Predicting Public Support for Electronic House Arrest

Abstract

This article builds upon an earlier effort to examine citizens' overall support for electronic house arrest (EHA). It explores a variety of demographic and attitudinal factors measured in a survey of residents in Oneida County, New York, and identifies predictors of support for EHA when used with “minor” and “serious” offenders. Survey findings indicate that those who favor the use of EHA with minor offenders have limited faith in the ability of incarceration to reduce crime and view EHA as a cost-effective way of punishing offenders. Those who favor its use with serious offenders tend to be non-White and older and believe that incarceration leads to recidivism. Nevertheless, both groups feel that EHA should also be rehabilitative. The article concludes by discussing the policy implications of this research; particularly the need for correctional decision makers to examine public perceptions when considering the implementation of community corrections programs.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aldrich, J. , & Nelson, F. (1984). Linear probability, logit, and probit models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Austin, J., & Hardyman, P. (1991). The use of early parole with electronic monitoring to control prison crowding: Evaluation of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections pre-parole supervised release with electronic monitoring. Unpublished report.

Ball, R. , Huff, C. R. , & Lilly, J. R. (1988). House arrest and correctional policy: Doing time at home. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Brown, M. P. , & Elrod, P. (1995). Electronic house arrest: An examination of citizen attitudes. Crime and Delinquency, 41, 332-346.

Clear, T. (1995). Ophelia the CCW: May 11, 2010. In J. Klofas & S. Stojkovic (Eds.), Crime and justice in the year 2010 (pp. 205-223). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Collins, W. C. (1987). Court watch. Offender Monitoring, 1, 2-3.

Corbett, R. , & Marx, G. T. (1991). Critique: No soul in the new machine: Technofalacies in the electronic monitoring movement. Justice Quarterly, 8, 399-414.

Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: John Wiley.

Durham, A. M., III. (1994). Crisis and reform: Current issues in American punishment. Boston: Little, Brown.

10.

Ford, D. , & Schmidt, A. K. (1985). Electronically monitored home confinement. NIJ Reports, 194 (November), 2-6.

11.

Friday, P. C., & Brown, M. (1994, April). The politics of community corrections. Overcrowded Times, pp. 8, 18.

12.

Glaser, D. , & Watts, R. (1992). Electronic monitoring of drug offenders on probation. Judicature, 76, 112-117.

13.

Gottfredson, S. D. , & Taylor, R. B. (1983). The correctional crisis: Prison population and public policy. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

14.

Gottfredson, S. D. , Warner, B. D. , & Taylor, R. B. (1988). Conflict and consensus about criminal justice in Maryland. In N. Walker & M. Hough (Eds.), Public attitudes to sentencing (pp. 17-55). Aldershot, England: Gower.

15.

Grinter, R. C. (1989). Electronic monitoring of serious offenders in Texas. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 2, 1-14.

16.

Gross, M. (1990). Serving time behind the front door: Electronic monitoring programs provide prison alternatives. Corrections Today, 52, 80.

17.

McShane, M. , & Krause, W. (1993). Community corrections. New York: Macmillan.

18.

Petersilia, J. (1987). Expanding options for criminal sentencing. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

19.

Renzema, M. , & Skelton, D. (1990). Use of electronic monitoring in the United States: 1989 update. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

20.

Tonry, M., & Will, R. (1990). Intermediate sanctions. Unpublished report.

21.

U.S. Bureau of the Census . (1994). County and city data book: 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

22.

U.S. Department of Justice . (1990). A survey of intermediate sanctions. Washington, DC: Author.

23.

Williams, J. S. , Johnson, D. M. , & McGrath, J. H. (1991). Is the public committed to the imprisonment of convicted felons? Citizen preferences for reducing prison overcrowding. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 7, 88-94.