Criminal Justice and Behavior

In this special themed section, we desired to highlight findings in transformative areas of juvenile justice operations. Our initial goal was not to focus on ancillary treatment programs, probation programs, court processes, diversion, and/or leadership training. That is, we were interested in scholarly studies that examined fundamental transformations in system operations. We discovered that there was little academically oriented research that was being devoted to documenting, studying, and measuring the impact of these transformation, and that there are few efforts to advance our knowledge about both how to do transformation and the resulting impacts of these transformations. We were primarily interested in system change at the macro-level to help inform others about what transformation no the ground looks like, and how it affects the operations of a juvenile justice system.

Science advisory boards and policy organizations have called for adolescent brain science to be incorporated into juvenile probation operations. To achieve this, Opportunity-Based Probation (OBP), a probation model that integrates knowledge of adolescent development and behavior change principles, was developed in collaboration with a local juvenile probation department. The current study compares outcomes (recidivism and probation violations) for youth in the OBP condition versus probation as usual. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to estimate causal effects of OBP’s average treatment effect (ATE). Results indicated clear effects of OBP on reducing criminal legal referrals, but no significant effects were observed for probation violations. Overall, results provide promising recidivism-reduction effects in support of developmentally grounded redesigns of juvenile probation.

Despite high rates of substance use, youth involved in the juvenile justice system are unlikely to be linked to the treatment services they need. Family Connect is a flexible, family-focused, linkage intervention developed to address multilevel barriers and increase youth engagement in care through the introduction of a linkage specialist. We describe the components of Family Connect and present findings from the intervention pilot test comparing 18 youth–caregiver dyads to 95 historical controls on referral, attending intake and initiating treatment. Results indicated preliminary support for Family Connect as an approach to increase cross-systems linkage and access to behavioral health care. Findings also suggested support for the feasibility of the intervention and indicated that justice-involved youth and their caregivers found the intervention to be acceptable. In addition to discussing our findings in the context of recent justice reforms, and the importance of improving access to treatment, we make recommendations to inform a future trial of Family Connect.

Probation is a common sanction for youth substance users, and as such, juvenile probation officers (JPOs) shoulder much of the burden for treatment and rehabilitation. To improve youth outcomes and alleviate some of the burden, JPOs may seek parental involvement in the probation and substance use desistance processes. Using focus group data, we analyzed JPO perceptions of the role parents play in contingency management (CM)—an incentive system designed to produce and reward decreased substance use—and whether they perceived any value in CM. We found that most JPOs perceived parental involvement as critical to the success of both substance use treatment and CM for youth. Our findings also suggest JPOs found parental involvement in CM valuable given that CM was employed on nonstudy clients and future clients. This has implications for the practicality and sustainability of CM as a youth probation intervention.

The emergence of COVID-19 placed immediate pressure on the juvenile justice system to adapt to changes in case processing and decision-making practices. Juvenile probation agencies were tasked with quickly altering their policies and practice to abide by local public health measures. As probation supervision is the most common disposition in the juvenile justice system, there is both an empirical and practical need to understand the impact that COVID-19 has on a variety of issues surrounding the supervision and provision of services for juveniles. Using self-report survey data from juvenile probation directors across the United States, the current study examines (a) the biggest challenges faced by juvenile probation agencies during the pandemic, (b) the strategies implemented in response to these challenges, and (c) the most pressing issues currently facing the field of juvenile community corrections. Results have the potential to inform future agency decision-making when adjusting juvenile probation policy and practice.

Pre-sentence reports (PSRs) provide important information about an individual’s background and circumstances to assist judicial officers in the sentencing process. The present study analyzed PSRs for 63 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people sentenced by either an Indigenous sentencing court or a mainstream court in the Australian State of Victoria. Using natural language processing techniques, our analyses revealed few differences between PSRs conducted for each court. However, PSRs were found to predominantly feature key words that are risk-based, with mainstream court PSRs more negatively worded than the Indigenous sentencing court’s PSRs. This may have been due to the inclusion of results from a risk and need assessment tool. Pro-social factors did comprise more than one third of extracted keywords, although the number of strength-based culture-related keywords, in particular, was low across PSRs in both courts. It is possible that courts may not be receiving all the information needed to promote individualized justice.

This study explores the use of clinical override with the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), including implications for predictive validity as well as the factors associated with this practice. The sample included 597 justice-involved youth from a metropolitan region in Québec, Canada. The clinical override was used in 32.5% of cases, usually to increase risk levels (30.3% of cases). As found in previous studies, clinical override did not increase the predictive validity of the YLS/CMI. Upward and downward clinical overrides were differently linked to the sociodemographic characteristics and criminal history of the youths in the sample. Criminal History, Peer Relations, Personality/Behavior, and Attitudes/Orientation risk/need domains were positively associated with upward override while Family Circumstances/Parenting, Personality/Behavior, and Attitudes/Orientation risk/need domains were negatively associated with downward override. These results are discussed in relation to the impact clinical override can have on the case management and interventions provided to justice-involved youth.

The current study aimed to provide data on the performance of items, dimensions, and the total score of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI), one of the most internationally used actuarial scales for the prediction of general recidivism in convicted persons. Using the full population of Quebec’s male incarcerated population evaluated between 2008 and 2015 with a 2-year follow-up (N = 15,961), results indicated that the predictive validity of the scale and its components was in line or better than effect sizes reported in other validation studies. A Rasch model was computed to obtain the difficulty parameter of LS/CMI items. Results indicated that items had varying levels of difficulty and covered the whole spectrum of the risk continuum. However, difficulty in Rasch was uncorrelated with the predictive validity of items, which casts a doubt on the applicability of some aspects of item response theory to actuarial scales.

The purpose of these studies was to develop a novel measurement, the Sentencing Goals Inventory (SGI), for understanding the underlying people’s motivations for punishing justice-involved individuals. Prior scales have focused on punishment motives such as utilitarianism (incapacitation or deterrence) and retribution (“just deserts”) but have not assessed a rehabilitation motive (punishment with the goal of addressing the cause of criminality) in tandem. Building on the previous unpublished work by Perelman and colleagues (2010), we conducted four new studies on the SGI. A slightly modified version of the scale emerged as a well-fitting model for sentencing goals. It displayed good reliability across samples, internal structure validity, and discriminant and convergent validity with other measures. This work provides a strong basis of evidence for the SGI as a measure of current social attitudes toward criminal justice sanctions and punishment that can be used in future research and to inform public policy.