Although the question of what works for general offender populations has received considerable attention within the rehabilitation literature, very little research has examined female offenders. The present investigation examined the principles of effective correctional treatment for female offenders through a meta-analytic review. The results indicated that the clinically relevant and psychologically informed principles of human service, risk, need, and responsivity identified in past meta-analytic reviews were associated with enhanced reductions in reoffending.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andrews, D. A.
1996. “Behavioral, Cognitive Behavioral and Social Learning Contributions to Criminological Theory.” Presented at the American Society of Criminology annual meeting, November 20, Chicago, IL.
2.
Andrews, D. A.
and James Bonta. 1998. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. 2d ed.Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
3.
Andrews, D. A.
, James Bonta, and Robert D. Hoge. 1990. “Classification for Effective Rehabilitation: Rediscovering Psychology.”Criminal Justice and Behavior17:19-52.
4.
Andrews, D. A.
, Craig Dowden, and Paul Gendreau. Forthcoming. “Clinically Relevant and Psychologically Informed Approaches to Reducing Criminal Recidivism: A Meta-Analytic Study of Human Service, Risk, Need, Responsivity and Other Concerns in Justice Contexts.” Manuscript submitted for publication.
5.
Andrews, D. A.
, Ivan Zinger, Robert D. Hoge, James Bonta, Paul Gendreau, and Francis T. Cullen. 1990. “Does Correctional Treatment Work? A Clinically Relevant and Psychologically Informed Meta-Analysis.”Criminology28:369-404.
6.
Cleland, Charles M.
, Frank Pearson, and Douglas S. Lipton. 1996. “A Meta-Analytic Approach to the Link Between Needs-Targeted Treatment and Reductions in Criminal Offending.” Presented at the American Society of Criminology annual meeting, November 20, Chicago, IL.
7.
Dowden, Craig. 1998. “A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Risk, Need and Responsivity Principles and Their Importance Within the Rehabilitation Debate.” Master's thesis, Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
8.
Gibbons, Don C.1999. “Review Essay: Changing Lawbreakers—What Have We Learned Since the 1950's?”Crime & Delinquency45:272-293.
9.
Hill, James K.
, D. A. Andrews, and Robert D. Hoge. 1991. “Meta-Analysis of Treatment Programs for Young Offenders: The Effect of Clinically Relevant Treatment on Recidivism, With Controls Introduced for Various Methodological Variables.”Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation6:97-109.
10.
Izzo, Rhena L.
and Robert R. Ross. 1990. “Meta-Analysis of Rehabilitation Programs for Juvenile Delinquents.”Criminal Justice and Behavior17:134-142.
11.
Koons, Barbara A.
, John D. Burrow, Merry Morash, and Tim Bynum1997. “Expert and Offender Perceptions of Program Elements Linked to Successful Outcomes for Incarcerated Women.”Crime & Delinquency43:512-532.
12.
Lipsey, Mark W.
1989. “The Efficacy of Intervention for Juvenile Delinquency: Results from 400 Studies.” Presented at the 41st annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, November, Reno, NV.
13.
Lipsey, Mark W.
1995. “What Do We Learn From 400 Research Studies on the Effectiveness of Treatment with Juvenile Delinquents?” Pp. 63-78 in What Works: Reducing Reoffending—Guidelines from Research and Practice, edited by J. Mcguire. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
14.
Losel, Friedrich
. 1996. “Effective Correctional Programming: What Empirical Research Tells Us and What it Doesn't.”Forum on Corrections Research8:33-36.
15.
Martinson, Robert
. 1974. “What Works? Questions and Answers About Prison Reform.”The Public Interest10:22-54.
16.
McGuire, James
, ed. 1995. What Works: Reducing Reoffending—Guidelines from Research and Practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
17.
Morash, Merry
, Tim S. Bynum, and Barbara A. Koons. 1995. Findings from the National Study of Innovative and Promising Programs for Women Offenders. East Lansing: Michigan State University, School of Criminal Justice.
18.
Rosenthal, Robert
. 1991. Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. Rev. ed.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
