NCJ Number
49313
Date Published
1969
Length
125 pages
Annotation
THE ATTITUDES, CHARACTERISTICS, AND DECISIONMAKING PROCESSES OF PAROLE SUPERVISORS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON PAROLE REVOCATION ARE EXAMINED IN A STUDY OF PAROLEES OF THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS.
Abstract
THE SUBJECTS OF THE STUDY WERE 100 PAROLEE VIOLATORS AND 100 PAROLEE NONVIOLATORS, MATCHED ACCORDING TO AGE, RACE, INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT AND NUMBER OF MONTHS ON PAROLE. COMPARISONS WERE MADE OF THE PAROLE EXPERIENCES OF THE TWO GROUPS AND OF THEIR PAROLE SUPERVISORS' BACKGROUNDS, EXPERIENCE, AND CASELOADS. PAROLE SUPERVISORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD PAROLEE CONDUCT, CONDITIONS OF PAROLE, AND DECISIONS MADE IN SUPERVISOR-PAROLEE SITUATIONS WERE ALSO EXAMINED. THE TWO PAROLEE GROUPS WERE SIMILAR WITH REGARD TO THEIR PRIOR RECORDS AND THEIR CONDUCT WHILE ON PAROLE. NO MAJOR DIFFERENCES IN BACKGROUND, WORK EXPERIENCE, OR CASELOAD WERE FOUND BETWEEN THE SUPERVISORS OF VIOLATORS AND THE SUPERVISORS OF NONVIOLATORS. THE PAROLE SUPERVISORS CONSIDERED CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF PAROLE TO BE OF MORE IMPORTANCE THAN OTHERS IN MAKING THEIR DECISIONS. SUPERVISORS USUALLY RECOMMENDED REVOCATION WHEN A PAROLEE VIOLATED THE MORE SERIOUS CONDITIONS OF PAROLE, PARTICULARLY CONDITIONS WITH A HIGH LEVEL OF VISIBILITY (E.G., ABSCONDING FROM PAROLE, FAILING TO SUPPORT DEPENDENTS). THE DATA TENTATIVELY SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION THAT PAROLE SUPERVISORS, IN MAKING THEIR DECISIONS, ARE SENSITIVE TO THE WISHES OF THEIR OWN SUPERVISORS AND TO THE STATED OBJECTIVES OF THEIR AGENCY. SUPPORTING DATA, COPIES OF STUDY INSTRUMENTS, AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE INCLUDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED -- LKM)