Area (4) After a Guilty Verdict –

OCR Specification

Area =After a guilty verdict

To look at how psychology can inform the penal system

Section =Imprisonment • Planned behaviours once freed from jail.

(e.g. Gillis & Nafekh, 2005) • Depression/suicide risk. (e.g. Dooley 1990); • The prison situation and roles (e.g. Haney & Zimbardo, 1998 : 25 years since the Stanford Prison Experiment).

Section =Alternatives to imprisonment

• Probation (e.g. Mair and May 2007); • Restorative Justice (e.g. Sherman and Strang 2007); • ‘Looking Death worthy’, (e.g.Eberhardt et al U.S. death penalty).

Section =Treatment programmes • Cognitive skills programmes (e.g. Cann,

2006); • Anger management (e.g. Ireland 2004); • Using ear acupuncture with a drug rehabilitation program (e.g. Wheatley (2005) FOCUS program with ear acupuncture, Cambridge University Institute of Criminology).

Area = After a Guilty VerdictImprisonment: Introduction

Once a guilty verdict has been announced the defendant becomes part of the penal system and is an offender. The penal system has two aims: - 1) Punishment and

2) Rehabilitation.

In order for prison to work, prisoners must be educated and made more employable, to ensure they are more likely to remain out of prison and become useful contributors to society. Some prisoners may also need treatment (see treatment programmes at the end of this area)These education and treatment programmes offer the offender rehabilitation. Without them, prisons become simply ‘Universities of Crime’. If a prisoner leaves prison with no employment prospects and the lack of normal ambition, then they are at high risk of reoffending and returning to prison. A job is important as it provides the ex-prisoner with not only a means of survival in financial terms but also helps them reintegrate into society by forming non-criminal contacts. Research has shown, however, (Prison Reform Trust 2007) 48% of prisoners are at, or below, the levelexpected of an 11 year old in reading, 65% in numeracy and 82% in writing.397

Nearly half those in prison have no qualifications at all.Half of all prisoners do not have the skillsrequired by 96% of jobs and only one in fiveare able to complete a job applicationform.399

41% of men, 30% of women and 52% of youngoffenders were permanently excluded fromschool.

that many prisoners have not reached the levels of literacy and numeracy expected of the average 11 year old; 50% in reading, 66% in numeracy and 80% in writing. 50% do not have the skills required by 96% of all jobs and 50% have been excluded from school. These statistics make prisoners, along with their criminal records, virtually unemployable without successful educational intervention within the prison system. In the summer of 2007 the UK prison population reached an all time high of 81,000, despite having an official capacity of only 78,000, leading to serious overcrowding. This means that prisoners do not get as much time out of their cells as they should, and the stretched resources mean that they do not get full access to either education or treatment programmes. Many people are critical of the parole system (the fact that prisoners are often released early and rarely serve their full sentence); however, this is an important incentive, crucial to the smooth operation of the prison system. Applications for parole are allowed after a minimum term (set by the judge) has been served. Success will depend on the nature of the offence, the judge’s comments on sentencing and crucially the inmate’s behaviour in prison. This gives the prisoner an incentive to behave and comply with prison rules: without this incentive many inmates would be unmanageable.

TASK: Explain why rehabilitation of offenders may not be effective.

Section = ImprisonmentSubsection = Planned behaviours once freed from jail

The effectiveness of the penal system is measured by looking at recidivism rates, this means re-offending rates. If the punishment and rehabilitation has been successful the offender should not reoffend, and consequently high recidivism rates are an indication of failures in the system.In a Canadian study by Christa Gillis and Mark Nafekh, the outcome of a planned employment scheme for offenders on conditional release was presented:

e.g. Gillis & Nafekh (2005) – The Impact Of Community-Based Employment On Offender Reintegration.

Aims: - To investigate the effect on recidivism rates of a community-based employment scheme.

Procedure: - A content analysis of data from Canada’s Offender Management System was completed on 23,525 individuals on conditional release between January 1998 and January 2005, 95% were male, 5% female. A matched pairs design was used where offenders were matched, then by gender, risk level, release year, sentence length, family/marital relations, substance abuse, emotional orientation, community functioning and attitudes. The independent variable was whether they were employed prior to their release on a special programme or unemployed. The dependent variables included the % return to federal custody before the end of the sentence and the median time to return to prison for returners in each group.Findings: - Those on the employment programme were more likely to remain on conditional release (i.e. not sent back to prison) and less likely to return to custody with a new offence. Table to show % of each group that remained out of prison on conditional release til the end of their sentence:

employed unemployed70% 55%

Table to show median length of time taken to return to prison by each group:employed unemployed37 months 11 months

Conclusions: - The authors conclude that these findings should reinforce the perception of employment as an important factor in an offenders' community reintegration and further the status of employment services as a programme area in prisons.

Section = ImprisonmentSubsection = Depression/suicide risk in prison According to the Howard League for Penal Reform there were 92 unnatural deaths in prisons in 2007, with a further 100 resuscitated. At any one time there are 1500 prisoners on suicide watch. Hanging is the most likely form of suicide in prison, although great care is taken to prevent it.

The suicide rate in the prison population is about four times that of the suicide rate in the general population. In addition to recorded suicides are other unnatural deaths, including deaths by “consciously self-inflicted injury” (CSI), and if these are added to official statistics the suicide rates in prisons would be much higher. Dr Enda Dooley describes one such case in his (1990) study (see below)

“ Prisoner A had been convicted of manslaughter in 1977 and had received a 6-year sentence. He had apparently been depressed for a number of weeks prior to the offence. He had never overcome the strong guilt he felt for what he had done, and when considered for parole his guilt increased A month before his death he had tried to hang himself and had stated at the time that he ‘would rather be dead than endure the sufferings of a tortured conscience. Though he was seen weekly by a visiting psychiatrist, he hanged himself from a coat hook in his cell.”

Although seen as a CSI case, it is difficult to see why such a case would not be recorded as suicide. Dooley compared cases of unnatural deaths in prison recorded as suicides with those recorded as CSI related deaths to see why these judgements were made in these cases.

e.g. Dr Enda Dooley (1990) – Unnatural Deaths in Prisons

Aims: - To investigate all unnatural deaths that occurred in prisons in England & Wales between 1972 and 1987Procedure: - A content analysis was conducted of Prison Department records of all those who had died an unnatural death in prisons in England and Wales 1972-1987. A checklist that included social, psychiatric and forensic history was used to analyse the data. The groups recorded as suicide were compared to those not recorded as suicide (including those considered as CSI)Findings: - 442 unnatural deaths were recorded, 300 were recorded as suicide. Records for 295 suicides were examined (290 male, 5 female) The remaining 142 death were recorded with a variety of verdicts (mainly misadventure), including 52 from consciously self-inflicted injury (CSI).

Findings related to the Suicide group: The greatest number of suicides (31%) happened in the third quarter

of the year Almost 50% occurred between midnight and 8 a.m. Most deaths occurred by hanging Data suggested that those in prison for less than a year were at higher

risk of suicideComparisons between the Suicide group and CSI group

The proportion of females to males was greater in the CSI group (although the numbers were small)

A larger proportion of the CSI group had never been married More of the suicide group were on remand (not yet sentenced) There was no significant difference in past-history of self-harming

between the 2 groups (Suicide 42.4%, CSI 52.9%)

death was more common during the night hours in the suicide group, with proportionately more of the CSI deaths occurring during the day-time or evening.

a significantly greater proportion of the CSI group had been prescribed major tranquillizers in the month prior to death.

fewer of the CSI group died by hanging compared to the suicide group and proportionately more by using fire.

Dooley comments that there is a need to prove intent on the person’s part before giving a suicide verdict and this may account for the lack of a suicide verdict in some cases, but since most of the deaths were caused by hanging and people are aware of the outcome of hanging themselves(!) it is surprising that more of these cases were not given suicide verdicts.Dooley considers some of the reasons for this:

- did those who died in the day or early evening expect to be discovered and stopped? (so no intent to commit suicide could be assumed)

- did those who chose a slower and more noticeable method (e.g. fire) also expect to be stopped and saved?

- females were less likely to receive a verdict of suicide, and this was also true of those with a history of self-harming, which is more prevalent in females both in and out of prison than in males. The death could be seen as an attempt at a controlled self-harming going too far.

Conclusions:-Dooley reports that unnatural deaths in prisons are on the increase in England and Wales. His research paper helps to highlight some of the risk factors that may need to be taken into account in order to reduce the rate of unnatural deaths

TASK – Using the findings from Dooley’s study, suggest what could be done to reduce the number of unnatural deaths in prisons.

Section = ImprisonmentSubsection = The Prison Situation and Roles

You will remember studying Reicherand Haslam in Year 12 and discussing the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) by Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973).

In this study the behaviour of the prisoners and guards resembled that of real prisoners and guards in real prisons and this led the researchers to conclude that the reason for this was that the brutal

set up of the prison situation impacted on the participants:

"Despite the fact that guards and prisoners were essentially free to engagein any form of interaction . . . the characteristic nature of their encounters tended to be negative, hostile, affrontive and dehumanising" (Haney et al., 1973) The researchers concluded that the level of brutality and distress they observed was caused by the situation and did not result from the nature of the individuals who took part (remember they selected conforming, normal, average middle-class students to take part in their study. It had to be stopped on day 6 because of the distress of the “prisoners” under the “guards” cruel regime)Zimbardo et al had hoped that the SPE would lead to an improvement in the American Penal system and the treatment of prisoners. Politically, there was a will to move towards alternatives to prison, no prisons were being built and the prevailing belief of The Supreme Court was that humane prisons are a sign of a cultured society. There was a belief that (at the time) prisons were too harsh and there was not enough focus on rehabilitation. It is worth noting here that American jails remain much tougher than UK prisons. And, of course, many states still have the death penalty. In their paper Zimbardo et al summarise the changes that actually happened from 1973-1998 and make “a series of reform-oriented proposals drawn from [the SPE] and related studies on the power of social situations and institutional settings that can be applied to the current crisis in American corrections” (Haney and Zimbardo, Page 1)

e.g. Haney & Zimbardo (1998) – The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy Twenty-Five Years After the Stanford Prison Experiment

Task :Read the following two sections on the Haney and Zimbardo study then draw

up two SPIDER DIAGRAMS, one summarising the changes to the US prison system from 1973 to 1998, and one summarising Haney and Zimbardo’s six

suggestions for improvements to the US penal system.

Part One – Summarising changes over the last 25 years

Haney and Zimbardo cite the following changes to the American penal system since the SPE –they refer to these as:“groundwork for the mean season of corrections that the nation has now entered… The criminal justice system not only has become increasingly harsh and punitive but also has obscured many of the psychological insights on which the SPE andnumerous other empirical studies were based–insights about the power of social situations and contexts to influence and control behaviour”.

President Ronald Reagan’s Republican ‘War on Drugs’ (1980s) led to political pressure to put more criminals behind bars.

The concept of rehabilitation was discredited – criminals deserved punishment. Haney and Zimbardo refer to this as the “death of rehabilitation”

Determinate sentencing was introduced – whatever sentence was given had to be served in full with no chance for parole

Many new prisons were consequently built, USA imprisons more people than any other modern nation (2008 prison population = 2 million). The building rate has never kept up with demand and Haney and Zimbardo note that for the last 25 years the prison system has been considerd to be “in crisis”

Racial bias in prison population 48% African-Caribbean men although they only represent 6% of the general population. Many for drug offences. Hispanics and women were also over represented compared with white men.

Introduction of the ‘Supermax’ prisons : example of a ‘Supermax’ cell.

The Supermax cell is designed for ultra-secure, long term segregated confinement and the offender lives in extreme isolation and with little stimulation and reduced privileges. They are locked in 23 out of 24 hours. These cells are used to house “violent or disruptive” prisoners in free standing cell blocks in isolation from the other prisoners. In 1998 36 states already had Supermax units and work was underway to increase capacity by 25%.Haney and Zimbardo argue that the USA is perpetuating discrimination against black people and encouraging dispositional explanations of

criminal behaviour. The ‘Supermax’ cell is another example of a dispositional explanation being used to categorise some prisoners as ‘problem prisoners’. The implication is that nothing can be done with or for these “violent” types – and consequently they are often “ineligible for prison jobs, vocational training programs, and, in many states, education” (p.8).

[Key term – Dispositional Explanations:A dispositional explanation sees the cause of criminal behaviour as being

entirely due to an individual’s personality, rather than considering the effect on them of the environment, which would be a situational explanation].

Finally, The Supreme Court had shown an unsympathetic stance on appeals from prisoners who used the Eight Amendment, which states that “no cruel and unusual punishments” should be imposed on a U.S. citizen, thus setting a punitive tone which reflected current attitudes to crime.

Part Two – Suggestions for Improvements, using lessons learned from the SPE and other psychological studies

1) Prisons should be used sparingly as they are psychologically damaging: resources should be directed into alternatives to prison.

2) Taking a lesson from the SPE where psychologically healthy young men were affected by the prison, prisons should take account of individual differences, in particular how a person is likely to react to confinement in a crowded, violent environment.

3) The conditions that exist when someone comes out of prison are as important as those on the inside. Rehabilitation programmes are needed to teach prisoners the skills to cope once they are released. “Otherwise, prisoners who were ill-prepared for job and social situations before they entered prison become more so over time, and the longer they have been imprisoned, the more likely it is that rapid technological and social change will have dramatically transformed the world to which they return.” Haney and Zimbardo p.13). Rehabilitation is necessary to reduce recidivism rates.

4) Both the SPE and Milgram’s obedience studies showed how difficult it is to predict or even explain behaviour in terms of individual characteristics, so in prison, explanations of disciplinary infractions and violence should focus more on the context in which they happened and less on the prisoners who engaged in them. In addition, predicting reoffenders would be best done by considering the context in which they will be placed rather than their individual characteristics

5) Haney and Zimbardo acknowledge that they got caught up in the SPE and lost their balanced perspective as objective experimenters. Therefore they suggest that reform needs to come from people outside of the prison system who are empowered to act on it, since those within the system are not impartial… “to depend exclusively on those whose perspectives have been created and maintained by these powerful situations to, in turn, transform or control them is shortsighted and psychologically naive. This task must fall to those with a different logic and point of view, independent of and free from the forces of the situation itself. To be sure, the current legal retreat to hands-off policies in which the courts defer to the presumably greater expertise of

correctional officials ignores the potency of prison settings to alter the judgments of those charged with the responsibility of running them. The SPE and much other research on these powerful environments teach that this retreat is terribly ill-advised.” (Haney and Zimbardo, p. 15)

6)Psychological knowledge should be used to improve the conditions within prisons. “…psychology can be made relevant to the broad and pressing national problems of crime and justice, that the discipline can assist in stimulating badly needed social and legal change, and that scholars and practitioners can improve these policies with sound data and creative ideas” Haney and Zimbardo, p16.

Section = Alternatives to ImprisonmentSubsection = Probation[Key term: probation order (or “community rehabilitation order”, as it

is now known in the UK) = a general term given to a whole range of different punishment and treatment

options which could include unpaid work, attendance on a treatment programme, a curfew, an exclusion, a residence requirement, electronic

monitoring (tags) and any combination of the above the offender has to meet the terms of the probation or face a stiffer penalty].

In the UK the probation service supervises over 200,000 offenders on four main types of community sentences: -

Community rehabilitation orders Community punishment orders Combined orders (rehabilitation & punishment) Drug treatment and testing orders

Approximately 90% of those on probation are male, and 25% aged between 16-20. 70% of clients are on community sentences, the remaining 30% are on licence after being released early from prison sentences. Any breach of probation is taken very seriously and can lead to a custodial sentence (being sent, or being sent back, to prison)

The purpose of probation is two-fold: To continuously manage the risk to from the offender to the community,

and To provide programmes designed to reduce re-offending

Source: Home office Information for those on a Probation Order:

What you must do

Stay out of trouble. Tell your supervisor immediately, if you change your address or phone number. Be on time for appointments you are given. Let staff visit you at home. Keep to any extra requirements ordered by the court. Keep to any extra requirements on your licence if you have been released from prison. Take part fully in anything else your supervising officer asks you to do. This may be

taking part in a one-to-one or groupwork programme.

What you must not do

You must not miss an appointment or be late. You must not turn up under the influence of drugs or alcohol. You must not upset or threaten other people. You must not make racist, sexist or other offensive remarks

Does Probation work? George Mair and Chris May (1997) investigated the probation service from the point of view of those who are its clients. They gave a mixed response as to its success.

e.g. Mair & May (1997) – Investigation Of The Experiences Of Offenders On Probation Orders.

Aim: - To investigate the experience of offenders on probation orders in a cross section of probation offices England & WalesProcedure: - 3299 offenders were chosen at random from 22 different probation offices, these represented all age groups and offences. There was a 40% drop out rate, with more failing to turn up in the London area then other areas. The researchers had to engage in corrective weighting to ensure that the results were not biased towards the smaller offices. A survey (questionnaire) was piloted on 7 offices and 24 offenders. This was then improved before being used on the wider sample.Interviews using the improved questionnaire were conducted by independent researchers: questions were all closed, either Likert scale or multiple choice type questions. The questions were wide ranging and asked about the offender’s life as well as their likelihood of reoffending.Results: -

88% felt probation was extremely or very useful. 60% thought there probation officer would help them to sort out

problems and was there to talk to, however only 37% said that this would stop them re-offending altogether. Probation was seen as useful by offenders, with its most important

function for offenders to provide someone to talk to on a variety of topics including: things to do; problems with accommodation; problems with money; employment; family problems; why they committed the offence; drugs and alcohol problems and their health generally.

Conclusions: -Probation was seen in a positive light by offenders. However, the percentage who failed to keep the appointments (40%, if you recall) are excluded from the analysis and may have more negative views. Indeed given that the interviews were carried out in the probation offices we may be justified in questioning the validity of the responses given as social desirability biases my have come into play.The study confirmed previous research that those on probation tend to be unemployed, on benefits, poorly qualified and in poor health, and much of the time was spent discussing these. It was disappointing that not on offender in the survey thought that their probation order was supposed to stop them reoffending, and also that almost one third of those interviewed went on to reoffend.

Section = Alternatives to Imprisonment

Subsection = Restorative Justice

In the criminal justice system in England and Wales, the offender is seen as having committed a crime against the state, e.g. Smith Vs Regina (lawsuits are give the name of the defendant and the Queen, hence the name “Crown” court). It is to the law that the defender has to answer, not to the victim of their crime.

“Victims have for too long been the forgotten parties in criminal justice. I am interested in finding out whether restorative justice can offer them a more satisfying experience that will provide the kind of emotional as well as material restoration that they seek”. Heather Strang 

Victims often feel that their experiences and expectations are not taken into account by the criminal justice system, and being a victim of a crime, either directly or as a relative or friend of someone who has been a victim of crime, can have damaging socio-psychological effects both in the short and long term: some people may be affected their whole lives by their experience of being a victim of crime. Victims often feel that the crime has taken away their sense of control and empowerment, and the dispersonal treatment of the offender by the criminal justice system can add to this sense of powerlessness. Restorative justice (RJ) is a process that aims to redress this balance. In RJ, a crime is seen as being enacted against a person or organisation and victims are allowed to be part of what happens. The most common form of restorative justice involves a meeting between the offender and victim, often through what is known as an RJ Conference. This is set up and managed by trained officials, often police officers, who invite those involved to attend, set up the structure of the conference and manage the conference. The conference will be attended by members of the families or other supportive people on both sides. Other methods include direct mediation where a facilitator brings together only the victim and the offender to meet face to face or indirect mediation where the correspondence between the victim and offender is through letters. Reports, or even videotape, of the conference or copies of letters can be sent to those involved in the offender’s criminal justice case, although the judge can decide whether or not to take the contents of the report or video into account when passing sentence. In the majority of RJ cases the offender will not avoid punishment (either imprisonment or a community sentence) just because they have agreed to take part in an RJ conference.

It is important to note that engagement in restorative justice has to be voluntary for both offender and victim, indeed this is a fundamental requirement on the U.N.’s guidelines on the implementation of RJ programmes, and that the purpose of the conference is to seek a positive outcome. It is respectful and not degrading for either offender or victim. Whilst the crime is denounced, the offender is not.

Restorative justice is tough both for victims and offenders. For offenders RJ is no soft option as it can be very difficult for them to have to face up to the consequences of their actions. For victims it can be an emotionally challenging experience as they will be facing their fears and they may be asked to relive frightening and upsetting experiences in the presence of the very perpetrator of those offences. Such conferences have to be managed carefully. There are number of benefits that RJ can offer. RJ aims to benefit victims by providing them with: -

An opportunity to explain the impact of the crime (impact statements) An acknowledgement of the harm caused A chance to ask questions and get an explanation of the crime, e.g. why

they were targetted Some control and choice, which may be gained simply through experience

a narrative of the events that happened from the offender’s point of view. Peace of mind about the future and the ability to return to a state of mind

similar to the one they held before the crimeIn addition to benefits for the victim, both the offender and the wider community may also benefit from restorative justice. The offender may be able to use RJ to help them mend their ways and choose not to reoffend, and community confidence can be built up if there is a belief that offenders are being dealt with.

Does restorative justice work? Lawrence Sherman and Heather Strang carried out an extensive international review of published research that aimed to examine the effectiveness of RJ in relation to reoffending – can RJ reduce recidivism in offenders?

e.g. Sherman & Strang (2007) Review of restorative justice and its effectiveness in preventing re-offending.

Aim: - To investigate good practice in restorative justice practice and measure its effectiveness in terms of re-offending.Procedure: - An internet search of academic journals was carried out by the researchers including the words “restorative justice” with “reoffending” or “recidivism” or “mediation”. This yielded 424 worldwide hits. These academic papers were then analysed to identify research where a sample of offenders on an RJ programme were compared with a sample who were not, the minimum research standard required by the Home Office in assessing reconviction rates to arrive at whet they call “reasonably unbiased” results. This gave 36 studies carried out in various parts of the world and included a number of RCTs (random controlled trials, which are considered the most scientific methodology for comparisons). The RCTs were based in such diverse locations as Canberra, Australia; Northumbria, UK; Indianapolis, USA;Results: In terms of reoffending, Sherman and Strang found that restorative justice reduced two year reoffending rates for both property crime and violent crime:

In the ten studies that looked at property crime, RJ reduced two year offender rates compared with criminal justice in 6/10 cases (in 4 there was no effect)

In the 11 studies of violent crimes for which sufficient data was available, RJ showed a reduction in 5, an increase in 2 and no difference in 4

In terms of best practice in RJ (in relation to face to face RJ and court determined restoration, the two commonest forms of RJ), Sherman and Strang suggest that

• RJ seems to work best when it is focused on the kinds of offences that have a personal victim, who can – at least in principle – be invited to meet with the offender. The major criteria for “working” in this claim include helping victims and reducing reoffending.• RJ seems to work best when it is focused on violent crime, rather than property crime, with major exceptions: burglary victims gain reduced post-traumatic stress symptoms, and property offenders may commit less crime in future (or at least no more) if they get RJ than if they get prison.• RJ may be best able to reduce court and imprisonment costs, as well as crime and its medical and financial impact on victims, if it is used as a form of diversion from CJ – including prosecution, or on a post-conviction basis, as a diversion from likely incarceration.Conclusions: - There is strong evidence to suggest that restorative justice is effective in some cases. There is support for its increased use, especially with young, first time offenders. [Examples of restorative justice approaches already used in the UK, often with youth offenders, include: getting offenders to remove graffiti and repair property they’ve damaged; bringing shoplifters face to face with store managers to hear how shop theft affects others; getting offenders to write letters of apology (source = Home Office)]

Section = Alternatives to ImprisonmentSubsection = ‘Looking Death Worthy’

The issue of the death penalty is very contentious.

Task: -Using the internet, find out:

what are the arguments for and against the death penalty which countries (or states in the USA) still have the death penalty, and for which crimes?

Whatever opinion you personally hold about the death penalty you would want the law to be upheld and justice meted out in a fair and unbiased way. Unfortunately we have seen that appearance of the offender can have an effect on the jury, and therefore on the sentence that is handed down. Jennifer Eberhardt and her colleagues have investigated a phenomenon they call “Looking Death Worthy”. They suggest that in the USA the more stereotypically ‘Black’ your features are the more likely you are to be given a death sentence for your crime, if the victim is White. It is a fact that the Criminal justice system is dominated by White people (98% of the chief district attorneys in death penalty states are White, only 1% are Black) and that many of the states which still have the death penalty are Southern states where discrimination and prejudice were historically worse. Is it possible that the criminal justice system today is subject to biases of appearance more reminiscent of Lombroso’s criminal types than of the application of blind justice?

e.g. Eberhardt et al (2006) Investigation of the relation between stereotypically black features in offenders and the likelihood of

receiving the death sentence.Background: - In passing the death sentence in the USA race has be shown to matter. For example, murderers of white victims are more likely to get the death

sentence than murderers of black victims and black defendants are more likely to be given the death sentence than white victims. Aim: - To investigate whether there was support for the hypothesis that black offenders with stereotypically black features (e.g. broad nose, thick lips, dark skin) were more likely to get the death sentence than offenders with less stereotypically black features.Procedure: - An analysis of the database of death-eligible cases in Philadelphia between 1979 and 1999 was carried out. In 44 cases a Black man had killed a white victim. Photographs of these 44 were shown to naïve raters who were asked to rate their facial features for stereotypical Black features between 1-11, 11 being very stereotypical. Black and white photos of the 44 Black men were each shown to the raters for 4 seconds each. The 51 raters included 32 white, 15 Asian and four of other ethnicities.

Results: - The results confirmed that (with other factors taken into account) the defendants whose appearance was perceived as more stereotypically Black were more likely to receive a death sentence than defendants whose appearance was perceived as less stereotypically Black when the victim was white:

Less More Stereotypical Stereotypical

Graph showing % death sentences given to less stereotypical and most stereotypical Black defendants when the victim was White

In fact, 24.4% of those Black defendants who fell in the lower half of the stereotypicality distribution had received a death sentence, whereas 57.5% of those Black defendants who fell in the upper half had received a death sentence.

Conclusion: - This suggests that stereotypically looking Black men are seen as somehow more ‘Death Worthy’, however this was only the case when the victim was White: the type of case where the race issue is most salient.In a second study where the victim was Black, no significant effect was found:

Graph showing % death sentences given to less stereotypical and more stereotypical Black defendants when the victim was Black

This suggests that only where the victim is White did the jurors see the race of the offender as a blameworthy factor in the trial.

Quote from the study:“Our findings suggest that in cases involving a Black defendant and a White victim—cases in which the likelihood of the death penalty is already high—jurors are influenced not simply by the knowledge that the defendant is Black, but also by the extent to which the defendant appears stereotypically Black. In fact, for those defendants who fell in the top half as opposed to the bottom half of the stereotypicality distribution, the chance of receiving a death sentence more than

doubled. Previous laboratory research has already shown that people associate Black physical traits with criminality (Eberhardt et al., 2004). The present research demonstrates that in actual sentencing decisions, jurors may treat these traits as powerful cues to deathworthiness”.

Jennifer L. Eberhardt, Stanford University

Section = Treatment ProgrammesSubsection = Cognitive Skills programmes The recidivism rate in the UK is approximately 64%. In order to break the ‘revolving door’ phenomenon of repeat offending, effective treatment and rehabilitation programmes are needed. Unfortunately, spending money on helping prisoners is not seen as a priority by governments and tax payers. This is short-sighted, however, as breaking the cycle of re-offending is a major step towards reducing crime. In HM Prison Service in England and Wales today there are 13 types of Offender Behaviour Programmes being used, including anger management programmes such as CALM (see “anger management subsection below) and also cognitive skills programmes such as Enhanced Thinking Skills (ETS), which we will investigate in this subsection. It is important for the government to evaluate the effectiveness of their offender behaviour programmes for two reasons; firstly to show that they make a difference and are therefore worth the large expenditure of tax payers’ money that they involve, and secondly to ensure that they offer the most effective way of reducing re-offending. In other words, such programmes need to be shown to be working, and working efficiently. A government initiative called “What Works” began in the 1990s, and the purpose of this was to design, deliver and evaluate prisoner rehabilitation programmes. The studies we will look at here are concerned with the evaluation of the use of cognitive skills programmes. These are based on the principles of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), that is if you change the way a person thinks you will change the way they act, and in this case that changing the way offenders think can prevent re-offending.

[Key term =cognitive skills programmes“ Cognitive skills progrmmes are a specific type of cognitive behavioural

intervention, sometimes referred to as ‘thinking skills’ programmes. These operate on the assumption that offenders lack the appropriate cognitive skills to achieve their goals in a pro-social way. Programmes seek to address this

deficit by teaching new ways of thinking, mainly through skills practice”(Fanshaw et al, 2003)

Cognitive skills programmes were first introduced in England and Wales in 1992, when two programmes were introduced:

Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R & R) – the aim was to develop prisoners’ cognitive skills, targeting thinking style; self control or impulsivity; interpersonal problem-solving; critical reasoning; moral reasoning; social perspective training. The programme was made up of 36 sessions each of 2.5hrs, with assignments for prisoners to do between the sessions and after the programme was complete. This was designed in North America for use with prisoners at high risk of reoffending.Those on the programme had served sentences of varying lengths, from a few months to over 4 years, and had to have basic literacy skills and an IQ of at least 80 to qualify for inclusion on the programme.To study the effectiveness of the programme prisoners were classified into 4 different risk of reoffending categories: low risk, moderate low risk, moderate high risk and high risk. They were also categorised in terms of the reason for their sentence: violent, sexual, acquisitive or “other”. After

a Home office review R & R was discontinued in England and Wales in 2004.

Enhanced Thinking Skills (ETS) - ETS is a relatively short programme (20 sessions), similar to R&R, which addresses thinking and behaviour associated with offending. This includes impulse control, flexible thinking, social perspective taking, values/moral reasoning, reasoning, and inter-personal problem solving. It was designed for the prison population in England and Wales who are at medium to high risk of reoffending and is currently the programme most frequently delivered, with over 40,000 offenders having completed this course within HMPS over the past 12 years

Do Cognitive Skills programmes work?In terms of the effectiveness of cognitive skills programmes, the two major studies of their effectiveness came up with conflicting results. The first of these, by Caroline Friendship and colleagues, was published in 2003 and reviewed a sample of 600+ male offenders comparing those who had been on R&R or ETS programmes between 1992 and 1996 with matched controls who had not. They had found that in all risk of offending categories those in the cognitive skills programme were less likely to reoffend, with an overall reduction in recidivism rates of 14%. This first major study suggested that cognitive skills programmes offered a promising method of rehabilitation of offenders. However, in a second major study, carried out on a similar scale by Louise Fanshaw, Caroline Friendship, Rosie Travers and Francis Nugent in 2003, there was found to be no significant difference in reoffending rates in a sample of 600+ male offenders on ETS or R&R from 1996-98 and matched controls, contradicting the earlier study. Fanshaw et al, however, suggest that their failure to find significant results might be explained by other factors, such as the expansion and possible compromising of quality of the programmes (they note that in 1995-6, 30 prisons supported cognitive skills programmes and 746 completers were reported, whereas in 1998-9 70 institutions offered the programmes with 2837 completions). They also suggest that higher levels of motivation in both those delivering the programme in the period reported by the earlier study and also those receiving the programmes could explain in part why the second study failed to find a significant reduction in reoffending after cognitive behavioural therapy.The studies illustrate the methodological difficulties inherent in evaluating the effects of intervention or treatment programmes in general and don’t mean, Fanshaw et al argue, that cognitive skills programmes don’t work. The challenge, they conclude, is for the government to work out not whether the programmes work in general, but specifically to carry out investigations on what works with whom.Whilst there was a plan to carry out research with specific types of offender, the first major study of the effect of cognitive skills programmes on reoffending with female offenders was not carried out until 2006. This study was carried out by Jenny Cann and is described below.

e.g. Cann (2006) Cognitive skills programmes: impact on reducing reconviction among a sample of female prisoners.

Aim: - To find out if cognitive skills programmes were effective in terms of lowering re-offending rates for a sample of women prisoners.

Procedure: - A sample of 180 female offenders who started one of two types of cognitive skills were retrospectively matched with a group of 540 other female offenders, each subject being matched with 3 control subjects to control for “rogue” scores from atypical individuals. All those studied were discharged between 1996 and 2000 and spent at least a year in the community following a custodial sentence of six months or more.

Results: - One and two year reconviction rates acted as a measure for reoffending, and the % reconviction was recorded after one and two years.

A Table to show the one and two year reconviction rates for programme participants and control subjects

Programme Ppts

Control group

One year reconviction rate %

18.3 15.0

Two year reconviction rate %

36.7 23.7

The results showed that after two years the reconviction rate was actually higher in the programme group, although not significantly so. The results for each type of programme, ETS and R&R were analysed, with no difference being shown between the ETS programme group and teir controls. However, a significant difference was found with thr R&R group , showing that they were significantly more likely to reoffend after one year (R&R reconviction rate was 19.1%, and for their controls it was 10.1%) which represents the opposite of what would be hoped the cognitive skills programme would lead to.

Conclusion : - The results showed no support for the idea that cognitive skills programmes reduced reconviction rates in female offenders.

Cann, however, points out that the failure of the programmes in this study may not be an indication that similar programmes, properly devised and administered, would never be effective. She suggests that in this study the programmes used may have proved ineffective for a number of reasons, including:

The reasons why women offend may not be predominantly their cognitive skills deficits – the important drivers behind female offending include mental health issues, substance misuse, interpersonal relationships and emotional factors and severe financial hardship. None of these reasons for offending will necessarily be affected by or eradicated as a result of cognitive skills training

The cognitive therapies used with female prisoners from 1996-2000 (ETS and R&R) had been developed with male prisoners in mind and were therefore inappropriate for women. In fact, R&R was discontinued with all prisoners in England and Wales in 2004.

The provision of these programmes for female prisoners 1996-2000 was small-scale, making consistent and complete delivery of the programmes difficult, so the programmes may not have been properly delivered (Cann points out the HMPS now stipulates that cognitive skills tutors deliver a minimum number of sessions each year)

Cognitive skills programmes such as ETS or R&R are unlikely at any rate to be effective on their own, and the best way forward is to combine them with other interventions with, and support for, offenders.

Interventions designed specifically for female prisoners: CAREIn 2001, the Home Office reviewed the government’s strategy for women offenders and out of this came the intervention for female prisoners known as CARE: Choices, Actions, Relationships and Emotions.

This is a programme designed for female offenders classed as having a medium to high risk of reconviction for violent and/or substance abuse related offending. This is s multi-disciplinary programme involving mental health workers, substance misuse workers for prisoners as well as non-statutory agencies in mentoring and advocacy, The aim is to target the areas of emotional well-being, relationships, substance misuse, and lifestyle and associates. These are areas that research has identified as being important factors in female offending and reoffending.

The course aims to help participants identify and label emotions and develop skills for managing emotion. In addition, the course aims to foster a positive self-identity that will enable participants to live the kind of life they would like to on release.

The CARE programme was piloted in two public sector prisons and an accreditation submission will be made to Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, (CSAP), in summer 2009.

Section = TreatmentsSubsection = Anger Management Anger management is a therapeutic programme used with a range of clients from convicted violent criminals to aggressive school children. It assumes that violence is caused by anger, and that if violent individuals learn to control their anger, their violent behaviour will decrease. The programme differentiates between two types of anger, instrumental aggression where the aggression is planned and is used to get something, and hostile aggression which is uncontrolled, unplanned aggression in response to a situation or person, for example road rage. Instrumental aggression is by definition aggression that is already controlled so this is not the target of anger management course. Instead the courses target hostile aggression and aim to help offenders gain control over their aggressive outbursts. Anger management programmes are based largely on cognitive-behavioural therapy techniques, and are usually delivered through group sessions. A specific anger management programme called the National Anger Management Package was devised for use in prisons in the 1980s, becoming widely used in the 1990s. The initial need for anger management in prisons arose from the rising levels of aggression and violence within the prison setting itself, so the main focus of the National Anger Management Package was to try to reduce the amount of violence within prisons, but there was also with the hope that improved self-control would continue once offenders are released and lessen their chances of reoffending.

Aims of the National Anger Management Package course for prisonersCourse members should:- Increase their understanding of how and why they become angry - Realise the importance of monitoring their own behaviour so that they notice the first signs of becoming angry- Develop strategies for controlling their anger- Use role play to practise coping with provocation- Consider how their lives will improve if they learn to control their anger and aggression Typically such a course will involve around 8 two-hour sessions, spread over a couple of weeks. As well as helping the offenders to recognise and manage their responses to provocation they are also encouraged to consider avoiding situations where they may experience such provocation, such as night clubs or football matches. This lifestyle change is difficult to achieve but some offenders manage this through a determination to avoid situations where they realise they can’t control their behaviour and have a strong will not to reoffend.

CALMA new anger management programme was accredited for use in HMPS in 2000, CALM (Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage It)

This course is for offenders whose offending is associated with poor emotional control, so like earlier versions it is aimed at helping offenders control their hostile aggression.. CALM aims to enable participants to reduce the intensity, frequency and duration of negative emotions which are associated with their offending. These emotions include anger, anxiety and jealousy.

Anger management programmes usually result in some improvement in prisoners’ behaviour. As with all offender behaviour programmes, objective and systematic analysis of their outcome is necessary, and Jane Ireland has carried out research into the effectiveness of anger management programmes with offenders. Below is a study she conducted in a YOI (youth offender institution) in the UK in 2004.

e.g. Ireland (2004) Anger Management Therapy With YoungMale Offenders: An Evaluation of Treatment Outcome

Aim : - to assess the effectiveness of a brief group-based anger management intervention with young male offenders.

Procedure: -At a male young offender institution in the UK the study was conducted on 87 prisoners,, who had all been identified as being suitable for an anger management course. This group was split into an experimental group and a control group on the basis that 50 (mean age =19) of them, the experimental group, had already completed the course and 37 (mean age = 18) of them had been identified as suitable for the course but has had yet not begun it, and could therefore be used as a control group. The IV was whether the prisoners had received the programme or not.

The participants were assessed using two scales two weeks prior to their course and eight weeks after. The two measures of their anger were:1. their angry behaviour was assessed by prison officers on a checklist assessing angry behaviour (Wing Behaviour Checklist: WBC)2. a self-report questionnaire (Anger Management Assessment questionnaire: AMA) that included 53 items that could indicate an anger problem. Prisoners were asked to rate how often each item had occurred to them in the previous

week on a scale ranging from 0 (‘never’) to 2 (‘more than once’). Items were related to angrybehaviours, thoughts, and feelings. Examples of items included, ‘I have banged on my cell door,’ ‘I have thrown items around my cell/wing,’ ‘I have plotted revenge against others,’ ‘I have felt irritated by people for no real reason,’ ‘I have found it hard to control my anger’. The higher the score, the higher the self-reported anger level. It was predicted that those who had experienced the programme would have reduced WBC and AMA scores eight weeks after the programme whereas there would be no difference in the control group’s scores (they were still on the waiting list at the eight week retest). Thus the dependant variable was the difference in their anger scores as measured on the WBC and AMA eight weeks after completing the programme. The anger management programme included 12 one-hour sessions run over a three-day period. The average number of prisoners attending the course was ten, with two staff facilitators. The sessions incorporated a range of material; participants were required to complete anger diaries, to contribute to group discussions, to take part in role-plays and group exercises, to watch videos, and to complete pieces of homework. The 12 sessions addressed triggers to anger, consequences of anger loss, and the importance of behaviour, thoughts and feelings.Results : -

92% of prisoners belonging to the experimental group showedimprovement on at least one of the measures. (48% of these showed improvement on both the AMA and the WBC, 35% showed improvement solely on the AMA, and 17% showed improvement solely on the WBC.

8% of all prisoners showed no improvement or a deterioration on both measures following course completion.

Prisoners who improved on both measures appeared to contain the highest proportion of violent offenders, with those showing no improvement or a deterioration containing the smallest. Conclusion: - Anger management was found to be successful in the short term for youth offenders within a prison setting. Ireland points out that o conclusions can be drawn about the long term effects of this programme as no reoffending data was gathered, but suggests that long-term evaluation of programmes should be included in future research, provided that the aims of the programme delivered were to extend the effectiveness beyond the prison setting and have the effect of reducing reoffending, which was not the specific aim of the programme used in this study.

Section = TreatmentsSubsection = Using Ear Acupuncture With A Drug Rehabilitation Program

Among the offender behaviour programmes delivered in HMPS are those specifically aimed at drug rehabilitation, helping offenders to give up substance abuse. These use a variety of techniques. One such programme, FOCUS, is a high-intensity drug and alcohol treatment programme operating in five of our high security prisons. The FOCUS programme looks to enhance motivation, change thinking associated with drug misuse, improve social and emotion management skills and develop relapse prevention skills using role-play. So far no big surprises, but what you may be surprised to know is that in these high security prisons, most of the prisoners who go through the programme also use ear acupuncture.

This alternative treatment has been used in prisons for 5 years and is popular as it is cheap, easily taught (prison officers can be taught in a 4-day course and two officers can administer the treatment to 10-15 inmates at a time in a 40 minute session). Its proponents, including Michael Wheatley, (Senior Manager for the Drug Strategy & Services Directorate of High Security Prisons in England and Wales), argue that it is a useful addition to the drug rehabilitation programme and does not require the prisoner to be highly motivated to participate.

But does it work? Is the FOCUS programme more effective where auricular (ear) acupuncture is administered as part of the programme?Wheatley presented the following paper in 2005 to argue that this is indeed the case.

e.g. Wheatley M (2005) Auricular Acupuncture with Substance Prisoners in Maximum Security Prisons : An Evaluation Summary

Aim: - To evaluate the effectiveness of ear acupuncture used in drug rehabilitation programmes with maximum security offenders.

Procedure: - A group of prisoners in six high security prisons received ear acupuncture in addition to standard care programme for drug rehabilitation, FOCUS; these were compared with a control group who just received the standard care programme. Two trained practitioners worked with groups of 10-15 prisoners in a relaxed setting, fine needles were inserted into five acupuncture points in the ear and prisoners relaxed for 40 minutes, often falling asleep.

Results: - Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered. Compared with controls, prisoners in the FOCUS + ear acupuncture group reported better sleep, improved relaxation, better ability to cope, reduced nicotine cravings, amended cognitions and general health improvements. Staff

reported better communication with staff and families, improved attendance on offender behaviour programmes, calmer atmosphere and less use of healthcare facilities, including fewer requests for medication to assist sleep.

Wheatley reported that 350 prisoners in total had been on the FOCUS programme, with most also using ear acupuncture. The completion rate was an impressive 85% and promising evidence from pre- and post- programme assessment showed: -

70% reduction in drug related incidents in the 6 months after treatment 41% reduction in serious incident reports 42% reduction in positive drug tests (mandatory) 33% reduction in positive drug tests (voluntary) Significant changes in prisoners’ attitudes

Conclusion: - Wheatley believes that there is enough evidence to expand the delivery of acupuncture in conjunction with, for example, the FOCUS programme for drug rehabilitation, throughout the prison system.

What makes this a psychological study? Well, if you take the view that ear acupuncture “does something” biologically to the patient, then this is a biomedical study not a psychological one. However, what lends this study a psychological angle is that the effects of ear acupuncture as reported by Wheatley could not be replicated by Gates et al in 2006. Reviewing a total of seven controlled studies of acupuncture that compared “real” with “sham” acupuncture (needles stuck anywhere rather then the five “official” points for drug users) Gates et al found no difference in outcome between the “real” and “sham” acupuncture participants.With such evidence disputing the effect of ear acupuncture Wheatley’s study lacks reliability. This and other factors give us reason to question Wheatley’s confidence in the positive effect of including ear acupuncture in drug rehabilitation programmes for prisoners. There are other challenges to the validity of his work:

If there is no effect of ear acupuncture on drug users, what can explain the positive outcomes that Wheatley reports in his study? What other variables might account for the positive change in the prisoners’ attitudes and behaviours?

Is there an expectancy effect? Can we use the placebo effect to explain the “success” of ear acupuncture in Wheatley’s study?