Meta-analysis and the rehabilitation of punishment
Authors:
- 1 June 1993
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Justice Quarterly
- Vol. 10 (2) , 245-263
Abstract
Do we know what “works” in the way of rehabilitative treatment in corrections? Not yet. Has the old “nothing works” literature been invalidated by new reviews of research claiming to show, through meta-analysis, that treatment really does work, at least when it is “appropriate?” Not likely. Would production of this knowledge enhance the ability of prison officials to do their job? Not ever. Their job, and their highest duty, is to administer justice, not treatment. Individualized treatment muddles the message of punishment, making it less principled and not necessarily more humane. A “confinement model” of imprisonment is proposed, which rejects rehabilitation as an official goal and yet allows for programs of work, education, and other activities within the mission of a prison.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- DOES CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT WORK? A CLINICALLY RELEVANT AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY INFORMED META‐ANALYSIS *Criminology, 1990
- A HUMAN SCIENCE APPROACH OR MORE PUNISHMENT AND PESSIMISM: A REJOINDER TO LAB AND WHITEHEADCriminology, 1990
- Classification for Effective RehabilitationCriminal Justice and Behavior, 1990
- Tertiary Prevention: What the Meta-analyses of the Offender Treatment Literature Tell Us About "What Works"Canadian Journal of Criminology, 1990
- Punishment and Modern Society1990
- The Effectiveness of Correctional Rehabilitation1989
- Treatment of juvenile offenders: Study outcomes since 1980Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 1988
- Effects of Residential Treatment on Adjudicated Delinquents: A Meta-AnalysisJournal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1985
- Treatment in corrections: Martinson was wrongp.Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 1981
- Correctional Outcome: An Evaluation of 100 ReportsThe Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1966