Can Electronic Monitoring Make a Difference? An Evaluation of Three Canadian Programs

Abstract

Electronic monitoring (EM) is a correctional program promising an alternative to imprisonment. The present study compared EM programs that differed in setting (corrections-based vs. court-based) and the type of supervision (custodial staff vs. probation officers). EM offenders were also compared with inmates and probationers matched for offender risk. The results showed that type of program was unrelated to program completion or recidivism and that EM had a net-widening effect. Type of supervision showed some relationship with offender and staff views of the program but, in general, EM added little value to more traditional forms of community control.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andrews, D. A. and James Bonta . 1995. The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.

Andrews, D. A. and James Bonta . 1998. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. 2nd ed. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Ball, Richard A. , Ronald C. Huff , and Robert J. Lilly . 1988. House Arrest and Correctional Policy: Doing Time at Home. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Ball, Richard A. and Robert J. Lilly . 1986. “A Theoretical Examination of Home Incarceration.” Federal Probation 50:17-24.

Baumer, Terry L. , Michael G. Maxfield , and Robert I. Mendelsohn . 1993. “A Comparative Analysis of Three Electronically Monitored Home Detention Programs.” Justice Quarterly 10:121-142.

Beck, James , Jody Klein-Saffran , and Harold B. Wooten . 1990. “Home Confinement and the Use of Electronic Monitoring With Federal Parolees.” Federal Probation 54:22-31.

Bonta, James and Paul Gendreau . 1992. “Coping With Prison.” Pp. 343-354 in Psychology and Social Policy, edited by P. Suedfeld and P. E. Tetlock . Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Bonta, James , Suzanne Wallace-Capretta , and Jennifer Rooney . Forthcoming. “A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of an Intensive Rehabilitation Program.” Criminal Justice and Behavior.

Cadigan, Timothy P. 1991. “Electronic Monitoring in Federal Pretrial Release.” Federal Probation 55:26-30.

10.

Cullen, Francis T. , Faith E. Lutze , Bruce G. Link , and Nancy T. Wolfe . 1989. “The Correctional Orientation of Prison Guards: Do Officers Support Rehabilitation?” Federal Probation 53:33-42.

11.

Cullen, Francis. T. , John P. Wright , and Brandon K. Applegate . 1996. “Control in the Community: The Limits of Reform?” Pp. 69-116 in Choosing Correctional Options That Work: Defining the Demand and Evaluating the Supply, edited by A. T. Harland . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

12.

Denton, M. 1988. Statistical Report (Dec.). Harper Woods, Michigan. Described in A. K. Schmidt, Electronic Monitoring in the United States. United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, Chicago: Nelson Hall.

13.

Doherty, Diana . 1995. “Impressions of the Impact of the Electronic Monitoring Program on the Family.” Pp. 129-139 in Electronic Monitoring and Corrections: The Policy, the Operation, the Research, edited by K. Schulz . Burnaby, Canada: Simon Fraser University.

14.

Fox, Richard G. 1987. “Dr. Schwitzgebel's Machine Revisited: Electronic Monitoring of Offenders.” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 20:131-147.

15.

Friel, Charles M. and Joseph B. Vaughn . 1986. “A Consumer's Guide to the Electronic Monitoring of Probationers.” Federal Probation 50:3-14.

16.

Gendreau, Paul and Claire Goggin . 1996. “Principles of Effective Correctional Programming.” Forum on Corrections Research 8:38-41.

17.

Lilly, Robert J. , Richard A. Ball , G. David Curry , and John McMullen . 1993. “Electronic Monitoring of the Drunk Driver: A Seven-Year Study of the Home Confinement Alternative.” Crime & Delinquency 39:462-484.

18.

Mainprize, Stephen . 1992. “Electronic Monitoring in Corrections: Assessing Cost Effectiveness and the Potential for Widening the Threat of Social Control.” Canadian Journal of Criminology 34:161-180.

19.

Maxfield, Michael G. and Terry L. Baumer . 1990. “Home Detention with Electronic Monitoring: Comparing Pretrial and Postconviction Programs.” Crime & Delinquency 36:521-536.

20.

Mortimer, Ed and Chris May . 1997. Electronic Monitoring in Practice: The Second Year of the Trials of Curfew Orders. London, UK: Home Office.

21.

Motiuk, Michelle S. , Laurence L. Motiuk , and James Bonta . 1992. “A Comparison Between Self-Report and Interview-Based Inventories in Offender Classification.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 19:143-159.

22.

Ontario . 1991. An Evaluation of the Electronic Monitoring Pilot Project: Mimico Correctional Centre, April, 1989-October, 1990. North Bay, Canada: Ministry of Correctional Services of Ontario.

23.

Petersilia, Joan . 1986. “Exploring the Option of House Arrest.” Federal Probation 50:50-55.

24.

Rogers, Robert and Anntee Jolin . 1989. “Electronic Monitoring: A Review of the Empirical Literature.” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 5:141-153.

25.

Roy, Sudipto . 1997. “Five Years of Electronic Monitoring of Adults and Juveniles in Lake County, Indiana: A Comparative Study on Factors Related to Failure.” Journal of Criminal Justice 20:141-157.

26.

Schmidt, Annesley K. 1998. “Electronic Monitoring: What Does the Literature Tell Us?” Federal Probation 62:10-19.

27.

Whitefield, Dick . 1999. “Electronic Monitoring in Europe: A Conference Report.” The Journal of Offender Monitoring 12:15, 18-19.

28.

Whittington, M. 1987. Supervised Electronic Confinement Pilot Program October 1986-September 1987: Final Report. Santa Ana, CA: Orange County Probation Department.