Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Crime & Delinquency
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taxman, F. S.
Right arrow Articles by Thanner, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Risk, Need, and Responsivity (RNR): It All Depends

Faye S. Taxman

Virginia Commonwealth University, fstaxman{at}vcu.edu

Meridith Thanner

University of Maryland, College Park

Target populations have always been a thorny issue for correctional programs. In this experiment of seamless treatment for probationers in two sites, offenders were randomly assigned to the seamless model (drug treatment incorporated into probation supervision) or traditional referral model to services in the community. The experiment blocked on risk level to measure the differential effects on rearrest and substance abuse. The seamless system model improved treatment participation with greater gains for the offenders who were high risk in both sites. Yet no main effects were observed on drug use or rearrest, although effect sizes illustrate that small effects can be observed for the offenders who are high risk. Part of the failure to observe main effects is because of instrumentation problems, namely, that most substance abusers in the experiment had low-severity substance abuse problems and were marijuana users. The focus on sound dynamic factors may assist with identifying the appropriate target populations for correctional interventions.

Key Words: high-risk offenders • integration of treatment and supervision • experiment • substance abusers • risk assessment • probation • marijuana users • responsivity

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 52, No. 1, 28-51 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128705281754
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J Offender Ther Comp CriminolHome page
E. L. Sevigny and P. D. Coontz
Patterns of Substance Involvement and Criminal Behavior: A Gender-Based Cluster Analysis of Pennsylvania Arrestees
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, August 1, 2008; 52(4): 435 - 453.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
F. S. Taxman, K. L. Cropsey, D. W. Young, and H. Wexler
SCREENING, ASSESSMENT, AND REFERRAL PRACTICES IN ADULT CORRECTIONAL SETTINGS : A National Perspective.
Criminal Justice and Behavior, September 1, 2007; 34(9): 1216 - 1234.
[Abstract] [PDF]