Predicting Prison Misconducts

Abstract

A meta-analysis was conducted on 39 studies that generated 695 correlations with prison misconducts. Predictors of prison misconducts were grouped into 16 domains as follows: (a) personal characteristics ( n = 9), (b) situational factors ( n = 3), and (c) actuarial measures of antisocial personality and risk ( n = 4). Personal and situational variables were similar in their ability to predict prison misconduct. Within these two categories, antisocial attitudes and behavior (e.g., companions, prison adjustment), criminal history, and institutional factors were the strongest predictors. Among actuarial measures, an interview-based risk protocol produced the highest correlations with prison misconducts. The prediction of violent misconducts was associated with greater effect sizes than nonviolent misconducts. Despite the limitations of the database, several recommendations for assessing prison misconducts appear warranted.

A Multi-Site Controlled Trial of the R&R2MHP Cognitive Skills Program for Mentally Disordered Female Offenders

“…Consistent with the findings of the present study, the ad hoc per protocol analysis of Cullen et al"s [18] 12-month follow-up data found a treatment effect for violent attitudes. Thus "softer" measures evaluating antisocial attitudes are likely to be important early markers due to their association with offending [41][42][43][44]. Thus antisocial attitudes and behaviors, together with reconviction rates, should be the primary benchmarks for evaluating OBPs in MDOs.…”

Pro-bullying attitudes among incarcerated juvenile delinquents: Antisocial behavior, psychopathic tendencies and violent crime

“…When it comes to antisocial attitudes, there is a line of research that demonstrates a link between: antisocial attitudes and antisocial behavior (Gendreau, 1996); antisocial attitudes and criminal and violent recidivism (Simourd & van de Ven, 1999;Mills, Kroner, & Hemmati, 2004); and between antisocial attitudes and prison misconduct (Gendreau, Goggin, & Law, 1997). Together with antisocial peers, antisocial attitudes are one of the strongest predictors of future delinquency (Simourd, Hoge, Andrews, & Leschied, 1994).…”

L’évaluation de la validité prédictive du LS/CMI dans la prédiction des incidents disciplinaires en prison

“…Depuis sa création, cet instrument a prouvé sa fi abilité dans la prédiction du risque de récidive (Hollin et Palmer, 2006). Le LSI-R semble surpasser l'ensemble des autres outils actuariels et les inventaires de personnalité (Gendreau et al, 1997) dans la prédiction des incidents disciplinaires. Généralement, la corrélation entre le LSI-R et les incidents disciplinaires se situe entre 0,26 à 0,39 selon les travaux de Bonta (1989) et Bonta et Montiuk (1987).…”

“…Bien que la question de la prise en charge des délinquants en soit une qui est particulièrement délicate, les prisons sont désormais plus difficiles à gérer (Dilulio, 1991 ;Gendreau et al, 1997). L'une des principales causes de cette diffi culté est vraisemblablement le phénomène de surpopulation carcérale, lequel a atteint un sommet vers la fi n des années 1990 au Québec (Landreville et Charest, 2004).…”