Explore the vast range of titles available.

Incarceration is a pervasive issue in the United States that is enormously costly to families, communities, and society at large. The path from prison back to prison may depend on the relationship a person has with their probation or parole officer (PPO). If the relationship lacks appropriate care and trust, violations and recidivism (return to jail or prison) may be more likely to occur. Here, we test whether an “empathic supervision” intervention with PPOs—that aims to reduce collective blame against and promote empathy for the perspectives of adults on probation or parole (APPs)—can reduce rates of violations and recidivism. The intervention highlights the unreasonable expectation that all APPs will reoffend (collective blame) and the benefits of empathy—valuing APPs’ perspectives. Using both within-subject (monthly official records for 10 mo) and between-subject (treatment versus control) comparisons in a longitudinal study with PPOs in a large US city (NPPOs = 216; NAPPs =∼20,478), we find that the empathic supervision intervention reduced collective blame against APPs 10 mo postintervention and reduced between-subject violations and recidivism, a 13% reduction that would translate to less taxpayer costs if scaled. Together, these findings illustrate that very low-cost psychological interventions that target empathy in relationships can be cost effective and combat important societal outcomes in a lasting manner.

One of the goals of imprisonment is to reduce violence 1 . Although imprisonment has risen dramatically since the 1970s, its effects on future violent crime are poorly understood 2 . This study’s objective was to examine the effect of imprisonment on violent crime in the community among individuals on the policy margin between prison and probation sentences. Drawing on data from a population-based cohort of individuals convicted of a felony in Michigan between 2003 and 2006 ( n  = 111,110) and followed through June 2015, we compared the rates of commission of violent crime committed by individuals sentenced to prison with those of individuals sentenced to probation using a natural experiment based on the random assignment of judges to criminal cases. Being sentenced to prison had no significant effects on arrests or convictions for violent crimes after release from prison, but imprisonment modestly reduced the probability of violence if comparisons included the effects of incapacitation during imprisonment. These results suggest that for individuals on the current policy margin between prison and probation, imprisonment is an ineffective long-term intervention for violence prevention, as it has, on balance, no rehabilitative or deterrent effects after release. Using data from Michigan, Harding et al. find no evidence that prison sentences have an effect on arrests or convictions for violent crimes after release. Imprisonment modestly reduced violence if the analysis included imprisonment’s incapacitation effects.

We aimed to systematically review risk factors for criminal recidivism in individuals given community sentences. We searched seven bibliographic databases and additionally conducted targeted searches for studies that investigated risk factors for any repeat offending in individuals who had received community (non-custodial) sentences. We included investigations that reported data on at least one risk factor and allowed calculations of odds ratios (ORs). If a similar risk factor was reported in three or more primary studies, they were grouped into domains, and pooled ORs were calculated. We identified 15 studies from 5 countries, which reported data on 14 independent samples and 246,608 individuals. We found that several dynamic (modifiable) risk factors were associated with criminal recidivism in community-sentenced populations, including mental health needs (OR = 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2-1.6), substance misuse (OR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.1-4.9), association with antisocial peers (OR = 2.2, 95% CI: 1.3-3.7), employment problems (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.3-2.5), marital status (OR = 1.6, 95%: 1.4-1.8), and low income (OR = 2.0, 95% CI: 1.1-3.4). The strength of these associations was comparable to that of static (non-modifiable) risk factors, such as age, gender, and criminal history. Assessing dynamic (modifiable) risk factors should be considered in all individuals given community sentences. The further integration of mental health, substance misuse, and criminal justice services may reduce reoffending risk in community-sentenced populations.

We conducted a systematic review to examine the substance use and recidivism outcomes of prison-based substance use interventions. We searched public health, criminology, and psychology databases, and conducted forward and backward snowballing methods to identify additional studies. Studies were included if they were published between January 1, 2000 and June 30, 2017; were published in English; and reported substance use and/or recidivism outcomes of prison-based substance use interventions. Studies were reviewed for methodological rigor using the Effective Public Health Practice Project’s Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Our search returned 49 studies: 6 were methodologically strong, 20 were moderate, and 23 were weak. Results suggest therapeutic communities are effective in reducing recidivism and, to a lesser extent substance use after release. There is also evidence to suggest that opioid maintenance treatment is effective in reducing the risk of drug use after release from prison for opioid users. Furthermore, care after release from prison appears to enhance treatment effects for both types of interventions. Results provide evidence that policymakers can use to make informed decisions on best-practice approaches when addressing prisoner substance dependence and improving long-term outcomes. This comprehensive review highlights the difficulties of conducting quality research in the prison setting and suggests innovative study design for future research.

This study provides the first representative analysis of error estimations and willingness to accept errors in a Western country (Germany) with regards to algorithmic decision-making systems (ADM). We examine people's expectations about the accuracy of algorithms that predict credit default, recidivism of an offender, suitability of a job applicant, and health behavior. Also, we ask whether expectations about algorithm errors vary between these domains and how they differ from expectations about errors made by human experts. In a nationwide representative study (N = 3086) we find that most respondents underestimated the actual errors made by algorithms and are willing to accept even fewer errors than estimated. Error estimates and error acceptance did not differ consistently for predictions made by algorithms or human experts, but people's living conditions (e.g. unemployment, household income) affected domain-specific acceptance (job suitability, credit defaulting) of misses and false alarms. We conclude that people have unwarranted expectations about the performance of ADM systems and evaluate errors in terms of potential personal consequences. Given the general public's low willingness to accept errors, we further conclude that acceptance of ADM appears to be conditional to strict accuracy requirements.

We aimed to systematically review recidivism rates in individuals given community sentences internationally. We sought to explore sources of variation between these rates and how reporting practices may limit their comparability across jurisdictions. Finally, we aimed to adapt previously published guidelines on recidivism reporting to include community sentenced populations. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SAGE and Google Scholar for reports and studies of recidivism rates using non-specific and targeted searches for the 20 countries with the largest prison populations worldwide. We identified 28 studies with data from 19 countries. Of the 20 countries with the largest prison populations, only 2 reported recidivism rates for individuals given community sentences. The most commonly reported recidivism information between countries was for 2-year reconviction, which ranged widely from 14% to 43% in men, and 9% to 35% in women. Explanations for recidivism rate variations between countries include when the follow-up period started and whether technical violations were taken into account. Recidivism rates in individuals receiving community sentences are typically lower in comparison to those reported in released prisoners, although these two populations differ in terms of their baseline characteristics. Direct comparisons of the recidivism rates in community sentenced cohorts across jurisdictions are currently not possible, but simple changes to existing reporting practices can facilitate these. We propose recommendations to improve reporting practices.

By providing a structured assessment of specific risk factors, risk assessment tools allow statements to be made about the likelihood of future recidivism in people who have committed a crime. These tools were originally developed for and primarily tested in men and are mainly based on the usual criminological background of men. Despite significant progress in the last decade, there is still a lack of empirical research on female offenders, especially female forensic psychiatric inpatients. To improve prognosis in female offenders, we performed a retrospective study to compare the predictive quality of the following risk assessment tools: PCL-R, LSI-R, HCR-20 v3, FAM, and VRAG-R. Data were collected from the information available in the medical files of 525 female patients who had been discharged between 2001 and 2017. We examined the ability of the tools to predict general and violent recidivism by comparing the predictions with information from the Federal Central Criminal Register. Overall, the prediction instruments had moderate to good predictive performance, and the study confirmed their general applicability to female forensic psychiatric patients. The LSI-R proved to be particularly valid for general recidivism, and both, LSI-R and HCR-20 v3, for violent recidivism. •LSI-R is best suited for predicting general recidivism in female forensic psychiatric patients.•HCR-20 v3 is best suited for predicting violent recidivism in female forensic psychiatric patients.•All instruments exhibit low sensitivity and are not suitable as the sole basis for discharge decisions.•Study's strength: large sample size, long observation period.

One of the primary objectives in forensic psychiatry, distinguishing it from other psychiatric disciplines, is risk management. Assessments of the risk of criminal recidivism are performed on a routine basis, as a baseline for risk management for populations involved in the criminal justice system. However, the risk assessment tools available to clinical practice are limited in their ability to predict recidivism. Recently, the prospect of incorporating neuroimaging data to improve the prediction of criminal behavior has received increased attention. In this study we investigated the feasibility of including neuroimaging data in the prediction of recidivism by studying whether the inclusion of resting-state regional cerebral blood flow measurements leads to an incremental increase in predictive performance over traditional risk factors. A subsample (N = 44) from a cohort of forensic psychiatric patients who underwent single-photon emission computed tomography neuroimaging and clinical psychiatric assessment during their court-ordered forensic psychiatric investigation were included in a long-term (ten year average time at risk) follow-up. A Baseline model with eight empirically established risk factors, and an Extended model which also included resting-state regional cerebral blood flow measurements from eight brain regions were estimated using random forest classification and compared using several predictive performance metrics. Including neuroimaging data in the Extended model increased the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) from .69 to .81, increased accuracy from .64 to .82 and increased the scaled Brier score from .08 to .25, supporting the feasibility of including neuroimaging data in the prediction of recidivism in forensic psychiatric patients. Although our results hint at potential benefits in the domain of risk assessment, several limitations and ethical challenges are discussed. Further studies with larger, carefully characterized clinical samples utilizing higher-resolution neuroimaging techniques are warranted.

Modern test theory supplements the more prevalent classic methods for assessing test properties. However, such an assessment of the commonly used sexual recidivism risk assessment instrument, Static-99R, has yet to be attempted. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of said instrument using Rasch analysis. The clinical cohort assessed consisted of individuals with mental disorders convicted of a sexual offense (N = 146). Results showed that the original ten-item Static‑99R did not meet the Rasch model requirements, and revisions of the instrument with seven and nine items each only marginally improved performance. More reliable results could likely have been obtained with a larger, non-clinical sample and a more randomized distribution of missing data. Despite the consistently poor performance of item 3 (“Index non-sexual violence”) in all three analyses, reliability was slightly improved by dichotomizing the only two polytomous items in the Static-99R; items 1 (“Age at release from index offense”) and 5 (“Prior sexual offenses”). These results may be of interest considering the significant change of splitting the formerly dichotomous item 1 into four different response categories in the revision of Static-99 to Static-99R.

Introduction There is a high prevalence of attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in prison populations compared to the general population, and ADHD has also been shown to be associated with criminality and antisocial behavior. This systematic review examines the effect of pharmacological ADHD treatment on criminal recidivism, ADHD symptoms, and rehabilitation in inmates with ADHD. Methods Adhering to PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines, we conducted a structured search on September 6, 2023 using PubMed. We focused on original research published in peer‐reviewed scientific journals, following the IMRaD format, written in English, containing the established search terms, based on participants who met the criteria for ADHD diagnosis (any edition of DSM), and who were incarcerated at the start of pharmacological treatment for ADHD. The primary outcome was criminal recidivism, the secondary outcomes were ADHD symptoms, and rehabilitation‐related factors such as global function, norm‐breaking/antisocial behavior, adaptation to society/institutional behavior, cognitive function, and well‐being. Results Five studies, based on three patient cohorts, were included in this systematic review. Surprisingly, only one study investigated criminal recidivism. That study indicated that self‐reported criminal recidivism was lower than expected among inmates who had received pharmacological ADHD treatment. The five studies showed varying results in the effectiveness of pharmacological ADHD treatment on ADHD symptoms and other rehabilitation‐related factors. The included studies also varied regarding participant characteristics, study design, dosage, adherence to treatment, treatment regimes, and measured outcomes. All studies reported using osmotic‐release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate as their drug of choice. Conclusion We conclude that there is limited empirical evidence to support the efficacy of pharmacological ADHD treatment on criminal recidivism in inmates diagnosed with ADHD. Still, evidence suggests that these treatments can reduce ADHD symptoms and enhance rehabilitation outcomes, which may, in turn, lower the rate of reoffending. We point to the need for more targeted research in this area. ADHD is more common among inmates compared with the general population. We perform a systematic review investigating if ADHD medication (methylphenidate) could reduce crime. We find limited evidence but ADHD medication may facilitate rehabilitation and thereby reduce crime. More research is needed.