Since LaFree's review of 34 cross-national homicide studies in 1999, an additional 50 studies have been published on this topic. There have been a few reviews of the extant literature, and a meta-analysis of cross-national predictors of homicide. However, none of these have directly assessed the degree to which the subsequent research has heeded the recommendations provided by LaFree, nor considered the long-term implications of his analysis for ongoing cross-national homicide research. We extend the literature by updating the review conducted by LaFree and detailing the major changes that have occurred in this body of research since the late 1990s. Our review reveals that recent studies appear to have taken into account LaFree's recommendations, particularly in regard to data sources, theoretical perspectives, and variable choices. We conclude that while advances in this field have been made, there are issues that have remained problematic over time and should be considered by researchers engaged in cross-national homicide research. IntroductionResearch on cross-national homicide spans five decades. Since the early 1960s, over 85 quantitative studies have examined the issue of cross-national homicide rates. In 1999, Gary LaFree published the first comprehensive review of cross-national homicide research, analyzing 34 academic articles published between 1965 and 1997. He reviewed data sources, independent and control variable specification, methodological issues (e.g., sample sizes, sampling procedures, and homicide definitions), theoretical perspectives, and significance of findings. He then outlined several recommendations for future cross-national homicide research based on his analysis of these 34 studies.Since 1999 (i.e., LaFree's study), the extant literature on cross-national homicide has flourished, with over 55 quantitative studies published assessing the nature and extent of cross-national homicide in nearly one-third the time span of LaFree's study. Of these 55 more recent studies, over one-third (18 articles) make reference to LaFree's (1999) review. This includes seven articles that use LaFree as a source for review of the cross-national homicide literature, another seven articles that cite his study as a justification for their use of the World Health Organization (WHO) data, and six that refer to

This article explores the demographic factors, background characteristics, and workplace perceptions that predict secondary trauma among probation/parole and residential officers. Our results indicate that probation/parole officers were more likely to report secondary trauma than residential officers. Additionally, we found that officers who reported better health, better job training, and fewer contact hours with offenders were also less likely to report secondary trauma. These results fill a muchneeded gap in the literature, as well as provide information that may be utilized by the department of corrections to minimize symptoms of secondary trauma among community corrections staff.

The purpose of this article was to explore the association between demographic and background characteristics, as well as workplace perceptions that may predict burnout among two connected groups of community corrections officers. Using the Maslach Burnout Inventory, we assessed whether burnout differed between probation/parole and residential officers and analyzed whether predictors of burnout varied across these two groups. Our results indicated that while probation/parole officers were more likely to report Emotional Exhaustion, they were not any more or less likely to experience Depersonalization or Personal Accomplishment. In addition, educational training had a stronger impact for residential officers, while schedule fit was more important for probation/parole officers, when predicting Personal Accomplishment. These results not only extended the existing research on burnout but also helped inform key correctional stakeholders about what policies and practices were working well, as well as indicated potential areas of change to help minimize burnout among staff.

No abstract

Community corrections (e.g., probation, parole, halfway houses) is the largest correctional placement in the United States, yet little research assesses community corrections staff experiences with job stress and job satisfaction. The purpose of this article is to extend the literature on community corrections officers by assessing the influence of individual factors, job characteristics, and organizational variables on both job stress and job satisfaction. In general, we found that the influence of individual factors and job characteristics differed for job stress compared to job satisfaction. Similarly, the impact of organizational factors on these outcomes also differed, although this was contrary to our expectations. Finally, job stress had a negative effect on job satisfaction and organizational factors had a larger impact on both job stress and job satisfaction, compared to individual and job characteristics. Our results provide a number of possible areas for departments to focus on in order to reduce job stress and increase job satisfaction among probation/parole and residential officers.