skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 102847 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Selective Incapacitation as a Means of Crime Control
Journal: American Behavioral Scientist  Volume:27  Issue:1  Dated:(September-October 1983)  Pages:87-108
Author(s): A Blumstein
Date Published: 1983
Page Count: 21
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 82-IJ-CX-0062
Dataset: DATASET 1
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper reviews arguments for selective incapacitation as a crime control method, means of implementing such a policy, and philosophical and legal issues that must be addressed.
Abstract: Prison crowding has pressed policymakers to a more efficient selection of offenders for incarceration. The theory of selective incapacitation argues that a small percentage of offenders commits a large percentage of crimes, so crime could be significantly reduced by identifying and imprisoning such offenders. The validity of this theory depends on the incapacitated offenders not being replaced by new offenders. The selection of habitual and serious offenders has been the focus of research by Jan and Marcia Chaiken and Peter Greenwood. Confirmation of the validity of this research for the selection of habitual offenders requires further studies. Also, the use of the selection instrument and the kinds of data required to administer it raise legal and philosophical questions. Some of these issues are the basing of sentences on predicted future crimes rather than the offense of conviction and the risk that the selection instrument may be flawed by design or information input. So long as selection is accurate and the assigned sentence does not exceed a reasonable maximum sentence for the offense of conviction, the use of a selection instrument to implement selective incapacitation can be legally and philosophically justified. An instrument, however, should never be applied mechanistically. Judicial discretion is required to deal with complex issues not encompassed by a selection instrument. 7 references.
Main Term(s): Selective incapacitation
Index Term(s): Criminality prediction; Dangerousness; Habitual offenders
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 website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.