Effectiveness of Using Incentives to Improve Parolee Admission and Attendance in Community Addiction Treatment.
Effectiveness of Using Incentives to Improve Parolee Admission and Attendance in Community Addiction Treatment.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0093854815592914
复制
发表时间：
2015-10
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Knight C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Prendergast ML;Hall EA;Grossman J;Veliz R;Gregorio L;Warda US;Van Unen K;Knight C
本研究是一项随机有效性试验，旨在探讨使用激励措施提高社区治疗中假释犯的治疗利用率。在监狱中，入院阶段的假释犯被随机分配到入院激励组 (N=31) 或教育组 (N=29)。进入社区治疗的出勤阶段假释犯被随机分配到出勤激励组 (N=104) 或教育组 (N=98)。在这两个研究阶段，激励措施都没有产生主要影响。接受社区治疗（激励 60%，教育 64%；p =.74）和干预完成（激励 22%；教育 27%；p =.46）似乎都没有受到影响。治疗时间是根据年龄、首次被捕年龄和假释状态类型（Cox 回归 p<.05）预测的，而不是根据治疗组预测的。提供激励措施并没有增加假释犯参加或留在社区治疗的可能性。鉴于这一发现，正在考虑采取激励措施来增加入学或保留的刑事司法从业者应该意识到，他们可能不会产生预期的结果。
This study is a randomized effectiveness trial of the use of incentives to improve treatment utilization among parolees in community treatment. In prison, Admission phase parolees were randomized to Admission Incentive (N=31) or Education (N=29). Attendance phase parolees entering community treatment were randomized to Attendance Incentive (N=104) or Education (N=98). There was no main effect for incentives in either study phase. Neither admission to community treatment (Incentive 60%, Education 64%; p =.74), nor intervention completion (Incentive 22%; Education 27%; p =.46) appeared to be impacted. Time-in-treatment was predicted by age, first arrest age, and type of parole status (Cox regression p<.05), but not by treatment group. Providing incentives did not increase the likelihood that parolees enrolled in or stayed in community treatment. In light of this finding, criminal justice practitioners who are considering incentives to increase admission or retention should be aware that they may not produce the desired outcomes.