THE AUTHORS NOTE THAT IT IS FASHIONABLE TO SOUND THE DEATH KNELL FOR TREATMENT IN CORRECTIONS. THE FOLLOWING REASONS ARE CITED FOR WITHOLDING SUCH A HARSH JUDGMENT ON CORRECTIONS TREATMENT: (1) THE QUALITY OF CORRECTIONAL RESEARCH IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO GIVE AN ADEQUATE ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT; (2) THE TREATMENT USED IN CORRECTIONS IS NOT AN ADEQUATE REFLECTION OF THE VARIETY AND QUALITY OF TREATMENT AVAILABLE IN THE MENTAL HEALTH FIELD; (3) SOME CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE EFFECTIVE; AND (4) THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH TREATMENT IS APPLIED IS OFTEN DEBILITATING, PERHAPS MORE THAN THE TREATMENT CONCEPT ITSELF. WHILE BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION AS A CONCEPT FOR WHOLESALE CHANGE IN CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR IS ACKNOWLEDGED TO HAVE BEEN ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED WITH UNREASONABLE EXPECTATIONS, IT IS BELIEVED TO BE A VIABLE TREATMENT APPROACH IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. THE POPULAR SUPPORT FOR BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION, ITS APPARENT SIMPLICITY OF OPERATION, AND ITS PROMISE TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM ARE CONSIDERED THE PRINCIPAL REASONS FOR ITS INITIAL APPEAL. THE AMBIGUOUS RESULTS OF BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION PROGRAMS IN CORRECTIONS ARE VIEWED AS ONE PHASE OF THE EXPERIMENT, WITH THE LESSONS LEARNED FROM THIS PHASE TO BE LATER APPLIED FOR INCREASED EFFECTIVENESS IN THE NEXT PHASE OF TREATMENT APPLICATION. THE SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS ARE NOT IMPOSED ON OFFENDERS, BUT INVOLVE OFFENDERS IN PROGRAM PLANNING; AIM AT STRENGTHENING PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR RATHER THAN ATTEMPTING DIRECTLY TO REDUCE ANTISOCIAL ACTS; AND NEUTRALIZE OR MOBILIZE THE INFLUENCE OF THE OFFENDER'S PEER GROUP. TABLES ARE PROVIDED SHOWING THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SPECIFIC EVALUATION RESEARCH DONE ON A VARIETY OF INSTITUTIONAL AND COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT PROGRAMS. NOTES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)