., 441–463. Toronto: Butterworths.
9. Andrews, D. A., 1990. Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28 (3): 369–404.
10. Aos, S., Miller, M., and Drake, E., 2006. Evidence-based adult corrections programs: what works and what does not, Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
11. Baer, J. S., 2004. An evaluation of workshop training in motivational interviewing foraddiction and mental health clinicians. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 73 (1): 99–106.
12. Bonta, J., Rugge, T., and Coles, R., 2004. Case management in Manitoba probation, Manitoba, Canada: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada.
13. Bonta, J., 2008. Exploring the black box of community supervision. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47 (3): 248–270.
14. Bonta, J., 2010. The strategic training initiative in community supervision: risk, need, responsivity in the real world, Ottawa: Public Safety Canada.
15. Carlson, E. W., and Parks, E. C., 1979. Critical issues in adult probation, Washington, DC: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.
16. Clear, T. R., and Latessa, E. J., 1993. Probation officer roles in intensive supervision: surveillance versus treatment. Justice Quarterly, 10: 441–462.
17. Dowden, C., and Andrews, D. A., 2004. The importance of staff practice in delivering effective correctional treatment: a meta-analytic review of core correctional practices. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48 (2): 203–214.
18. Eaglin, J. B., 1997. RPI profiles: descriptive information about offenders grouped by their RPI scores, Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center.
19. Fixsen, D. L., 2005. Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature, Tampa: University of South Florida.
20. Gendreau, P., Little, T., and Goggin, C., 1996. A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: what works!. Criminology, 34 (4): 575–607.
21. Glaser, D., 1969. The effectiveness of a prison and parole system, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
22. Glaze, L., 2010. Correctional populations in the United States, 2009, Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
23. Green, D., and Winik, D., 2010. Using random judge assignments to estimate the effects of incarceration and probation on recidivism among drug offenders. 48 (2): 357–387.
24. Jaccard, J., and Turrisi, R., 2003. Interaction effects in multiple regression, 2nd ed, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Jalbert, S. K., 2011. A multi-site evaluation of reduced probation caseload size in an evidence-based practice setting, Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.
26. Klockars, C. B., 1972. A theory of probation supervision. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 63: 550–557.
27. Lombard, P., Hooper, L., and Rauma, D., 2001. Risk prediction index: frequently asked questions, Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center.
28. Lowenkamp, C. T., and Latessa, E. J., 2005. Developing successful reentry programs: lessons learned from the ‘What Works' research. Corrections Today, April
29. Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E., and Holsinger, A., 2006a. The risk principle in action: what have we learned from 13,676 offenders and 97 correctional programs?. Crime and Delinquency, 51 (1): 1–17.
30. Lowenkamp, C. T., Lowenkamp, M. S., and Robinson, C. R., 2010. Effective Practices in Correctional Settings-II. Raleigh, NC: Lulu Publishing
31. Lowenkamp, C. T., Robinson, C. R., and Vanbenschoten, S. W., 2011. Initial STARR results: a positive step forward. News & Views: A Biweekly Newsletter of the United States Probation and Pretrial Services System, 36 (8): 3–4.
32. Martinson, R., 1974. What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Public Interest, (Spring): 22–54.
33. Menard, S., 2001. Applied logistic regression analysis, 2nd ed, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Miller, W. R., and Mount, K. A., 2001. A small study of training in motivational interviewing: does one workshop change clinician and client behavior?. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29: 457–471.
35. Miller, W. R., and Rollnick, S., 2002. Motivational interviewing: preparing people for change, 2nd ed, New York: Guilford Press.
36. Ohlin, L. E., Piven, H., and Pappenfort, M. D., 1956. Major dilemmas of the social worker in probation and parole. National Probation and Parole Association Journal, 2: 21–25.
37. Paparozzi, M., and Gendreau, P., 2005. An intensive supervision program that worked: service delivery, professional orientation, and organizational supportiveness. The Prison Journal, 85 (4): 445–466.
38. Paparozzi, M., and Lowenkamp, C. T., 2000. To be or not to be–a profession–that is the question for corrections. Corrections Management Quarterly, 4 (2): 9–16.
39. Posavac, E., and Carey, R., 2003. Program evaluation: methods and case studies, 6th ed, Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
40. Rogers, E. M., 2003. Diffusion of innovations, 5th ed, New York: Free Press.
41. Skeem, J., 2007. Assessing relationship quality in mandated treatment: blending care with control. Psychological Assessment, 19 (4): 397–410.
42. Solomon, A., Kachnowski, V., and Bhati, A., 2005. Does parole work? Analyzing the impact of postprison supervision on rearrest outcomes, Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
43. Taxman, F., 2002. Supervision–exploring the dimensions of effectiveness. Federal Probation, 66 (2): 14–27.
44. Taxman, F., 2008a. No illusion, offender and organizational change in Maryland's proactive community supervision model. Criminology and Public Policy, 7 (2): 235–302.
45. Taxman, F., 2008b. To be or not to be: community supervision déjà vu. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47 (3): 250–260.
46. Taxman, F., Shepardson, E., and Byrne, J. M., 2004. Tools of the trade: a guide to implementing science into practice, Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
47. Taxman, F. S., Yancey, C., and Bilanin, J., 2006. Proactive Community Supervision in Maryland: Changing Offender Outcomes, College Park: University of Maryland, Bureau of Governmental Research.
48. Trotter, C., 1996. The impact of different supervision practices in community supervision: cause for optimism. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 29 (1): 29–46.
49. Trotter, C., 1999. Working with involuntary clients: a guide to practice, London: Sage.
50. Wallace, J. A., 1974. “ Probation administration ”. In Handbook of criminology, Edited by: Glaser, D., 949–969. New York: Rand McNally.