Offender Perceptions of Graduated Sanctions

Wodahl, Eric J.; Ogle, Robbin; Kadleck, Colleen; Gerow, Kenneth G.

doi:10.1177/0011128709333725

Cited by 21 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior research, although it was conducted with adult offenders who were predominately White, revealed that offenders view treatment‐oriented sanctions as more punitive than other graduated sanctions (Wodahl, Ogle, Kadleck, and Gerow, ; see also Petersilia and Deschenes, ; Wood and Grasmick, ). However, younger and more educated offenders viewed alternative sanctions, including treatment, less harshly, with high‐school graduates willing to endure almost twice as many days of inpatient treatment to avoid a 1‐day extension of the jail sanction (Wodahl et al., ). Future research should examine juvenile offender perceptions of the graduated sanctions options in Florida's disposition matrix and how these perceptions vary based on individual characteristics.…”

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Implications of a Structured Decision‐Making Tool for Recidivism in a Statewide Analysis

Baglivio

Greenwald

Russell

2014

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice has implemented a disposition matrix to guide recommendations made by juvenile probation officers to the court. This study examines whether recidivism rates for dispositions/placements made within the suggested range of this matrix differ from those outside of the suggested range. Using a sample of 38,117 juvenile offenders, we found that the dispositions/placements within the suggested range had an average recidivism rate of 19.4%, whereas those whose dispositions were outside the range had an average recidivism rate twice as high (38.7%). Furthermore, dispositions/placements that were the least restrictive option within the suggested range performed best. Dispositions above the suggested range (more restrictive) performed poorly, although those below the suggested range (less restrictive than suggested) performed the worst. These results held for males and females, across race/ethnicity, and across risk to reoffend levels. Policy Implications Implementation of structured decision‐making tools leads to questions from stakeholders and front‐line staff charged with using those tools regarding their effectiveness. Research and theory‐based justifications do not hold the weight actual data from the implementation population provide. These tools help control costs, facilitate planning, and can improve outcomes. Monthly monitoring of adherence rates, development of override and management oversight protocols, and regular feedback to front‐line staff are critical components of success.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Implications of a Structured Decision‐Making Tool for Recidivism in a Statewide Analysis

Baglivio

Greenwald

Russell

2014

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Graduated sanctions are engaged as a method of deterrence that is used before revoking the probation or parole agreement. Although they have become somewhat common in correctional practice, research has found mixed evidence of their effectiveness, particularly among different populations (i.e., drug offenders, juveniles; Guastaferro & Daigle, 2012;Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard, 2011; see also Wodahl, Ogle, Kadleck, & Gerow, 2009). It would be important in future studies to discover where officers learn the method of graduated sanctions-they may be trained to use it, it may be in their agency policies, or it may be an implicit strategy they have found to be effective through experience.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between officer orientation and supervision strategies in community corrections.

Ricks¹,

Louden²

2015

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community corrections (i.e., probation and parole) officers play a crucial role within criminal justice agencies: They have the onerous task to balance the competing demands of rehabilitating offenders while protecting the community. Field studies have suggested that officers' effectiveness depends, in part, on the relative emphasis they place on these demands (i.e., their orientation toward their roles). However, the extent to which officers' orientations toward rehabilitation versus community safety affect their decisions for individual offenders is not clear. We examined the relationship between officer attitudes and supervisory decisions using a quasi-experimental design. In the first stage of the study, we revised a promising measure of officers' role orientation. In the second stage, we examined the revised scale's psychometric properties, and tested how officers' self-reported orientations related to the strategies they used in hypothetical supervision scenarios. The majority of officers reported a balanced approach of control and support, whereas 29.7% reported a preference for one over the other. Regardless of self-reported orientation, officers approached supervision with similar strategies for an offender's first incident of noncompliance, but when an offender showed continued noncompliance, both officers who emphasized control and those who emphasized a balanced approach toward supervision were more likely to use punitive methods to gain compliance than officers who reported emphasizing rehabilitation. This research furthers our understanding of the relationship between self-reported orientation and supervision strategy. Findings will inform agencies' selection and training of community corrections officers. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

“…Polakow and Doctor (1974) found that negative behaviors, like arrest and technical violations, were reduced and positive behaviors, like maintaining employment, increased when probationers received reductions in their probation sentences as a result of meeting case plan objectives. In addition, Wodahl and colleagues (2013) studied the impact of both incentives and sanctions on probationers and parolees supervised through a Wyoming ISP program. A range of incentives were used by supervision officers, such as verbal praise, removal from electronic monitoring, and reductions in total supervision time.…”

Section: Prior Research On Sanctions and Incentives In Community Supementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the goal of this article is to examine the effects of incentives, praise, sanctions, and reprimands on criminal offending and substance use across time, we use a cross-lagged dynamic panel model (Allison, 2015;williams et al, 2016). Although cross-lagged dynamic panel models are not new to the field of criminology, we use a version of this method outlined by Allison (2015) and williams et al (2016) for a variety of reasons (see .…”

Section: Analytic Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, most research on these interventions relies on cross-sectional data; however, because this study utilizes longitudinal data, it allows us to explore the effect of these interventions on individuals across time. Second, while most studies on sanctions and incentives focus independently on either sanctions or incentives (Wodahl, Ogle, Kadleck, & Gerow, 2013, is a notable exception), this study looks at sanctions and incentives simultaneously, which allows us to explore their combined effect on behavior. Finally, previous research has relied exclusively on official data sources such as drug test results and arrest records to measure the impact of sanctions and incentives on offender behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Sanctions and Incentives in Promoting Successful Reentry: Evidence From the SVORI Data

Mowen

Wodahl

Brent

et al. 2018

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior work on the efficacy of incentives and sanctions in community supervision practices suggests both can encourage desistance during prison reentry. Yet limited scholarship has investigated how sanctions and incentives impact reentry together and most research in this area is cross-sectional. Using four waves of data from the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative, results of cross-lagged dynamic panel models reveal that certain incentives, namely supervision officer praise, relate to significantly lower levels of offending and substance use. Conversely, supervision sanctions and supervision officer reprimands relate to higher levels of offending and substance use over time. Overall, supervision practices that emphasize recognizing prosocial behavior over punishing noncompliance appear to hold greater promise for promoting successful reentry. Findings suggest that supervision agencies should consider the potential negative outcomes of sanctions during the reintegration process, and policies should be put into place that more closely consider the role of sanctions on behavior.

show abstract

Offender Perceptions of Graduated Sanctions

Cited by 21 publications

References 17 publications

Assessing the Implications of a Structured Decision‐Making Tool for Recidivism in a Statewide Analysis

Assessing the Implications of a Structured Decision‐Making Tool for Recidivism in a Statewide Analysis

The relationship between officer orientation and supervision strategies in community corrections.

The Role of Sanctions and Incentives in Promoting Successful Reentry: Evidence From the SVORI Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About