The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
From a theoretical standpoint, Chapters 2 and 3 also provide an insight into the<br />
nature <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> low-risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders and the types <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> crime they commit. Understandably, a great<br />
deal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> attenti<strong>on</strong> is paid in the criminological literature to unpacking the characteristics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
more serious <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders, but in developing low-intensity supervisi<strong>on</strong> the Philadelphia<br />
APPD hypothesized that the majority <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its caseload could be classified as low risk. If it<br />
is true that the majority <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders pose little risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> serious recidivism, it is important<br />
to learn how they compare to the minority who pose a greater threat.<br />
In Chapter 2 we utilize a range <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> statistical procedures to break down the main<br />
results <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the low-intensity supervisi<strong>on</strong> experiment, in order to ensure that there are no<br />
circumstances under which reduced supervisi<strong>on</strong> increases recidivism.<br />
We find no<br />
evidence that this was the case. We use instrumental variables techniques to model the<br />
characteristics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> low-risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders and their relati<strong>on</strong>ship to take-up and outcomes <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
low-intensity probati<strong>on</strong>. We find that low-risk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders represent a much broader range<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> society than the traditi<strong>on</strong>al ‘young male’ <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fender. However, they have an extremely<br />
low propensity to re<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fend and appear to perform well regardless <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the degree <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong> they receive. Thus, we c<strong>on</strong>clude that it is not necessary to treat all <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders<br />
equally when it comes to probati<strong>on</strong> supervisi<strong>on</strong>. Standards can be relaxed for most<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders to allow probati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficers to spend more time with higher-risk clients, working<br />
to identify and address their needs. For such a model to work in practice, a good<br />
predicti<strong>on</strong> model is needed to identify who can safely be diverted to the low-intensity<br />
unit.<br />
Chapter 3 examines whether the predicti<strong>on</strong> model used in the low-intensity<br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong> experiment, which classifies <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders as low and n<strong>on</strong>-low risk based <strong>on</strong> their<br />
xiii