The Connection of Probation/Parole Officer Actions to Women Offenders’ Recidivism

• Author: Merry Morash,Jennifer E. Cobbina,Deborah A. Kashy,Sandi W. Smith
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854815626490
• Published date: 01 April 2016
• Date: 01 April 2016
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2016, Vol. 43, No. 4, April 2016, 506 –524.

DOI: 10.1177/0093854815626490

© 2016 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

506

THE CONNECTION OF PROBATION/PAROLE

OFFICER ACTIONS TO WOMEN OFFENDERS’

RECIDIVISM

MERRY MORASH

DEBORAH A. KASHY

SANDI W. SMITH

JENNIFER E. COBBINA

Michigan State University

Because women offenders often have limited social networks and unique needs, the actions of probation/parole officers

providing community supervision may be particularly relevant to outcomes. The present study examined the effects of proba-

tion/parole officer relationship style, attention to criminogenic needs, and intensity of supervision on women offenders’

arrests and convictions within a 24-month period. Contrary to findings from other studies, the measured elements of officer

actions had no direct effects on recidivism for a sample of 226 women. However, the analysis revealed an indirect effect in

which a non-supportive, punitive relationship was related to reactance and anxiety, which in turn were related to high

recidivism. The discussion focuses on theoretical and methodological explanations for the null findings regarding direct

effects. Moreover, it draws on the literature in psychology and communication to suggest approaches to reducing the reac-

tance that can promote recidivism and to suggest related future research directions.

Keywords: recidivism; women offenders; relationship style; criminogenic needs; supervision effect; reactance

The purpose of the study described in this article was to increase understanding of the

effects of probation and parole officer (PO) interactions with women offenders. In par-

ticular, we sought to understand effects on recidivism. A social psychological theory of

reactance, theories of corrections, communication theory, and feminist criminological the-

ory influenced the focus on women and the choice of potential explanatory variables. The

correctional theories included dual-role relationship (DRR) theory, the risk–needs–respon-

sivity (RNR) model, and scholarship on the effect of intensive supervision (i.e., the supervi-

sion effect). Before we introduce the specific theoretical frameworks that informed the

design of the research, we further explain the focus on community corrections and women

offenders.

In 2012, one in every 50 U.S. residents was supervised in the community on probation or

parole, and the smaller but sizable proportion of 1 in 108 adults was incarcerated in jail or

AUTHORS’ NOTE: This article is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant

1126162 and by a Strategic Partnership grant from the Michigan State University Foundation. Correspondence

concerning this article should be addressed to Merry Morash, Professor, School of Criminal Justice 655

Auditorium Dr., Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824; e-mail: morashm@msu.edu.

626490CJBXXX10.1177/0093854815626490CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIORMorash et.al

research-article2016

Morash et al. / PROBATION/PAROLE OFFICER ACTION AND WOMEN’S RECIDIVISM 507

prison (Glaze & Herberman, 2013). As the most common correctional intervention, com-

munity supervision (i.e., probation and parole) has substantial public cost both in terms of

financial outlays to operate these programs and expenses resulting from recidivism.

Recidivism costs extend beyond harm to victims, offenders, families, and communities to

include expenditures on law enforcement, prosecution, courts, additional community super-

vision, and incarceration (Clear, 2007; Cohen & Bowles, 2010; National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People, 2011). High rates of recidivism for individuals under

community supervision and high costs of failure warrant increased research to understand

effective practices (Guerino, Harrison, & Sabol, 2011; Kleiman, 2011; Meredith & Prevost,

2009; Ostermann, 2015; Ostermann, Miller, & Matejkowski, 2013; Schram, Koons-Witt,

Williams, & McShane, 2006).

Women constitute a community supervision population of unique concern. Because a

higher proportion of women than men are in the correctional system due to drug and alcohol

misuse, it is important to focus research on women offenders with substance involvement

(Belknap, 2014; Guerino et al., 2011; Langan & Pelissier, 2001; Mumola & Karberg, 2006).

Other subgroups deserve study, but because groups follow different pathways into crime

(Morash, 2010), each group must be large enough to allow for meaningful conclusions from

the analysis. Women make up a growing proportion of individuals under correctional super-

vision, specifically 11% of those on parole and 24% of those on probation (Maruschak &

Bonczar, 2013). Despite their representation, limited research has focused on the connec-

tion between women’s recidivism and POs’ actions and methods. This is problematic

because although some offenders in the community attend programs other than supervision,

for others the PO provides the only intervention or the impetus to participate in other pro-

grams (Gill, Hyatt, & Sherman, 2010).

Turning now to the theoretical framing of the research, DRR theory holds promise as an

explanation of the effects of PO interactions on women. It considers professionals who have

controlling authority over clients and who also are expected to help those clients. For these

types of relationships, research finds that a PO’s supportive, non-punitive style of relation-

ship is related to improved outcomes for offenders (Kennealy, Skeem, Manchak, & Louden,

2012; Skeem, Manchak, Vidal, & Hart, 2009). Although DRR study samples have included

women, the small numbers have precluded women-specific analyses. As an exception, in a

prior analysis of data considered in the present study, we examined short-term effects (e.g.,

reactance, anxiety), not recidivism (Morash, Kashy, Smith, & Cobbina, 2015). That analy-

sis revealed that a more supportive, non-punitive style was related to lower anxiety and

reactance, especially for low-risk women.

The present study contributes to the literature by focusing on the understudied group,

women under community supervision. It extends research on DRRs and outcomes by exam-

ining the direct effect of PO relationship style on recidivism and the indirect effects through

reactance and anxiety resulting from PO-offender interactions. To strengthen the test for

significance of these effects, the analysis considers influences on recidivism identified by

other correctional theories. RNR theory identifies two of these influences: the POs’ atten-

tion to crime causing needs (criminogenic needs) and the offenders’ initial risk for recidi-

vism (Andrews & Bonta, 2006; Andrews et al., 1990; Cullen & Gendreau, 2000; Gendreau,

Smith, & French, 2006; Singh et al., 2014; P. Smith, Gendreau, & Goggin, 2004). Research

is inconsistent in its findings about a third influence, the intensity of supervision, which

depending on the study increases, has no effect on, or decreases recidivism (Hawken &