The principles of risk, need, and responsivity have been empirically linked to the effectiveness of treatment to reduce reoffending, but the transference of these principles to the inside of prison walls is difficult. Results from a sample of 620 incarcerated male offenders—482 who received either a 5-week, 10-week, or 15-week prison-based treatment program and 138 untreated comparison offenders—found that treatment significantly reduced recidivism (odds ratio of .56; effect size r of .10) and that the amount of treatment (e.g., “dosage”) played a significant role (odds ratios between .92 and .95 per week of treatment; adjusted effect size r of .01 and .02). These results indicate that prison-based treatment can be effective in reducing recidivism, that dosage plays a mediating role, and that there may be minimum levels of treatment required to reduce recidivism that is dependent on the level of an offender’s risk and need.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
2.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1998). The psychology of criminal conduct (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
3.
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2003). The psychology of criminal conduct (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
4.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19-52.
5.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. (1995). The level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR): Interview and Scoring Guide. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services.
6.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. (in press). Manual for the level of service/Case Management Inventory IS/CMI. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
7.
Andrews, D. A., Dowden, C., & Gendreau, P. (1999). Clinically relevant and psychologically informed approaches to reduced re-offending: A meta-analytic study of human service, risk, need, responsivity, and other concerns in justice contexts. Unpublished manuscript, Psychology Department, Carleton University.
8.
Andrews, D. A., Dowden, C., & Rettinger, L. J. (2001). Special populations within corrections. In J. Winterdyk (Ed.), Corrections in Canada: Social reaction to crime (pp. 238-263). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Prentice Hall.
9.
Andrews, D. A., & Wormith, J. S. (1984). Criminal sentiments and criminal behaviour (Programs Branch User Report). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Solicitor General of Canada.
10.
Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990).Does correctional treatment work?A clinically-relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
11.
Aos, S., Phipps, P., Barnoski, R., & Lieb, R. (2001). The comparative costs and benefits of programs to reduce crime. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.wa.gov/wsipp/crime/pdf/costbenefit.pdf
12.
Armstrong, B., Bourgon, G., Ricciuti, K., Yates, B., Boudreau, S., Finn, J., et al. (1999). Report on an integrated service delivery model: Effective correctional treatment based on risk/need assessments, motivational levels, and sentence length. Merrickville, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
13.
Baxter, D. J., Burchill, M., & Tweedale, M. (1992). The Attitudes Towards Correctional Treatment Scale. Merrickville, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services.
14.
Baxter, D. J., Marion, A.-J., & Goguen, B. (1995). Predicting treatment response in correctional settings. Forum on Corrections Research, 7, 38-41.
15.
Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1987). The Beck Depression Inventory. New York: The Psychological Corporation.
16.
Bonta, J. (1997). Offender rehabilitation: From research to practice (R-01). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Solicitor General of Canada.
17.
Cohen, M. (1998). The monetary value of saving a high-risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14,5-33.
18.
Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. In Policies, processes & decisions of the criminal justice system (Vol. 3, pp. 109-175). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice.
19.
Donato, R., & Shanahan, M. (1999). The economics of implementing intensive in-prison sexoffender treatment programs. Australian Institute of Criminology: Trends and issues (No. 134). Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
20.
Gendreau, P. (1996). Offender rehabilitation: What we know and what needs to be done. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 144-161.
21.
Gendreau, P., & Goggin, C. (1997). Correctional treatment: accomplishments and realities. In P. Van Voorhis, M. Braswell, & D. Lester (Eds.), Correctional counseling & rehabilitation (pp. 271-279). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
22.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (1999). The forgotten issue in effective correctional treatment: Program implementation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43, 180-187.
23.
Gendreau, P., Smith, P., & Goggin, C. (2001).Treatment programs in corrections. In J. Winterdyk (Ed.), Corrections in Canada: Social reaction to crime (pp.238-263).Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Prentice Hall.
24.
Girard, L. (1999). The Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision: Risk/need assessment and recidivism. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa, 1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 1-B.
25.
Girard, L., & Wormith, S. (2004). The predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory – Ontario Revision on general and violent recidivism among various offender groups. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 150-181.
26.
Haddock, C. K., Rindskopf, D., & Shadish, W. R. (1998). Using odds ratios as effect sizes for meta-analysis of dichotomous data: A primer on methods and issues. Psychological Methods, 3, 339-353.
27.
Hollin, C. (2001). The role of consultant in developing effective correctional programmes. In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice (pp. 269-281). New York: John Wiley.
28.
Lab, S., & Whitehead, J. (1990). From “nothing works” to “appropriate works”: The latest stop on the search for the secular grail. Criminology, 28, 405-417.
29.
Lipsey, M. W. (1995). What do we learn from 400 research studies on the effectiveness of treatment with juvenile delinquents? In J. McGuire (Ed.), What works; reducing reoffending (pp. 63-78). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
30.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1998). Effective interventions for serious juvenile offenders. In R. Loeber & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders (pp. 313-345). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Lösel, F. (1995). The efficacy of correctional treatment: A review and synthesis of meta-evaluations. In J. McGuire (Ed.), What works: Reducing reoffending: guidelines from research to practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
32.
Lösel, F. (2001). Evaluating the effectiveness of correctional programs: Bridging the gap between research and practice. In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice. Chichester, UK. Wiley.
33.
Paulhus, D. L. (2000). Paulhus Deception Scale. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
34.
Redondo, S., Sanchez-Meca, J., & Garrido, V. (1999). The influence of treatment programmes on the recidivism of juvenile and adult offenders: An European meta-analytic review. Psychology, Crime and Law, 5, 251-278.
35.
Rettinger, L. J. (1998). A recidivism follow-up study investigating risk and need within a sample of provincially sentenced women. (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, 6-B.
36.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for socialresearch. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Simourd, D. J. (1997). The Criminal Sentiments Scale–Modified and Pride in Delinquency scale: Psychometric properties and construct validity of two measures of criminal attitudes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 52-70.
38.
Simourd, D. J., & Van De Ven, J. (1999). Assessment of criminal attitudes: Criterion-related validity of the Criminal Sentiments Scale and Pride in Delinquency Scale. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26, 90-106.
