Which Criminogenic Need Changes Are Most Important in Promoting Desistance From Crime and Substance Use?

Abstract

Andrews and Bonta identified the following criminogenic needs as important to reducing offending: substance use, antisocial cognition, antisocial associates, family and marital relations, employment, and leisure and recreational activities. This study examines dynamic criminogenic need changes across a 12-month period and identifies which need changes are the best predictors of criminal offending and illicit drug use among a sample of drug-involved probationers who participated in an intervention (N = 251). Probationers had significant changes in several need areas, and treatment participation moderated some changes. Probationers who had reductions in criminally involved family members they associate with, improved work performance, and decreased alcohol use had the greatest reductions in offending. Those who increased time spent engaged in leisure and recreational activities were less likely to self-report subsequent drug use. These findings suggest that certain dynamic need changes may be more important than others, and designing interventions to impact these needs might improve outcomes.

General Responsivity Adherence in Juvenile Drug Treatment Court

“…However, they are inconsistent with Wooditch et al's (2014) study, which found a decrease in substance use with prosocial changes in certain criminogenic needs. It should be noted that Prendergast et al (2013) did not examine adherence to the RNR model as a predictor of substance use, and Wooditch et al (2014) solely examined the need principle. This study expanded on the empirical research regarding treatment outcome and examined whether the RNR model, specifically the general responsivity principle, is associated with a substance-use outcome.…”

A Multilevel Examination of Risk/Need Change Scores, Community Context, and Successful Reentry of Committed Juvenile Offenders

“…An additional study of adult drug-involved probationers did, however, examine which criminogenic need changes resulted in decreased substance use and reduced offending (Wooditch, Tang, & Taxman, 2014). Unlike prior studies discussed above, this study did not use a single standardized risk/needs assessment like the LSI-R but rather a few separate measures (such as the Criminal Thinking Scale) as well as self-report/life tables for certain risk factors.…”

“…Unlike prior studies discussed above, this study did not use a single standardized risk/needs assessment like the LSI-R but rather a few separate measures (such as the Criminal Thinking Scale) as well as self-report/life tables for certain risk factors. Wooditch, Tang, and Taxman (2014) included six of the eight prominent criminogenic needs espoused by the RNR model: antisocial attitudes, antisocial peers, family/marital relationships, work/school, leisure activities, and substance use. Probationers who evidenced decreases in risk in familial criminal networks, income, and alcohol use had reduced subsequent self-reported offending, while only changes in leisure/ recreational activities were associated with changes in substance use (Wooditch et al, 2014).…”

“…Wooditch, Tang, and Taxman (2014) included six of the eight prominent criminogenic needs espoused by the RNR model: antisocial attitudes, antisocial peers, family/marital relationships, work/school, leisure activities, and substance use. Probationers who evidenced decreases in risk in familial criminal networks, income, and alcohol use had reduced subsequent self-reported offending, while only changes in leisure/ recreational activities were associated with changes in substance use (Wooditch et al, 2014). Changes in any of the other areas were not significantly related to the outcomes measured.…”

Counseling psychologists and correctional settings: Opportunities between profession and setting

“…Of the variables most associated with desistance, at least three are developmental (age, marriage, and work/ education; Devers, 2011). Further, work and education have been noted to be promising for intervention to promote desistance (Varghese, Fitzgerald, Chronister, Cummings, & Forrest, 2013;Wooditch, Tang, & Taxman, 2014).…”