Does substance misuse moderate the relationship between criminal thinking and recidivism?

Abstract

Purpose Some differential intervention frameworks contend that substance use is less robustly related to recidivism outcomes than other criminogenic needs such as criminal thinking. The current study tested the hypothesis that substance use disorder severity moderates the relationship between criminal thinking and recidivism. Methods The study utilized two independent criminal justice samples. Study 1 included 226 drug-involved probationers. Study 2 included 337 jail inmates with varying levels of substance use disorder severity. Logistic regression was employed to test the main and interactive effects of criminal thinking and substance use on multiple dichotomous indicators of recidivism. Results Bivariate analyses revealed a significant correlation between criminal thinking and recidivism in the jail sample (r = .18, p < .05) but no significant relationship in the probation sample. Logistic regressions revealed that SUD symptoms moderated the relationship between criminal thinking and recidivism in the jail-based sample (B = −.58, p < .05). A significant moderation effect was not observed in the probation sample. Conclusions Study findings indicate that substance use disorder symptoms moderate the strength of the association between criminal thinking and recidivism. These findings demonstrate the need for further research into the interaction between various dynamic risk factors.

Trends and correlates of substance use disorders among probationers and parolees in the United States 2002–2014

“…Between 2000 and 2014, 4.5 to 5.1 million individuals were on probation or parole, representing about 1 out of every 45 US adult residents. Although substance use/abuse/addiction issues (i.e., substance use disorders, hereafter SUDs) are not the exclusive domain of criminal offenders, they are quite prevalent among individuals who come into contact with the criminal justice system (e.g., Allen and Jacques, 2014; Caudy et al, 2015; Copes et al, 2015; DeLisi et al, 2015; Golder et al, 2014; Hendricks et al, 2014; Rezansoff et al, 2013; Teplin, 1994; Vaughn et al, 2012; Walters, 2015). Consistently, one-quarter of those under supervision are on probation/parole for some type of drug offense and another 14% to 25% received their sanction due to a DUI/DWI or some other public order offense that was often drug-related (Kaeble et al, 2015).…”

Changes in inmates' substance use and dependence from pre-incarceration to one year post-release

“…In the domain of substance misuse, criminogenic thinking may inhibit potentially constructive use of the period of incarceration. But for substance dependent inmates, criminogenic thinking does not predict recidivism as it does for non-substance dependent inmates (Caudy, Folk, Stuewig, Wooditch, Martinez, Maass, Tangney, & Taxman, 2015). Therefore, programs may need to address both criminogenic thinking (e.g., Folk et al, 2015; Malouf, Youman, Harty, Schaefer, & Tangney, 2013) and substance misuse in order to most effectively serve this subgroup of inmates (Taxman, 2014).…”

Connectedness to the criminal community and the community at large predicts 1‐year post‐release outcomes among felony offenders

“…1 The primary goal of this prospective study of jail inmates was to examine the implications of moral emotions and cognitions for post-release recidivism, substance abuse relapse, and HIV risk behavior (e.g., Caudy et al, 2015; Martinez, Stuewig, & Tangney, 2014; Tangney, Stuewig, & Martinez, 2014; Tangney, Stuewig, Mashek, & Hastings, 2011). At the time of enrollment, participants were on average 33.17 years old ( SD = 10.09, range 18 to 69), male (69.5%), had completed 11.84 years of education ( SD = 2.10, range 5 to 18), and were diverse in terms of race and ethnicity (45.0% African American, 35.1% Caucasian, 7.6% Hispanic, 3.4% Asian, 5.2% “Mixed,” and 3.7% “Other”).…”