Gang Affiliation and Prisoner Reentry: Discrete-Time Variation in Recidivism by Current, Former, and Non-Gang Status

Abstract

Objectives: Reentry experiences for the 600,000 people released annually from federal and state prisons differ vastly. We contend that gangs, which rose to prominence alongside mass incarceration, are an overlooked source of variation in reentry experiences. Drawing on precepts from the street gang literature, we test whether patterns of recidivism differ by official and survey measures of current, former, and non-gang status. Methods: Data from a representative sample of 802 prisoners interviewed prior to their release in 2016 were linked to 36 months of post-release arrest, conviction, and imprisonment records. Survival curves and multivariable discrete-time survival analysis were used to test for differential patterns of recidivism. Results: The conditional risk of recidivism varied by gang status. Current gang members maintained the greatest risk for all recidivism types. While former gang members were more likely to get arrested than non-gang members, there were no differences in conviction and imprisonment. Official and survey gang measures mostly told the same story, although official measures appeared to be more reliable determinants of recidivism than survey measures. Conclusions: Distinguishing former from current and non-gang members is important for policy, practice, and research. These findings renew calls to understand and respond to social groups and networks like gangs for prisoner reentry.

Procedural justice, legal orientations, and gang membership: Testing an alternative explanation to understand the gang–misconduct link

“…First, even though we did not have access to correctional intelligence files on the dates gang affiliation was classified, our survey data showed that in the 6 months prior to the interview date, no respondents joined a gang and only three left. Furthermore, official reclassification to an “ex” lags behind status transitions among prisoners (see Pyrooz et al., 2021). Additionally, a range of time‐stable factors are included as controls for nonrandom selection into gangs.…”

“…The outcome of interest is prison misconduct, which captures self-reported institutional rule violations in the 6 months prior to the interview. Most studies use the same sources of data to test the relationship between gang affiliation and misconduct (see Pyrooz, 2022). In our case, self-report indicators of misconduct are used as our theoretical model focuses on prisoners' behavioral responses to official gang policies and treatment as opposed to focusing on how authorities respond to reported behaviors.…”