Home Forums EBP & Related Research Findings Research Citations for Behavior Change

This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  fairwjl December 08 , 2014.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF |  

  • fairwjl
    Participant

    There is a comprehensive article at CSOM (Center for Sex Offender Management) that cites a number of studies on these principles and goes into some depth in each area. The information is relevant to the sex offender population; however, if you consider the implications of the article’s content, the findings of the cited studies, and the application to a broader range of correctional clientele, even though some of the topical intervention strategies may vary across populations of correctional clientele, the fundamental foundations are the same. The article may be located at: http://www.csom.org/pubs/cap/2/2_0.htm.

     

    MarkCarey
    MarkCarey
    Participant

    Joseph, you asked for information on citations regarding effective intervention principles.  As you can imagine, there has been a growing body of literature on this.  I am listing a few that I am aware of but don’t claim that this is an exhaustive listing.  I trust that this will be helpful to you.

     

    Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: LexisNexis Matthew Bender.

    Andrews, D. A., & Carvell, C. (1998). Core Correctional Treatment — Core Correctional Supervision and Counseling: Theory, Research, Assessment and Practice. Ottawa, ON: Carleton University.

     

    Bonta, J., Bourgon, G., Rugge, T., Scott, T.-L., Yessine, A. K., Gutierrez, L., & Li, J. (2011). An experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based community supervision. Criminal Justice and behavior, 38, 1127–1148.

    Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Scott, T., Bourgon, G., & Yessine, A. (2008). Exploring the black box of community supervision. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47, 248–270.

    Bourgon, G., Bonta, J., Rugge, T. & Gutierrez, L. (2010). Technology transfer: The importance of ongoing clinical supervision in translating “what works” to everyday community supervision. In F. McNeil, P. Raynor & C. Trotter (Eds.), Offender supervision. New Directions in Theory, Research and Practice, pp. 88–106. Willan Publishing.

    Bourgon, G., & Gutierrez, L. (2012). The general Responsivity principle in community supervision: The importance of probation officers using cognitive intervention techniques and its influence on recidivism. Journal of Crime & Justice, 35, 149–166.

    Bourgon, G., Gutierrez, L. & Ashton, J. (2011). The evolution of community supervision practice: The transformation from case manager to change agent. Irish Probation Journal, 8, 28–48Dowden, C. & Andrews, D.A. (2004). The importance of staff practices in delivering effective correctional treatment: A meta-analytic review of core correctional practices.  International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48: 203-214.

     

    Goggin, C., & Gendreau, P. (2006). The implementation and maintenance of quality services in offender rehabilitation programs. In C. R. Hollin & E. J. Palmer (Eds.), Offending behaviour programmes: Development, application, and controversies (pp. 209–246). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

    Kazdin, A.E. (2001). Behavior Modification in Applied Settings (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

     

    Landenberger, N. A., & Lipsey, M. W. (2005). The positive effects of cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 451–476.

    Latessa, E.J., Cullen, F.T., & Gendreau, P. (2002). Beyond correctional quackery—professionalism and the possibility of effective treatment. Federal Probation, 66(2), 43–49.

    Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4, 124–147.

    Lowenkamp, C., A. Holsinger, C. Robinson, and M. Alexander. “Diminishing or Durable Treatment Effects of STARR? A Research Note on 24-Month Re-Arrest Rates.” Journal of Crime and Justice (2012), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0735648X.2012.753849

    Robinson, C., C. Lowenkamp, C. Holsinger, S. VanBenschoten, M. Alexander, and J.C. Oleson. “A Random Study of Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Re-arrest (STARR): Using Core Correctional Practices in Probation Interactions.” Journal of Crime and Justice, 35 (2012).

    Striefel, S. (1998).  How To Teach Through Modeling and Imitation, 2nd edition.  Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, Inc.

     

    Taxman, F.S. (2008). No illusions: Offender and organizational change in Maryland’s proactive community supervision efforts. Criminology & Public Policy, 7, 275–302.

    Taxman, F. S., Henderson, C., & Lerch, J. (2010). The socio-political context of reforms in probation agencies: Impact on adoption of evidence-based practices. In F. McNeil, P. Raynor & C. Trotter (Eds.), Offender supervision: New Directions in Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 336–378). Willan Publishing.

    Trotter, C. (1996). The impact of different supervision practices in community corrections: Cause for optimism. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 29, 1–18.

    Trotter, C. (1999).  Working with Involuntary Offenders: A Guide to Practice.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.