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
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
assignment pool. Backfill probati<strong>on</strong>ers were not included in the analysis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the main<br />
results <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the experiment.<br />
SAU for the c<strong>on</strong>trol group usually c<strong>on</strong>sisted <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> m<strong>on</strong>thly <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fice visits, although the<br />
frequency could be increased or decreased at the probati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficer’s discreti<strong>on</strong> for reas<strong>on</strong>s<br />
relating to compliance or time left <strong>on</strong> the probati<strong>on</strong> term.<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>y c<strong>on</strong>tinued regular<br />
appointments with their usual probati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficer and no part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their supervisi<strong>on</strong> changed<br />
as a result <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their experimental status. Probati<strong>on</strong>ers and probati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficers were not<br />
informed <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their status. Caseloads in this group were still large enough (approximately<br />
145 clients per <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficer) that the c<strong>on</strong>tent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> meetings was essentially the same in both the<br />
treatment and c<strong>on</strong>trol groups. However, c<strong>on</strong>trol group <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders saw their probati<strong>on</strong><br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ficers more frequently.<br />
Treatment group cases received approximately 45 per cent fewer c<strong>on</strong>tacts than<br />
they had in the year prior to random assignment, while the amount <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>tact in the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol group did not change. C<strong>on</strong>trol group <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders received approximately twice as<br />
many c<strong>on</strong>tacts as treatment group <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fenders. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> experimental protocol called for three<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol group c<strong>on</strong>tacts to every <strong>on</strong>e in the treatment group, or six to <strong>on</strong>e in terms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> faceto-face<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tacts (assuming m<strong>on</strong>thly <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fice-based c<strong>on</strong>tacts in the c<strong>on</strong>trol group), so<br />
although this standard was not quite achieved, the treatment group still received lowerintensity<br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong>. No significant differences in recidivism were found between the<br />
treatment and c<strong>on</strong>trol groups after <strong>on</strong>e year. Sixteen per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the treatment group and<br />
15 per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the c<strong>on</strong>trol group were charged with a new <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fense <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> any type (p ≤ .593).<br />
Thus, it appeared that LIS did not lead to more crime compared to SAU, and was<br />
142