Who Lets the Dog In? Differential Effects of a Dog-Training Program for Incarcerated Adults

Abstract

This quasi-experimental study examined the short-term effectiveness of Dutch Cell Dogs (DCD), a short prison-based dogtraining program, on anti-social behavioral and wellbeing outcomes of incarcerated adults (n = 138; men = 133; women = 5). Little is known about the responsivity of subgroupsand the prerequisites of changein dog-training programs (DTPs). Therefore, the role of moderators (age, cultural background, correctional facility type) and predictors (dog bond, implementation process) of DCD was also assessed. Results demonstrated that DCD (n = 70) did not outperform treatment-asusual (TAU; n = 68) in any of the outcomes, although a small negative effect was found for aggression (F (1,135) = 5.552, p = 0.020), which appeared driven by the group of participants who had a weaker bond with the dog. This group had higher aggression levels after the program, compared with TAU (F (1, 98) = 9.443, p = 0.003). The dog bond was not associated with any other outcomes post-intervention. In addition, age moderated program effectiveness on infractions (Wald χ 2(1) = 6.254, p = 0.012), suggesting differential effects for younger (< 36 years) participants. No evidence was found for the other moderators and predictor of implementation quality. In conclusion, DCD did not outperform TAU in anti-social behavioral and wellbeing outcomes. Some evidence for predictors and moderators were found. The present study is only one of the first to examine what matters for whom in a DTP for incarcerated adults. More research, preferably in the form of randomized controlled trials with sufficiently large sample sizes, is needed.

Effects of a Dog-Assisted Social- and Emotional-Competence Training for Prisoners: A Controlled Study

“…We also suggest additionally focusing on process measures such as motivation rather than on symptom reduction. Further, prisoner characteristics that could predict the effects of dog-assisted training should be investigated since little is known about the responses of subgroups [ 56 ].…”

“…Future trials should also include an active control condition to match the total time spent in treatment for the intervention and the control groups. Since some studies have found that integrating animals into therapeutic programmes has add-on effects and other studies have shown animal-assisted programmes to be equivalently effective as evidence-based programmes [ 51 ], an interesting question for future research may be to investigate differential effects to see which people profit from animal assistance and which people do not need an animal as an addition to conventional treatments in order to benefit [ 56 ].…”

A Friend in Prison: Human-Animal Bond, Stress and Self-Esteem of Detained Juveniles in Dutch Cell Dogs

“…All dogs participating in the program were shelter dogs and had behavioral problems because of previous experiences (e.g., neglect). The only inclusion criterion for the shelter dogs was that they had to be interested in treats, given the reward-based training methods [ 25 ].…”

“…During the first meeting, the DCD staff observes participants’ behavior while discussing what is expected from participants. Based on these observations, DCD staff matches each participant with their own shelter dog (for example, an energetic person is matched with an active dog [ 25 ]). If possible, the DCD staff also matches detainees and dogs based on shared experiences, such as neglect [ 11 ].…”

An Experiential Approach to Canine-Assisted Learning in Corrections for Prisoners Who Use Substances

“…With respect to future research, few studies currently exist that quantitatively explore prison dog programs. Some research has been conducted using a quasi-experimental design to explore outcomes related to prison cell dogs on antisocial behavior and prison well-being, with a greater focus on male than female prisoners (Duindam et al, 2021). It is suggested that future research in this area should include randomized controlled trials as well as longitudinal and mixed methods designs (Conroy et al, 2019).…”