1998
DOI: 10.1080/10683169808520009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting recidivism in a scottish prison sample

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A second possibility is that the legal class ‘psychopathic disorder’ is operating as a proxy for ‘psychopathy’ (Hare, 1970) and that psychopathy is independently associated with conviction after discharge (Harris et al , 1991). It is unclear from previous research, however, that such an effect would be limited to serious offending (Cooke et al , 2001; Stadtland et al , 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…A second possibility is that the legal class ‘psychopathic disorder’ is operating as a proxy for ‘psychopathy’ (Hare, 1970) and that psychopathy is independently associated with conviction after discharge (Harris et al , 1991). It is unclear from previous research, however, that such an effect would be limited to serious offending (Cooke et al , 2001; Stadtland et al , 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…It is highly probable that age and previous convictions are related to recidivism (Cooke & Michie, 1998), and therefore, initial tests for group differences on these two variables were conducted. The mean age of the reconvicted group was 26.00 years (SD = 8.32), compared to 32.19 years (SD = 12.72) for the group who was not reconvicted.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the empirical findings regarding predictors of prisoners’ misbehavior and health care utilization are inconsistent. Results have low generalizability across outcomes, settings, type of offenders, and populations (Cooke, Michie, & Ryan, 2001; Endrass, Rossegger, Frischknecht, Noll, & Urbaniok, 2008; Guy et al, 2005; Leistico et al, 2008; Singh et al, 2011). In addition, differences in the results may be explained by different research methodologies, like representative versus convenience samples, retrospective versus prospective designs, and the use of self-reports versus official prison records (Guy et al, 2005; Leistico et al, 2008; Schenk & Fremouw, 2012; Singh et al, 2011).…”
Section: Prior Research Synthesizing Empirical Findingsmentioning
confidence: 97%