Matching Items (2)
Description
Over the last few decades, specialized courts have received an increasing amount of research attention. The existing literature mostly supports drug courts and demonstrates their effectiveness in reducing recidivism and substance abuse, more generally (Belenko, 1998; Bouffard & Richardson, 2007; Gottfredson, Najaka, & Kearley, 2003). Whether the drug court model “works” across offender subgroups remains an open empirical question. The current study uses data originally collected by Rossman and colleagues (2003-2009) for the Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) to examine the effect of drug court participation on recidivism among unique offender subgroups. First, a context-specific risk score is used to examine recidivism outcomes. Second, offender subgroups are statistically created using latent class analysis (LCA). Recidivism outcomes are then assessed by subgroup, with these results compared to the initial measure of risk. Both analyses are performed using the full sample of drug court participants and the comparison groups. Finally, the third model uses a split sample analysis by court participation to explore the full effects of drug court. The findings of the present study contribute to the theoretical literature and help inform future policy regarding risk assessment and the treatment of offenders in drug courts.
ContributorsFordyce, Shayla (Author) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Sweeten, Gary (Committee member) / Yan, Shi (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Procedural justice has become a widely researched topic in the criminological field with applicability to multiple arenas, including policing, corrections, and courts. Its main tenents suggest that through fair treatment, respectful dialogue and being given a proper voice, citizens will view their experiences with authority more justly. However, though the literature regarding procedural justice has grown immensely, it is still unclear whether certain characteristics of individuals, such as gender and mental health, play a role in their perceptions of procedural justice. Using secondary data originally collected for Rossman, Roman, Zweig, Rempel and Lindquist’s Multi-Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE), an attempt is made to address the previously neglected association between procedural justice, gender, mental health and the added aspect of specialized drug court participation. Results suggest that both gender and mental health, namely depression, play a significant role in predicting procedural justice. Additionally, being a drug court participant was significantly related to higher levels of perceived procedural justice. Implications for theory, research, and policy are discussed.
ContributorsSomers, Logan J (Author) / Reisig, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Telep, Cody (Committee member) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016