The Effects of Sanction Intensity on Criminal Conduct - JDAI Helpdesk

to do with it. Furthermore, the more intensive strategies were not always targeted at the
highest-risk <strong>of</strong>fenders in the greatest need <strong>of</strong> treatment, a policy now known to be crucial
to successful correctional programming (Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990). <strong>The</strong>re is no
standard definition <strong>of</strong> ‘high’ or ‘low’ risk in the earlier studies, and the most serious
<strong>of</strong>fenders were <strong>of</strong>ten excluded. For example, in the RAND studies, participants were
generally more serious <strong>of</strong>fenders, but risk levels varied (Petersilia & Turner, 1993).
Offenders convicted <strong>of</strong> homicide, robbery, and sex <strong>of</strong>fenses were excluded from the
studies for safety reasons, even though it is not unusual for such <strong>of</strong>fenders to appear in
probation and parole caseloads. In some cases, ISP was reasonably effective for highrisk
<strong>of</strong>fenders but backfired for low-risk <strong>of</strong>fenders (e.g., Erwin, 1986; Hanley, 2006;
Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Holsinger, 2006).
More recent research on probation supervision has accounted for some <strong>of</strong> these
problems, making careful assessments <strong>of</strong> risk and targeting supervision appropriately.
For high-risk <strong>of</strong>fenders, intensive supervision has shown more positive results when it
includes a greater emphasis on treatment and service brokerage by probation <strong>of</strong>ficers in
addition to small caseloads and frequent contact (e.g., Latessa et al., 1998; Paparozzi &
Gendreau, 2005; Aos, Miller, & Drake, 2006; Taxman, 2008b). Probation agencies have
also begun experimenting with reducing the intensity <strong>of</strong> supervision for those <strong>of</strong>fenders
at the lowest risk <strong>of</strong> re<strong>of</strong>fending. New York City’s probation department piloted an
electronic kiosk reporting system for a considerable portion <strong>of</strong> its caseload that was
considered to be low-risk. <strong>The</strong>se <strong>of</strong>fenders checked in regularly using an ATM-style
device, and could request or be compelled to see a probation <strong>of</strong>ficer if adverse
circumstances arose. Two-year rearrest rates for all crimes for low-risk probationers
58