This study meta-analytically examined the effect of macro-level concentrated disadvantage on individual-level recidivism. Search results indicated research to date is designed to assess the incremental effect of concentrated disadvantage on recidivism above other risk factors. Using a multilevel random effects model, we found the estimated incremental effect of concentrated disadvantage was nonsignificant (log odds ratio = 0.03, p = .15, k = 48). However, effects varied by recidivism and offense type. Concentrated disadvantage does not add incremental utility when predicting general recidivism, but it does add incremental utility when assessing arrests (especially drug arrests) and violent reconvictions. Although individual-level risk factors and markers seem to explain most of the relationship between concentrated disadvantage and reoffending, concentrated disadvantage should not be summarily dismissed as irrelevant to recidivism. The overrepresentation of disadvantaged neighborhoods among the justice-involved—and the overrepresentation of the justice-involved in disadvantaged neighborhoods—requires further research on the disadvantage–recidivism relationship.
*BaglivioM. T.WolffK. T.JackowskiK.GreenwaldM. A. (2017). A multilevel examination of risk/need change scores, community context, and successful reentry of committed juvenile offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 15(1), 38–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204015596052
2.
BlumsteinA.LarsonR. C. (1971). Problems in modeling and measuring recidivism. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 8(2), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/002242787100800202
3.
BontaJ.AndrewsD. A. (2016). The psychology of criminal conduct (6th ed.). Routledge.
4.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis (1st ed.). John Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386
5.
*BurdenF. F. (2009). Examining parolees in their communities: Poverty, rurality, and criminal justice resources [Doctoral Dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University]. Available from ProQuest Dissertation Abstracts.
6.
*ChamberlainA. W.BoggessL. N.PowersR. A. (2014). The impact of the spatial mismatch between parolee and employment locations on recidivism. Journal of Crime and Justice, 39(3), 398–420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2014.965264
7.
ChamberlainA. W.HippJ. R. (2015). It’s all relative: Concentrated disadvantage within and across neighborhoods and communities, and the consequences for neighborhood crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(6), 431–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2015.08.004
8.
ChamberlainA. W.WallaceD. (2016). Mass reentry, neighborhood context and recidivism: Examining how the distribution of parolees within and across neighborhoods impacts recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 33(5), 912–941. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2015.1012095
*ClarkV. A. (2016). Predicting two types of recidivism among newly released prisoners: First addresses as “launch pads” for recidivism or reentry success. Crime & Delinquency, 62(10), 1364–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128714555760
11.
ClearT. R. (2009). Imprisoning communities: How mass incarceration makes disadvantaged neighborhoods worse. Oxford University Press.
12.
ClearT. R.RoseD. R.WaringE.ScullyK. (2003). Coercive mobility and crime: A preliminary examination of concentrated incarceration and social disorganization. Justice Quarterly, 20(1), 33–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820300095451
13.
*CraigJ. M. (2019). The potential mediating impact of future orientation on the ACE–crime relationship. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 17(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204018756470
14.
*CraigJ. M.BaglivioM. T.WolffK. T.PiqueroA. R.EppsN. (2017). Do social bonds buffer the impact of adverse childhood experiences on reoffending?Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 15(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204016630033
FaganJ.DaviesG. (2000). Street stops and broken windows: Terry, race, and disorder in New York City. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(2), 457–504.
17.
FleisherM. S.DeckerS. H.CurryG. (2001). Going home, staying home: Integrating prison gang members into the community. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5, 65–77.
18.
García-PooleC.ByrneS.RodrigoM. J. (2019). How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs. Children and Youth Services Review, 99, 194–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.01.038
19.
*GrunwaldH. E.LockwoodB.HarrisP. W.MennisJ. (2010). Influences of neighborhood context, individual history and parenting behavior on recidivism among juvenile offenders. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(9), 1067–1079. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9518-5
20.
HardingD. J.MorenoffJ. D.HerbertC. W. (2013). Home is hard to find: Neighborhoods, institutions, and the residential trajectories of returning prisoners. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 647(1), 214–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716213477070
21.
HarrisP. W.LockwoodB.MengersL.StoodleyB. H. (2011). Measuring recidivism in juvenile corrections. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 1(1), 1–16.
22.
*HeadleyR. A. (2017). Do local institutions matter? A multilevel examination of the effects of neighborhood churches and service providers on parolee outcomes [Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University]. Available from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (Publication No. 10602992)
HippJ. R. (2007). Block, tract, and levels of aggregation: Neighborhood structure and crime and disorder as a case in point. American Sociological Review, 72(5), 659–680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200501
25.
HippJ. R.PetersiliaJ.TurnerS. (2010). Parolee recidivism in California: The effect of neighborhood context and social service agency characteristics. Criminology, 48(4), 947–979. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2010.00209.x
26.
HippJ. R.TurnerS.JannettaJ. (2010). Are sex offenders moving into social disorganization? Analyzing the residential mobility of California parolees. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(4), 558–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427810381093
27.
HsiehC.-C.PughM. D. (1993). Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: A meta-analysis of recent aggregate data studies. Criminal Justice Review, 18(2), 182–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/073401689301800203
28.
*HuebnerB. M.DeJongC.CobbinaJ. (2010). Women coming home: Long-term patterns of recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 27(2), 225–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820902870486
29.
*IntraviaJ.PelletierE.WolffK. T.BaglivioM. T. (2017). Community disadvantage, prosocial bonds, and juvenile reoffending: A multilevel mediation analysis. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 15(3), 240–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204016639350
30.
JacobsL. A.AshcraftL. E.SewallC. J. R.FolbB. L.MairC. (2020). Ecologies of juvenile reoffending: A systematic review of risk factors. Journal of Criminal Justice, 66, 101638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2019.101638
31.
JacobsL. A.SkeemJ. L. (2021). Neighborhood risk factors for recidivism: For whom do they matter?American Journal Community Psychology, 67, 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12463
32.
*JeongS. (2011). Long-term effects of restorative justice conferencing on future criminality: The Indianapolis experiment [Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University]. Available from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (Publication No. 3440032)
33.
KirkD. S.BarnesG. C.HyattJ. M.KearleyB. W. (2018). The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: Pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE). Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14(2), 213–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11292-017-9317-z
34.
KlingJ. R.LudwigJ.KatzL. F. (2005). Neighborhood effects on crime for female and male youth: Evidence from a randomized housing voucher experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(1), 87–130. https://doi.org/10.1162/0033553053327470
35.
*KubrinC. E.SquiresG.StewartE. (2007). Neighborhoods, race, and recidivism: The community reoffending nexus and its implications for African Americans (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2028179). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2028179
36.
*KubrinC. E.StewartE. A. (2006). Predicting who reoffends: The neglected role of neighborhood context in recidivism studies. Criminology, 44(1), 165–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2006.00046.x
37.
LeventhalT.Brooks-GunnJ. (2003). Moving to opportunity: An experimental study of neighborhood effects on mental health. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1576–1582. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1576
38.
LiskaA. E. (1992). Social threat and social control. State University of New York Press.
39.
*LockwoodB.HarrisP. W. (2015). Kicked out or dropped out? Disaggregating the effects of community-based treatment attrition on juvenile recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 32(4), 705–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2013.797485
40.
*McNeeleyS. (2018). Do ecological effects on recidivism vary by gender, race, or housing type?Crime & Delinquency, 64(6), 782–806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128717714425
41.
McNultyT. L. (2001). Assessing the race-violence relationship at the macro level: The assumption of racial invariance and the problem of restricted distributions. Criminology, 39(2), 467–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00930.x
42.
*McReynoldsL. S. (2004). Prediction of juvenile recidivism: Influence of gender, psychiatric disorder, and neighborhood disadvantage [Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University]. Available from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (Publication No. 3159747)
43.
*MearsD. P.WangX.BalesW. D. (2014). Does a rising tide lift all boats? Labor market changes and their effects on the recidivism of released prisoners. Justice Quarterly, 31(5), 822–851. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.677466
MonahanJ.SkeemJ. L. (2013). Risk redux: The resurgence of risk assessment in criminal sanctioning. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 26(3), 158–166.
46.
MurrayJ.FarringtonD. P.EisnerM. P. (2009). Drawing conclusions about causes from systematic reviews of risk factors: The Cambridge Quality Checklists. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-008-9066-0
OhmerM. L.WarnerB. D.BeckE. (2010). Preventing violence in low-income communities: Facilitating residents’ ability to intervene in neighborhood problems. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 37(2), 161–181.
49.
*OrrickE. A.WorrallJ. L.MorrisR. G.PiqueroA. R.BalesW. D.WangX. (2011). Testing Social Support Theory: A multilevel analysis of recidivism. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(6), 499–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.09.005
50.
PetersonR. D.KrivoL. J. (2005). Macrostructural analyses of race, ethnicity, and violent crime: Recent lessons and new directions for research. Annual Review of Sociology, 31(1), 331–356. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122308
51.
PetrosinoA.MorganC.FroniusT. (2018). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of crime prevention evaluations. In Oxford research encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.388
52.
PrattT. C.CullenF. T. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: A meta-analysis. Crime and Justice, 32, 373–450. https://doi.org/10.1086/655357
53.
*ReisigM. D.BalesW. D.HayC.WangX. (2007). The effect of racial inequality on Black male recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 24(3), 408–434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820701485387
54.
SampsonR. J. (1986). Neighborhood family structure and the risk of personal victimization. In ByrneJ. M.SampsonR. J. (Eds.), The social ecology of crime (pp. 25–46). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8606-3_2.
55.
SampsonR. J.LoefflerC. (2010). Punishment’s place: The local concentration of mass incarceration. Daedalus, 139(3), 20–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00020
56.
SampsonR. J.MorenoffJ. D.Gannon-RowleyT. (2002). Assessing “neighborhood effects”: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 443–478. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141114
57.
SampsonR. J.RaudenbushS. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 603–651. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/210356
58.
SampsonR. J.RaudenbushS. W.EarlsF. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.918
59.
SampsonR. J.WilsonW. J. (1995). Toward a theory of race, crime, and urban inequality. In KarpD. R. (Ed.), Community justice 37 (pp. 37–54). Rowman & Littlefield.
60.
SampsonR. J.WilsonW. J.KatzH. (2018). Reassessing “Toward a theory of race, crime, and urban inequality”: Enduring and new challenges in 21st century America. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 15(1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X18000140
61.
SanbonmatsuL.LudwigJ.GennetianL.DuncanG. J.KesslerR. C.AdamE.McDadeT.LindauS. (2011). Moving to opportunity for fair housing demonstration program—Final impacts evaluation. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/mtofhd_fullreport_v2.pdf
62.
SciandraM.SanbonmatsuL.DuncanG. J.GennetianL. A.KatzL. F.KesslerR. C.KlingJ. R.LudwigJ. (2013). Long-term effects of the Moving to Opportunity residential mobility experiment on crime and delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9(4), 451–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-013-9189-9
63.
SharkeyP.FaberJ. W. (2014). Where, when, why, and for whom do residential contexts matter? Moving away from the dichotomous understanding of neighborhood effects. Annual Review of Sociology, 40(1), 559–579. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043350
64.
ShawC. R.McKayH. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas: A study of rates of delinquents in relation to differential characteristics of local communities in American cities. University of Chicago Press.
65.
SimesJ. T. (2018). Place and punishment: The spatial context of mass incarceration. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(2), 513–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-017-9344-y
66.
SmithD. A. (1986). The neighborhood context of police behavior. Crime and Justice, 8, 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1086/449126
67.
SterneJ. A. C.EggerM. (2005). Regression methods to detect publication and other bias in meta-analysis. In RothsteinH. R.SuttonA. J.BorensteinM. (Eds.), Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments (pp. 99–110). Wiley.
68.
*TillyerM. S.VoseB. (2011). Social ecology, individual risk, and recidivism: A multilevel examination of main and moderating influences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(5), 452–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.08.003
69.
TittleC. R. (2018). The theoretical bases for inequality in formal social control. In BridgesG. S. (Ed.), Inequality, crime, and social control (pp. 21–52). Routledge.
70.
TravisJ.WaulM. (Eds.). (2003). Prisoners once removed: The impact of incarceration and reentry on children, families, and communities. The Urban Institute.
71.
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
*WangX.HayC.TodakN. E.BalesW. (2014). Criminal propensity, social context, and recidivism: A multilevel analysis of interactive relationships. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(3), 300–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854813507055
*WehrmanM. M. (2010). Race, concentrated disadvantage, and recidivism: A test of interaction effects. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 538–544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.04.024
76.
WilsonD. B. (2001). Meta-analytic methods for criminology. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578(1), 71–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000271620157800105
77.
WilsonW. J. (2012). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
78.
WodtkeG. T.HardingD. J.ElwertF. (2011). Neighborhood effects in temporal perspective: The impact of long-term exposure to concentrated disadvantage on high school graduation. American Sociological Review, 76(5), 713–736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0003122411420816
79.
*WolffK. T.BaglivioM. T.IntraviaJ.GreenwaldM. A.EppsN. (2017). The mobility of youth in the justice system: Implications for recidivism. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(7), 1371–1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0498-y
80.
*WolffK. T.BaglivioM. T.IntraviaJ.PiqueroA. R. (2015). The protective impact of immigrant concentration on juvenile recidivism: A statewide analysis of youth offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(6), 522–531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2015.05.004
81.
*WolffK. T.BaglivioM. T.PiqueroA. R.VaughnM. G.DeLisiM. (2016). The triple crown of antisocial behavior: Effortful control, negative emotionality, and community disadvantage. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 14(4), 350–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204015599042
82.
*WrightK. A.KimB.ChassinL.LosoyaS. H.PiqueroA. R. (2014). Ecological context, concentrated disadvantage, and youth reoffending: Identifying the social mechanisms in a sample of serious adolescent offenders. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(10), 1781–1799. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0173-0
83.
*WrightK. A.RodriguezN. (2014). A closer look at the paradox: Examining immigration and youth reoffending in Arizona. Justice Quarterly, 31(5), 882–904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.700057
84.
*WrightK. A.TuranovicJ. J.RodriguezN. (2016). Racial inequality, ethnic inequality, and the system involvement of at-risk youth: Implications for the racial invariance and Latino paradox theses. Justice Quarterly, 33(5), 863–889. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2014.987310
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
