NCJ Number
134759
Journal
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology Volume: 35 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1991) Pages: 351-359
Date Published
1991
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This article responds to Richard Anson's reply to the authors' reanalysis of his evaluation of the Dougherty County (Georgia) Criminal Alcoholic Program (CAP) which places convictees on probation in lieu of incarceration.
Abstract
To evaluate the CAP, Anson determined whether or not there were fewer crimes committed by probationers during the 2-year post program period than during the 2 years prior to entering the CAP. Anson (1987) used a paired t-test to identify any statistically significant reductions in the number of crimes. The authors of this article reanalyzed Anson's data (1990) and those generated by a separately selected CAP sample. The authors questioned Anson's approach, arguing that it tended to obscure the true performance of the CAP. Rather than use a pre-post paired t-test, the authors used the more conventional method of counting persons who were caught for committing new crimes and assessing the seriousness of those crimes. Anson replied to this reanalysis in a subsequent article (1990). In responding to Anson's reply, the authors reassert what they consider to be the general benefits of their evaluation methods, answer Anson's assertions that the authors failed to interpret his findings correctly, and address Anson's criticisms about the authors' use of crime-seriousness scaling. 3 notes and 6 references