Sunday, January 28, 2007

More NCJRS Abstracts, Sunday, January 28, 2007


NCJ 216722
Leonard A. Jason Ph.D. ; Bradley D. Olson Ph.D. ; Joseph R. Ferrari Ph.D. ; Anthony T. Lo Sasso Ph.D.
Communal Housing Settings Enhance Substance Abuse Recovery
American Journal of Public Health Volume:96 Issue:10 Dated:October 2006 Pages:1727 to 1729

Results indicated that when compared to the treatment as usual group, participants living in Oxford Houses had significantly lower substance use (31.3 percent compared to 64.8 percent), significantly higher monthly income ($989 compared to $440), and significantly lower incarceration rates (3 percent compared to 9 percent). This lower rate of incarceration for Oxford House members corresponded to an annual savings of approximately $119,000 for the State of Illinois. If the average savings realized by Oxford House member productivity is added to this figure, the State of Illinois saved approximately $8,173 per Oxford House member per year. The findings suggest that the Oxford House model may be a promising type of recovery home for individuals seeking to maintain drug abstinence. The study compared 75 individuals who were randomly assigned to live in an Oxford House with 75 individuals who were randomly assigned to the usual after-care condition (usually outpatient treatment or self-help groups). Participants were interviewed every 6 months for a 24-month period. In addition to presenting evaluation results, the article also described the Oxford House model, which is a democratically self-run group home in which members support one another in their efforts to remain drug-free. All members, who are democratically elected to live in the houses, pay rent and perform chores. The Oxford Houses are run independent of professional help and all expenses are covered by members. Future research should examine the relationship between outcomes and individual differences among Oxford House members. References

NCJ 216759
Michael Wenzel ; Ines Thielmann
Why We Punish in the Name of Justice: Just Desert Versus Value Restoration and the Role of Social Identity
Social Justice Research Volume:19 Issue:4 Dated:December 2006 Pages:450 to 470

The findings supported the hypothesis that the just desert notion of justice was positively associated with support for traditional forms of punishment, particularly when participants did not identify with a relevant inclusive community. On the other hand, the value restoration notion of justice was positively associated with support for alternative punishment, particularly when community values were regarded as diverse and requiring consensus. The findings support the conceptual distinction of two different justice models following rule-breaking. Two different studies were employed. In the first study, 965 adult participants were drawn from the Australian electoral roll. Participants completed a survey that contained two scenarios depicting tax evasion offenses: (1) a company doctor who manipulated the company’s books to reduce their taxes by $200,000; and (2) a tradesperson who gave discounts for customers in return for being paid in cash, which illegally reduced taxes by $10,000. In both scenarios, the offenders had been previously arrested for a similar offense. Following the scenarios, participants answered a series of questions measuring the two different justice philosophies (just desert and value restoration) in relation to the tax evasion offenses as well as demographic information. The second study was designed to replicate the findings of the first study in relation to a different type of offense: social security fraud. Participants were 263 undergraduate students who answered questions measuring the 2 justice philosophies in relation to a scenario depicting a person who had been receiving government assistance payments but failed to inform authorities about the financial support from a de facto partner, which would have made the person ineligible to receive assistance. Data were analyzed using zero-order correlations and hierarchical regression models. Future research should examine the factors that encourage or inhibit support for restorative justice practices. Tables, figures, footnotes, references

NCJ 216757
Dena M. Gromet ; John M. Darley
Restoration and Retribution: How Including Retributive Components Affects the Acceptability of Restorative Justice Procedures
Social Justice Research Volume:19 Issue:4 Dated:December 2006 Pages:395 to 432

The findings from study 1 indicated that participants were willing to assign pure restorative procedures for less serious crimes but they overwhelmingly included a retributive component for more serious crimes. Study 2 results indicated that participants did not lower prison sentences for offenders whose conferences failed, nor did they punish these offenders with more severe sentences. Participants consistently lowered prison sentences for offenders who successfully completed restorative procedures. The findings suggest that citizens may be willing to embrace restorative practices for less serious crimes but require more retributive options as the seriousness of the crime increases. The first study focused on whether the seriousness of the crime impacted citizen’s perceptions of the role of punitive measures in restorative justice procedures. Participants were 57 undergraduate psychology students who participated for course credit. Participants were educated on the differences between pure restorative practices and punitive procedures and were asked to judge nine court cases in terms of whether the cases should go through pure restorative procedures, a mixed procedure, or the traditional court process. In Study 2, 43 undergraduate psychology students who were participating for course credit were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions: (1) a no-fault conference outcome in which the victim and the offender from a mixed procedure had failed to reach an agreement, and (2) an offender-fault conference outcome in which a mixed procedure conference failed because of a lack of effort on the offender’s part. Participants were directed to answer questions related to the offender, such as likelihood of recidivism, and to offer their opinion of the sentence the offender should receive. Both studies were administered via Internet-linked computers. Data were analyzed using nominal logistic regression models and repeated measures ANOVA. Future research should attempt to replicate these findings with different populations. Tables, figures, footnotes, appendixes, references

No comments: