skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 238910   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
Title: GPS Monitoring Technologies and Domestic Violence: An Evaluation Study
  Document URL: PDF 
  Dataset URL: DATASET 1
Author(s): Edna Erez, LLB., Ph.D. ; Peter R. Ibarra, Ph.D. ; William D. Bales, Ph.D. ; Oren M. Gur, M.S.
Date Published: 06/2012
Page Count: 245
  Annotation: This study examined the use of Global Positioning System(GPS) technology to monitor compliance with court-mandated “no contact” orders in domestic-violence (DV) cases, particularly those that have involved violence.
Abstract: In addition, the study also determined the effectiveness of GPS as a form of pretrial supervision in DV cases compared to other pretrial supervision conditions. The findings indicate that the use of GPS impacts the behavior of program enrollees over both short and long terms. The short-term impact was associated with no contact attempts; and defendants enrolled in GPS monitoring had fewer program violations compared to those placed in traditional electronic monitoring (EM) that uses radio frequency (RF) technology. The latter involves remotely monitoring house arrest, but without tracking. Apparently, GPS tracking increases defendants’ compliance with program conditions compared to those who are monitored for presence at a particular location, usually the home residence, but are not tracked for all locations. Defendants enrolled in the Midwest GPS program had a lower probability of being rearrested for a DV offense during the 1-year follow-up period compared to defendants who had been in a non-GPS condition (e.g., in jail, in a EM program, or release on bond without supervision). In another study site, those placed on GPS had a lower likelihood of arrest for any criminal violation within the 1-year follow-up period. In a third site, however, no impact from participation in GPS monitoring was found. The authors speculate that the heterogeneity of the defendants placed on GPS at the latter site, along with the different method for generating the sample of DV defendants, may explain the absence of an impact of GPS on arrest in the long term. The finding also suggests that defendants’ participation in GPS increased the likelihood of conviction. 32 tables, 67 references, 82 notes, and appended study instruments
Main Term(s): Corrections policies
Index Term(s): Pretrial procedures ; Comparative analysis ; Equipment evaluation ; Domestic assault ; Electronic monitoring of offenders ; Victims of violence ; NIJ final report
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Grant Number: 2007-IJ-CX-0016
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Country: United States of America
Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.