skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 70111 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Decision-Making, Correctional Alternatives and Recidivism Final Progress Report, July 1970
Author(s): L T Empey; S G Lubeck; R L Yeaman
Corporate Author: University of Southern California
United States of America
Date Published: 1970
Page Count: 110
Sponsoring Agency: University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071
US Dept of Justice

US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 69-NI-050
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report is a rough draft account of research findings on the simulation of correctional alternatives. The text will be revised for publication as a section of a book on corrections to be used by workers in corrections and the criminal justice system.
Abstract: The major goal of this simulation project was to examine the relationship of recidivism to operational and outcome data gathered from a study of three major correctional alternatives -- probation, intensive community treatment, and incarceration. Primarily, this was a study of the computer simulation of outcomes because it was felt that computer simulation techniques provide an ideal basis for evaluating programs in terms of their abilities to bring about reductions in delinquency as well as for achieving a better matching of types of offenders with types of programs. The report is arranged in five major areas. First, a definition of simulation is given and its utility for the behavioral sciences described in general and for corrections in particular. Second, the correctional alternatives studied in the project are described. Then, the operational measures used in the study are delineated, followed by a discussion of the types of models that were developed. Finally, the empirical results of the study are presented along with an assessment of their implications. The five correctional alternatives involved in the study ranged from minimal probationary supervision (Utah County) through community programs of moderate supervision (Pinehills Experiment, Utah; Silverlake, Calif) to total institutions (Utah State Industrial School; Boys Republic, Calif). The State of Utah and Los Angeles County, Calif., were selected for their contrasting nonmetropolitan and metropolitan area features respectively. A total sample of 1,200 male delinquents and nondelinquents was utilized in the study. Data on delinquents assigned to the contrasting treatment institutions were analyzed through regressive analysis techniques; actual versus simulated recidivist behavior were compared for each program. It is felt that the most important contribution of a simulation of this nature is that it attempts to interrelate theory, research, and practice. Tables, footnotes, and a bibliography (ca. 70 entries) are provided. Appendixes contain tabulations of stepwise regression runs, factor matrices, and material on offense ratings.
Index Term(s): California; Community-based corrections (juvenile); Computer simulation; Correctional institutions (juvenile); Juvenile Recidivism; Treatment offender matching; Utah
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=70111

*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.