Challenges Faced by Women Offenders After Incarceration

Ng, Vanessa; Tang, Amanda; Ang, Jen Ying Zhen

doi:10.1080/08974454.2019.1697791

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…was judged to be slightly more predictive for women (though still in the 'maybe' range). This is consistent with the literature finding that emotional support is an important factor for women to combine with skill development (Sheehan et al, 2010), especially with JICs who need more emotional support upon reintegration (Ng et al, 2021). This support also varies based upon circumstances, as models of emotional support show it is more likely to exist within program participants and less likely to exist among those of low income (Reisig et al, 2002).…”

Section: Comparing Survey Findings To Meta-analysis Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

Changing GEARS: Development and Validation of Gendered Emerging-Adult Rehabilitative Strengths Measures

Baglole

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are currently no self-report strength measures designed for justice-involved (JI), emergingadult (EA) men and women. This dissertation is part of a proposed program of research to attain that goal, and contribute to current fundamental work on gendered research and strengths in a correctional context.Study 1 involved meta-analytic review of studies measuring strengths in relation to offending outcomes, using samples of justice-involved clients disaggregated by gender. Eligible studies (k = 19) involving gender-disaggregated samples of justice-involved women (aggregate n = 1,699, 54.4% adolescents) and men (aggregate n = 6,556, 72.4% adolescents) were collected.From the final study set, 32 strengths were assessed in men and boys, 18 (56%) of which were significantly related to desistance. Comparatively, of 16 strengths assessed in women or girls, 10 (63%) were related to desistance. Strengths with the largest effects were 'Network' and 'Mental health' for women, and 'Motivation' and 'Regulation' for men.In Study 2, forensic professionals (N = 25) rated the ability of strengths from Study 1 to predict desistance for justice-involved men and women, and suggested additional items that were not included. Of the 37 strength items proposed to professionals, 10 items were rated as probably having predictive utility toward desistance for JI women and men. 'Cognitive regulation' showed gender-salience in men, whereas 'Emotional support' and 'Dependent children' showed gendersalience in women.Strengths from Study 1 and suggested by professionals in Study 2 constituted an item pool for Study 3. This pilot study used methods of criterion and construct validity to form gendered measures for emerging-adult men and women. Three-factor, 16-item measures were derived for men and women, respectively, each demonstrating strong psychometric properties. GENDERED STRENGTHS FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED POPULATIONS Baglole xv GlossaryCNV: Criminal, non-violent behaviour, as assessed by item in the Antisocial Behaviours Scale (ABS).CV: Criminal, violent behaviour, as assessed by item in the Antisocial Behaviours Scale (ABS).Desistance: An ongoing process of intent and action toward cessation from offending.Emerging adults (EAs): Refers to young adults, specifically those within the age range from 18 to 25 years old.External factor: Variables, such as strengths, that derive from outside the self; examples include parental warmth and instrumental support. Gender-neutral:In forensic assessment, variables, such as strengths, that have predictive utility (i.e., are empirically related to desistance) in both genders equally.Gender-responsive: Umbrella term for gender-salient and -specific variables. Gender-salient:In forensic assessment, variables, such as strengths, that have predictive utility in both genders, yet higher utility (i.e., has a stronger statistical relationship with desistance) in one gender versus another. Gender-specific:In forensic assessment, variables, such as strengths, that have predictive utility (i.e., are empirically rel...

show abstract

Section: Comparing Survey Findings To Meta-analysis Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%