The Weak Effect of Imprisonment on Crime: 1971–1998

Abstract

Objective. This article studies the impact of increasing incarceration rates on crime rates. First we seek to replicate the findings of previous studies utilizing the pooled, fixed-effects models (which are based on the assumption that the effect of imprisonment does not vary across states). Next we test the validity of this assumption. Finally, we present a new methodology to examine the imprisonment-crime relationship. Methods. Annual state-level data from 1971-1998 are used to estimate 51 state-specific regression models in which crime rates for seven major categories are functions of incarceration rates and a wide array of socioeconomic and dummy control variables. Results. Our findings are consistent with prior studies. More important, the assumptions upon which the fixed-effect models are based were found to be statistically invalid. The results of our new methodology reveal that imprisonment rates are not significantly related to crime in the majority of states for any of the seven crimes studied. Conclusions. Because the state-level lagged imprisonment coefficients varied from significant negative effects to significant positive effects (depending on the state and type of crime), we argue that it is inappropriate to speak about "the" effect of imprisonment on any particular crime or at the national level.

So ‘Prison Works’, Does It? The Criminal Careers of 130 Men Released from Prison under Home Secretary, Michael Howard

“…Had we been even more conservative in our definition of desistance and included such offences as grounds for 'failure', the number of successfully desisting sample members would be only 15! 8 For instance, DeFina and Arvanites (2002) found that imprisonment rates are not significantly related to crime rates in the majority of USA states for any of the seven crimes in their study.…”

Legislation Targeting Sex Offenders: Are Recent Policies Effective in Reducing Rape?

“…A good deal of empirical research has examined the effectiveness of imprisonment on serious crimes (DeFina & Arvanites, 2002;Levitt, 1996Levitt, , 1998Liedka, Piehl & Useeem, 2006;Marvell & Moody, 1994Shepherd, 2006;Spelman, 1994;Witt & Witte, 2000). Despite the abundance of this research, it has failed to yield conclusive findings.…”

Prison privatization: a perspective on core governmental functions

“…Between 1990 and 2001, national crime and arrest rates both decreased by about 30%, yet between 1970 and 2000, the number of prisoners per 100,000 residents increased by 388%, and the number of prisoners increased by 577% [13]. Apart from the debates on the effectiveness of high incarceration rates on crime control [20,60], the emerging "custodian state" aggravated the instrumental problems of the correctional systems, such as overcrowding, fiscal pressures, and limits on debt financing. The unconstitutional overcrowding also led to court intervention.…”