No abstract

Research on the effects of restricted housing on inmate well-being indicates mild to moderate psychological effects and barriers opportunities for treatment and positive growth. Yet, there are few interventions tailored both to the needs of this high-risk population and to the institutional constraints of their environment. Given the financial and safety burdens associated with housing someone in segregation compared to the general population, correctional psychology should focus on developing programs that work. Using a prepost design, this study presents findings from a pilot investigation (N = 39) on the effects of a new, largely self-directed program (Stepping Up, Stepping Out [SUSO]) for inmates with mental and behavioral health concerns who are placed in restrictive settings. Results suggest that SUSO is associated with meaningful reductions in overall emotional distress and criminal attitudes; however, improvements in more stable criminal thinking patterns (i.e., distorted cognitions that are used to justify and support antisocial behavior; see Walters, 2012) were not observed. Overall, posttreatment working alliance was rated favorably by program participants. Demographic and preintervention comparisons between program completers and dropouts are also reported. Though preliminary findings suggest SUSO is a promising intervention for alleviating distress and aspects of criminal risk for inmates placed in restricted housing, future research should assess fidelity and engagement leading to a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of this program.

No abstract

Videoconferencing technology (VCT) is rapidly increasing in the mental healthcare industry and is becoming an attractive option to reach justice‐involved populations. This paper first highlights the need for alternative service delivery solutions and reviews current literature on the use of VCT for correctional clients. We then outline the specific timeline, procedures, and barriers associated with the initiation of a virtual, multidisciplinary telemental health clinic for jailed and community‐released offenders in a rural Mississippi county aimed at reducing criminogenic and psychiatric risks. Finally, we summarize generalizable recommendations for establishing community partnerships, developing structural and logistical processes, and delivering VCT while accounting for unique client factors and integrating evidence‐based intervention strategies. We hope other community leaders will feel empowered to initiate similar programs that address needs within in their own jurisdictions.

The legal system often charges forensic clinicians with the task of assisting the court in making decisions about a defendant's risk for violence. The extent to which these evaluations are useful depends, in part, on how the results are communicated to and understood by the trier of fact. Using a sample of 155 participants who previously served as a criminal trial juror, this study examined the effects of various risk communication formats on participants' perceptions of a hypothetical defendant's risk level, including his likelihood of reoffense and risk category, as well as sentencing and release decisions. Results consistently showed that when risk data was not anchored by an absolute recidivism estimate, predictions of future violence were highest. That is, when risk was stated only as an ordinal category (medium risk) or only in terms of needed interventions, participants severely overestimated the defendant's likelihood of violence. In the context of numerical data, the use of elaborative strategies (i.e., base rate examples and visual aids) did not impact risk perceptions. However, no between-groups differences were found across participants' decisions regarding sentencing and community release. Overall, participants tended to adhere to the expert's opinion when judging risk. Implications for best practices and future research are discussed, including the need for experts to simplify information during testimony and for risk researchers to work toward a better understanding of which strategies impact layperson perceptions of risk testimony and under what conditions.