Contrary to public opinion, empirical studies have consistently shown that persons convicted of a sexual offense (PCSO) are less likely to recidivate with a general offense. While researchers often point toward the surreptitiousness of sexual offending to explain low rates of recidivism, this paper tests a novel explanation: SOs recidivate at lower rates than persons convicted of a non-sexual offense (PCNSO) because they are more often revoked to prison before they are able to commit a new crime, perhaps owing to more restrictive post-release supervision guidelines.
Methods
Using a sample of 196,468 unique male releases, the difference in general and sexual recidivism between PCSO (n = 29,420) and PCNSO was assessed through survival analyses (Cox regression models).
Results
Results demonstrated that PCSO were significantly less likely to be reconvicted for a general crime, but more likely for a sex offense. They were also more likely to be reincarcerated due to a revocation without a new sentence. Accounting for revocations, the difference in reconviction risk lessens between the groups but does not disappear.
Conclusions
This analysis provides evidence that differences in community supervision are contributing to the difference in recidivism rates between PCSO and PCNSO. Implications and future research are discussed.
AckermanA. R.SacksM. (2018). Disproportionate minority presence on U.S. sex offender registries. Justice Policy Journal, 16(2), 1–20.
2.
AiraksinenJ.AaltonenM.TarkiainenL.MartikainenP.LatvalaA. (2023). Associations between cohabitation, marriage, and suspected crime: A longitudinal within-individual study. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 9(1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-022-00219-6
3.
AllenC. (1991). Women and men who sexually abuse children: A comparative analysis. Safer Society Press.
4.
AllisonP. D. (2001). Missing data. Sage.
5.
AlperM.DuroseM. (2019). Recidivism of sex offenders released from state prison: A 9-year follow-up (2005–14). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
6.
American Psychiatric Association. (1999). Dangerous sex offenders: A task force report of the American psychiatric association. American Psychiatric Association.
7.
AndersenS.SkardhamarT. (2017). Pick a number: Mapping recidivism measures and their consequences. Crime & Delinquency, 63(5), 613–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128715570629
8.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). LexisNexis Group.
9.
BarnoskiR. (2005). Sex offender sentencing in Washington state: Has community notification reduced recidivism?Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
10.
BarnoskiR. (2006). Sex offender sentencing in Washington state: Failure to register as a sex offender-revised. Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
11.
BontaJ.AndrewsD. A. (2007). Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation. Rehabilitation, 6(1), 1–22.
12.
BouffardJ. A.AskewL. N. (2019). Time-series analyses of the impact of sex offender registration and notification law implementation and subsequent modifications on rates of sexual offenses. Crime & Delinquency, 65(11), 1483–1512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128717722010
13.
Brouillette-AlarieS.ProulxJ.HansonR. K. (2018). Three central dimensions of sexual recidivism risk: Understanding the latent constructs of Static-99R and Static-2002R. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 30(6), 676–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217691965
14.
BurdonW. M.GallagherC. A. (2002). Coercion and sex offenders: Controlling sex-offending behavior through incapacitation and treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(1), 87–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854802029001006
15.
ChanH. C. O. (2021). Risky sexual behavior of young adults in Hong Kong: An exploratory study of psychosocial risk factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(658179), 658179–658212. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.658179
16.
ChanH. C. O.MyersW. C. (2023). Risky sexual behavior, paraphilic interest, and sexual offending: The study of a community sample of young adults in Hong Kong. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), 4279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054279
17.
CochranJ. C.TomanE. L.ShieldsR. T.MearsD. P. (2021). A uniquely punitive turn? Sex offenders and the persistence of punitive sanctioning. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 58(1), 74–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427820941172
18.
CortoniF.HansonR. K.CoacheM.-È. (2010). The recidivism rates of female sexual offenders are low: A meta-analysis. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 22(4), 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210372142
19.
DuweG.DonnayW. (2010). The effects of failure to register on sex offender recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(5), 520–536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810364106
20.
DuweG.GoldmanR. A. (2009). The impact of prison-based treatment on sex offender recidivism: Evidence from Minnesota. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21(3), 279–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063209338490
21.
EdwardsW.HensleyC. (2001). Contextualizing sex offender management legislation and policy: Evaluating the problem of latent consequences in community notification laws. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X01451006
22.
FarkasM. A.StichmanA. (2002). Sex offender laws: Can treatment, punishment, incapacitation, and public safety be reconciled?Criminal Justice Review, 27(2), 256–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/073401680202700204
23.
FarkasM. A.ZevitzR. G. (2000). The law enforcement role in sex offender community notification: A research note. Journal of Crime and Justice, 23(1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2000.9721113
24.
FarmerM.McAlindenA.-M.MarunaS. (2015). Understanding desistance from sexual offending: A thematic review of research findings. Probation Journal, 62(4), 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550515600545
25.
FerrettiF.PozzaA.CarabelleseF.SchimmentiA.SantoroG.MandarelliG.GualtieriG.CarabelleseF.CatanesiR.ColucciaA.ColucciaA. (2021). Non-intimate relationships and psychopathic interpersonal and affective deficits as risk factors for criminal career: A comparison between sex offenders and other offenders. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(600370), 600370. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.600370
26.
FreemanN. J.SandlerJ. C. (2008). Female and male sex offenders: A comparison of recidivism patterns and risk factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(10), 1394–1413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260508314304
27.
GillespieS. M.GarofaloC.VelottiP. (2018). Emotion regulation, mindfulness, and alexithymia: Specific or general impairments in sexual, violent, and homicide offenders?Journal of Criminal Justice, 58, 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2018.07.006
28.
GreenfeldL. A. (1997). Sex offenses and offenders: An analysis of data on rape and sexual assault. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
29.
GrubesicT.MurrayA.MackE. (2011). Sex offenders, residence restrictions, housing, and urban morphology: A review and synthesis. Cityscape, 13(3), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/41426673
30.
HansonR. K.BourgonG.HelmusL.HodgsonS. (2009). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders: Risk, need, and responsivity (Corrections User Report No. 2009-01). Public Safety Canada.
31.
HansonR. K.BussièreM. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.66.2.348
32.
HansonR. K.HarrisA. J. R.LetourneauE.HelmusL. M.ThorntonD. (2018). Reductions in risk based on time offense free in the community: Once a sexual offender, not always a sexual offender. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000135
33.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(6), 1154–1163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154
34.
HarrisonJ. L.O’TooleS. K.AmmenS.AhlmeyerS.HarrellS. N.HernandezJ. L. (2020). Sexual offender treatment effectiveness within cognitive-behavioral programs: A meta-analytic investigation of general, sexual, and violent recidivism. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 27(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1485526.
35.
HosmerD.LemeshowS.MayS. (2008). Applied survival analysis: Regression modeling of time-to-event data (2nd ed.). Wiley.
36.
JenningsW. G. (2015). Innovations and advancements in sex offender research. Routledge.
37.
JungH.SpjeldnesS.YamataniH. (2010). Recidivism and survival time: Racial disparity among jail ex-inmates. Social Work Research, 34(3), 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/34.3.181
38.
Kansas v. Hendricks. (1997). 521 U.S. 346.
39.
KewleyS. (2017). Policing people with sexual convictions using strengths-based approaches. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 7(3), 168–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-09-2016-0026
40.
LanganP.SchmittE.DuroseM. (2003). Recidivism of sex offenders released from prison in 1994. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
41.
LetourneauE. J.RobertsT. W. M.MaloneL.SunY. (2023). No check we won’t write: A report on the high cost of sex offender incarceration. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 35(1), 54–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632221078305
42.
LevensonJ. S.BrannonY. N.FortneyT.BakerJ. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2007.00119.x
43.
LevensonJ. S.LetourneauE.ArmstrongK.ZgobaK. (2010). Failure to register: Is it associated with sex offense recidivism?Justice Quarterly, 27(3), 305–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820902972399
44.
LiedkaR. V.PiehlA. M.UseemB. (2006). The crime-control effect of incarceration: Does scale matter?Deterrence, 5(2), 263–293. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315258089-9
45.
LockwoodS.NallyJ. M.HoT.KnutsonK. (2015). Racial disparities and similarities in post-release recidivism and employment among ex-prisoners with a different level of education. Journal of Prison Education and Reentry, 2(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.15845/jperv2i1.703
46.
LöselF.LinkE.SchmuckerM.BenderD.BreuerM.CarlL.EndresJ.LauchsL. (2020). On the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment in prisons: A comparison of two different evaluation designs in routine practice. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 32(4), 452–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063219871576
47.
LussierP.CaleJ. (2013). Beyond sexual recidivism: A review of the sexual criminal career parameters of adult sex offenders. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(5), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.06.005
48.
LussierP.Chouinard ThiviergeS.FréchetteJ.ProulxJ. (2023). Sex offender recidivism: Some lessons learned from over 70 years of research. Criminal Justice Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/07340168231157385
49.
LöselF.SchmuckerM. (2005). The effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(1), 117–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-004-6466-7
50.
ManciniC. (2014). Sex crime, offenders, and society: A critical look at sexual offending and policy. Carolina Academic Press.
51.
MannR. E.HansonR. K.ThorntonD. (2010). Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: Some proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 22(2), 191–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210366039
52.
MatthewsJ. K.MathewsR.SpeltzK. (1991). Female sex offenders: A typology. In PattonM. Q. (Ed.). Family sexual abuse: Frontline research and evaluation (pp. 199–219). Sage.
53.
McCannK.LussierP. (2008). Antisociality, sexual deviance, and sexual reoffending in juvenile sex offenders: A meta-analytical investigation. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6(4), 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204008320260
54.
Minnesota Department of Corrections. (2007). Sex offender recidivism in Minnesota. Minnesota Department of Corrections.
NavarroJ. N.JasinskiJ. L. (2015). Demographic and motivation differences among online sex offenders by type of offense: An exploration of routine activities theories. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 24(7), 753–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2015.1077363
57.
OzkanT.ClipperS. J.PiqueroA. R.BaglivioM.WolffK. (2020). Predicting sexual recidivism. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 32(4), 375–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063219852944
58.
PiqueroA. R.FarringtonD. P.JenningsW. G.DiamondB.CraigJ. (2012). Sex offenders and sex offending in the Cambridge study in delinquent development: Prevalence, frequency, specialization, recidivism, and (dis)continuity over the life-course. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(3), 412–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.688527
59.
PlantyM.LangtonL.KrebsC.BerzofskyM.Smiley-McDonaldH. (2013). Female victims of sexual violence, 1994-2010. Bureau of Justice Statistics.
60.
PrzybylskiR. (2015). Recidivism of adult sexual offenders. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing.
61.
ReijnenL.BultenE.NijmanH. (2009). Demographic and personality characteristics of internet child pornography downloaders in comparison to other offenders. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18(6), 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538710903317232
62.
RosselliM. K.JeglicE. L. (2017). Factors impacting upon attitudes toward sex offenders: The role of conservatism and knowledge. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 24(4), 496–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1254562
63.
RussellK.EvansW. (2021). Exploring perceptions of safety: Developing safety and support measures to assess public attitudes of sex offense registration. Justice Policy Journal, 18(2), 1–19.
SampleL.BrayT. (2006). Are sex offenders different? An examination of rearrest patterns. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403405282916
SampsonR. J.LaubJ. H.WimerC. (2006). Does marriage reduce crime? A counterfactual approach to within-individual causal effects. Criminology, 44(3), 465–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2006.00055.x
68.
SchaeferR. L. (2019). Understanding sex offender community supervision: A mixed methods approach. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(7), 1038–1065. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X18812043
69.
SchramD. D.MilloyC. D. (1995). Community notification: A study of offender characteristics and recidivism. Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
70.
SchulerM.MohnkeS.AmelungT.DziobekI.BorchardtV.GerwinnH.KärgelC.KneerJ.MassauC.PohlA.WeißS.PieperS.SinkeC.BeierK. M.WalterM.PonsetiJ.SchifferB.KrugerT. H. C.WalterH. (2021). Empathy in paedophilia and sexual offending against children: A longitudinal extension. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 28(2), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2021.1931721
71.
SmithW. R.MonasterskyC. (1986). Assessing juvenile sexual offenders’ risk for reoffending. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13(2), 115–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854886013002001
72.
ThompsonA.TappS. N. (2022). Criminal victimization, 2021. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
73.
VelázquezT. (2008). The pursuit of safety: Sex offender policy in the United States. Vera Institute of Justice.
74.
VessJ. (2009). Fear and loathing in public policy: Ethical issues in laws for sex offenders. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14(4), 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.04.004
75.
Wisconsin State Statute. (2001a). Kidnapping. Pub. L. No. 940.31.
76.
Wisconsin State Statute. (2001b). Sex offender registration. Pub. L. No. 301.45.
77.
ZandbergenP. A.LevensonJ. S.HartT. C. (2010). Residential proximity to schools and daycares: An empirical analysis of sex offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(5), 482–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810363549
78.
ZatkinJ.SitneyM.KaufmanK. (2022). The relationship between policy, media, and perceptions of sexual offenders between 2007 and 2017: A review of the literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 23(3), 953–968. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020985568
79.
ZevitzR.FarkasM. A. (2000). The impact of sex-offender community notification on probation/parole in Wisconsin. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(1), 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X00441002
80.
ZgobaK.SimonL. (2005). Recidivism rates of sexual offenders up to 7 years later: Does treatment matter?Criminal Justice Review, 30(2), 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016805284146
81.
ZgobaK.WittP.DalessandroM.VeyseyB. (2008). Megan’s Law: Assessing the practical and monetary efficacy. New Jersey Department of Corrections.
82.
ZimringF. E.PiqueroA. R.JenningsW. G. (2007). Sexual delinquency in Racine: Does early sex offending predict later sex offending in youth and young adulthood?Criminology & Public Policy, 6(3), 507–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00451.x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
