This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by MacKenzie, D. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Evidence-Based Corrections: Identifying What Works

Relatively few policy decisions regarding corrections use scientific evidence to assist in making informed decisions. This article emphasizes the importance of using evidence-based corrections if we are to be successful in reducing crime in the community. As an example of how scientific information can be used to make decisions, an assessment technique designed by University of Maryland researchers is used to assess the effectiveness of correctional strategies, interventions, and programs. This technique uses a two-step procedure for drawing conclusions about what works in crime prevention. Studies within each area (e.g., drug treatment, cognitive skills programs, educational programs) are assessed for scientific rigor. The scientific rigor score and the direction and significance of the results are used to draw conclusions about what works, what doesn't, what is promising, and what we don't know. The assessment technique is described and summaries of the findings from this assessment are presented.

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 46, No. 4, 457-471 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128700046004003


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. E. Lutze and J. G. van Wormer The Nexus Between Drug and Alcohol Treatment Program Integrity and Drug Court Effectiveness: Policy Recommendations for Pursuing Success Criminal Justice Policy Review, September 1, 2007; 18(3): 226 - 245. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. P. Caulkins and S. Chandler Long-Run Trends in Incarceration of Drug Offenders in the United States Crime Delinquency, October 1, 2006; 52(4): 619 - 641. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Bottcher and M. E. Ezell Examining the Effectiveness of Boot Camps: A Randomized Experiment with a Long-Term Follow Up Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, August 1, 2005; 42(3): 309 - 332. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. R. Lee The Adolescent Development of the Penitentiary: A Review and Comment on The Cradle of the Penitentiary by Negley Teeters The Prison Journal, December 1, 2004; 84(4_suppl): 115S - 121S. [PDF]

				D. L. MacKENZIE Corrections and Sentencing in the 21st Century: Evidence-Based Corrections and Sentencing The Prison Journal, September 1, 2001; 81(3): 299 - 312. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. T. CULLEN and P. GENDREAU From Nothing Works to What Works: Changing Professional Ideology in the 21st Century The Prison Journal, September 1, 2001; 81(3): 313 - 338. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Petrosino, R. F. Boruch, H. Soydan, L. Duggan, and J. Sanchez-Meca Meeting the Challenges of Evidence-Based Policy: The Campbell Collaboration The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 1, 2001; 578(1): 14 - 34. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Weisburd, C. M. Lum, and A. Petrosino Does Research Design Affect Study Outcomes in Criminal Justice? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 1, 2001; 578(1): 50 - 70. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. C. Welsh and D. P. Farrington Toward an Evidence-Based Approach to Preventing Crime The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 1, 2001; 578(1): 158 - 173. [Abstract] [PDF]