FORECASTING PAROLE OUTCOME BY PAROLE OFFICERS AND LAYMEN

• NCJ Number: 55143
• Author(s): M HAKEEM
• Date Published: 1950
• Length: 239 pages
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Thesis/Dissertation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY - DOCTORAL DISSERTATION

Annotation

A SAMPLE OF 200 CASE RECORDS OF PRISONERS PAROLED FROM A MIDWESTERN STATE PRISON WERE USED IN THIS 1950 STUDY OF THE PREDICTIVE POWER, AS REGARDS PAROLE OUTCOME, OF SELECTED INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OFFENDER CASE FILES.

Abstract

OF THE 200, HALF THE SUBJECTS WERE RETURNED TO PRISON AS PAROLE VIOLATORS AND HALF WERE RELEASED FROM PAROLE AS HAVING ADJUSTED SATISFACTORILY. USING PREPAROLE DATA, CASE SUMMARIES WERE PREPARED FOR EACH SUBJECT, AND A SET OF 20 SUMMARIES WERE SUBMITTED TO EACH OF 10 WELL-QUALIFIED PAROLE OFFICERS AND TO EACH OF 10 LAYPERSONS. THE SUMMARIES PROVIDED PERTINENT DATA RELATING TO EACH SUBJECT'S CRIME, PLEA, TRIAL, SENTENCE, AGE WHEN COMMITTED AND YEAR, RACE, PRIOR CRIMINAL RECORD, HOME BACKGROUND, MARITAL HISTORY, WORK RECORD, EDUCATION, INTELLIGENCE, RELIGION, HEALTH, CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDATION, PSYCHIATRIC APPRAISAL, TIME SERVED, INSTITUTIONAL ADJUSTMENT, STATEMENT OF THE CONVICTING JUDGE AND PROSECUTOR, SPECIAL PAROLE CONDITIONS, AND SPECIAL APPEALS TO THE PAROLE BOARD. THE PAROLE OFFICERS AND LAYPERSONS WERE ASKED TO JUDGE EACH OF THEIR CASE FILES AND PREDICT THE PROBABLE PAROLE OUTCOME OF EACH SUBJECT. EXAMINING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CORRECT PREDICTIONS MADE BY ALL THE JUDGES, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PAROLE OFFICERS AND LAYPERSONS DID NOT DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY IN THEIR PREDICTIVE EFFICIENCY. ALTHOUGH THE NUMBER OF CORRECT PREDICTIONS MADE BY INDIVIDUAL JUDGES VARIED CONSIDERABLY, THERE WAS LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CORRECT PREDICTIONS. OF THE 100 CASES OF PAROLE VIOLATORS, THE PAROLE OFFICERS AND THE 10 LAYPERSONS WERE ABLE TO PREDICT CORRECTLY 61 AND 64 CASES, RESPECTIVELY. OF THE NONVIOLATORS, THE OFFICERS AND LAYPERSONS PREDICTED 51 AND 48 CASES RESPECTIVELY. THE PREDICTIONS WERE SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN CHANCE IN CASES OF PAROLE VIOLATORS AND NO BETTER THAN CHANCE EXPECTATION IN CASES OF NONVIOLATORS. TABULAR DATA, REFERENCES, AND SELECTED CASE HISTORIES ARE INCLUDED, ALONG WITH A BRIEF REVIEW OF OTHER RESEARCH ON PAROLE PREDICTION. (KBL)