Parole release decisions: Impact of victim input on a representative sample of inmates

Caplan, Joel M.

doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.02.012

Cited by 19 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additional factors expected to influence parole determinations, and thus included for statistical control purposes, included whether the Department of Corrections warden/superintendents’ recommended parole (0 = No, 1= Yes), prior convictions (0 = No, 1= Yes), the nature of the offense controlling inmates’ sentences, and institutional custody levels (see [57,59,61,63,64,76,77]). This study accounted for the following controlling offense-type measures: drug offenses, property, rape/sexual assault, and robbery offenses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Houser

Vîlcică

Saum

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parole decision—the decision to release an incarcerated individual from prison conditionally—is one of the most critical decisions across justice systems around the world. The decision carries with it significant consequences: for the freedom of the individual awaiting release (the parolee); for the safety of the community in which they will return; and for the correctional system overall, especially its organizational capacity. The current study attempts to add to the parole decision-making literature by specifically analyzing the role that mental health factors may play in explaining parole decisions. Research to date is inconclusive on whether or not mental illness is a risk factor for criminal behavior; despite this, individuals with mental health problems generally fare worse on risk assessment tools employed in justice decisions. The study relies on a 1000+ representative sample of parole-eligible individuals in Pennsylvania, United States. To increase reliability, the analyses test for several mental health factors based on information from different sources (i.e., self-reported mental health history; risk assessment tool employed by the Parole Board; and risk assessment tool employed by the Department of Corrections). To address validity concerns, the study controls for other potential correlates of parole decisions. Although the multivariate models explained a considerable amount of variance in parole decisions, the inclusion of mental health variables added relatively little to model fit. The results provide insights into an understudied area of justice decision making, suggesting that despite the stigmatization of mental illness among criminal justice populations, parole board members in Pennsylvania, United States, appear to follow official guidelines rather than to consider more subjective notions that poor mental health should negate parole release.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another study, however, found that victim input, both positive and negative, was not a significant predictor of parole release, but measures of institutional behavior, crime severity, and criminal history were significant. It should be noted, however, that verbal input had more of an impact than did written input [64].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Houser

Vîlcică

Saum

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although inmate performance upon release has received significant attention recently (e.g., Berg and Huebner 2011;Gunnison and Helfgott 2011;Hipp et al 2011;Mallik-Kane and Visher 2008;Naser and Vigne 2006;Schlager and Robbins 2008;Zhang et al 2006;Zgoba et al 2008), such research efforts have not attempted to link studying of parolee performance to parole decisionmaking, as the current study did. As for the parole decision itself, it has been largely neglected in the contemporary criminal justice literature, with only a handful of studies addressing possible determinants and underlying processes (Caplan 2007(Caplan , 2011Hannah-Moffat and Yule 2011;Huebner and Bynum 2008;Matejkowski et al 2011;Morgan and Smith 2008;Roberts 2009). Lastly, the current research also contributes evidence related to other, broader themes in the criminological and criminal justice literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Studying Parole in the “Spotlight”: Lessons from a Large American Jurisdiction

Vîlcică

2015

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In September 2008 the Governor of Pennsylvania, USA, imposed a moratorium on all parole (early conditional) releases from the state prisons, which lasted until March 2009. As a political measure, the moratorium was triggered by a series of violent incidents involving recently released parolees culminating with the killings of several police officers. This paper documents the impact of the moratorium on the parole and correctional processes in the state and discusses its implications for the legitimacy of the two justice agencies affected, the Board of Parole and the Department of Corrections. The paper also describes the research undertaking of the team tasked with conducting the comprehensive review of parole and corrections at the Governor's request, which circumscribed the lifting of the moratorium on the results of the investigation. In addition to qualitative data, the study employed quantitative methods to investigate through predictive analyses both parole decisions and parolee performance upon release. The challenges of conducting action research in the "spotlight" are also highlighted. The nature of the study and its setting in a large state in the United States should provide a useful illustration of problems and potential approaches to dealing with them that similar crime prevention tasks may face in other jurisdictions around the world relying on conditional release as a means of prison release.

show abstract

“…Conform em ent a la loi canadienne sur la protection de la vie privee, quelques formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de cette these. in academic and political interest in the area (e.g., Campbell, 2008;Caplan, 2010aCaplan, , 2010bBurke, 2010aBurke, , 2010bHannah-Moffat, Maurutto, & Turnbull, 2009;Lindsey & Miller, 2011), yet overall, parole continues to receive limited attention within the correctional and criminal justice fields. This discrepancy is particularly striking given that a great deal of research has been conducted on the closely related topic of risk assessment (e.g., Andrews & Bonta, 1995;Campbell, French, & Gendreau, 2009;Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2009;Hare, 2003).…”

Section: Avismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As mentioned, the body of research focused on parole decision making remains limited, though it is growing (e.g., Caplan, 2007Caplan, , 2010aCaplan, , 2010bHannah-Moffat & Yule, 2011;Huebner & Bynum, 2006;Morgan & Smith, 2005), but that on the parole recommendations made by parole officers is nearly non-existent. Moreover, for the small amount of research touching on the topic that could be found Carroll & Burke, 1990;Metchik, 1988), parole officer recommendations were typically a peripheral topic (cf., Taylor, 1998).…”

Section: Study 1: Exploratory Examination Of Parole Officers' Parole mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding parole recommendations : the contribution of parole officers

Gobeil¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parole release decisions: Impact of victim input on a representative sample of inmates

Cited by 19 publications

References 32 publications

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Studying Parole in the “Spotlight”: Lessons from a Large American Jurisdiction

Understanding parole recommendations : the contribution of parole officers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About