Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T01:14:52.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Prediction in Parole Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

John S. Carroll ,
Richard L. Wiener ,
Dan Coates ,
Jolene Galegher  and
James J. Alibrio
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Discretionary legal decisions have become a recent focus of theory development and policy-oriented applied research. We investigated parole release decision making in Pennsylvania from both orientations. Analyses of post-hearing questionnaires and case files from 1,035 actual parole decisions revealed that the Parole Board considers institutional behavior and predictions of future risk and rehabilitation in the decision to release on parole. Predictions seem also to be based on diagnostic judgments identifying causes of crime such as personal dispositions, drugs, alcohol, money, and environment. A one-year follow-up of 838 released parolees showed that predictions were virtually unrelated to known post-release outcomes. An actuarial prediction device was developed that is more predictive than subjective judgments. The use of decision guidelines to structure discretion is discussed, as well as the utilization of our research in guideline development by Pennsylvania.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 17 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Psychology and Law , 1982 , pp. 199 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 The Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by Grant MH 32855 from the National Institute of Mental Health. We gratefully acknowledge the support and cooperation of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole. We thank John Payne and Shari Diamond for their comments on earlier drafts. Requests for reprints should be addressed to Dr. John S. Carroll, Psychology, Loyola University, 6525 North Sheridan Road, Chicago, IL 60626.

References

References

ABT, Lawrence E. and STUART, Irving, R. (eds.) (1979) Social Psychology and Discretionary Law. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
ALIBRIO, James J. and R., THOMPSON (1980) Findings of Parole Guideline Research. Report submitted to the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, Harrisburg, PA.Google Scholar
CANTOR, Nancy, Edward E., SMITH, Rita de Sales, FRENCH, and Juan, MEZZICH (1980) “Psychiatric Diagnosis as Prototype Categorization,” 89 Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 181.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John S. (1978) “Causal Attributions in Expert Parole Decisions,” 36 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1501.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John S. (1980) “Judgments of Recidivism Risk: The Use of Base-Rate Information in Lipsitt, Parole Decisions.” In Paul and Sales, Bruce (eds.), New Directions in Psycholegal Research. New York: Litton.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John S., Jolene, GALEGHER, and Richard L., WIENER (1982) “Dimensional and Categorical Attributions in Expert Parole Decisions, Basic and Applied Social Psychology 187.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John S., and R. Barry, RUBACK (1981) “Sentencing by Parole Board: The Parole Revocation Decision,” in Sales, Bruce (ed.), Perspectives in Law and Psychology (Vol. Perspectives in Law and Psychology (Vol: The Jury, Trial and Judicial Processes. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
CHAPMAN, Loren J. and Jean P., CHAPMAN (1969) “Illusory Correlation as an Obstacle to the Use of Valid Psychodiagnostic Signs,” 74 Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 271.Google Scholar
EINHORN, Hillel J. and Robin M., HOGARTH (1978) “Confidence in Judgment: Persistence of the Illusion of Validity,” 85 Psychological Review 395.Google Scholar
EINHORN, Hillel J. (1981) “Prediction, Diagnosis and Causal Thinking in Forecasting,” 1 Journal of Forecasting 1.Google Scholar
GARBER, Robert M. and Christina, MASLACH (1977) “The Parole Hearing: Decision or Justification?” 1 Law and Human Behavior 261.Google Scholar
GOTTFREDSON, Don M. and Leslie T., WILKINS (1978) “Guidelines for Guideline Development.” In Don M. Gottfredson, Colleen A. Cosgrove, Leslie T. Wilkins, Jane Wallerstein and Carol Rauh (eds.), Classification for Parole Decision Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.Google Scholar
GOTTFREDSON, Don M., Leslie T., WILKINS, and Peter B., HOFFMAN (1978) Guidelines for Parole and Sentencing. Lexington, M.A.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
GOTTFREDSON, Don M., Leslie T., WILKINS, Peter B., HOFFMAN, and Susan M., SINGER (1973) The Utilization of Experience in Parole Decision-Making: A Progress Report. Davis, CA: National Council of Crime and Delinquency Research Center.Google Scholar
HAGAN, John (1977) “Criminal Justice in Rural and Urban Communities: A Study of the Bureaucratization of Justice,” 55 Social Forces 597.Google Scholar
HAKEEM, Michael (1961) “Prediction of Parole Outcomes from Summaries of Case Histories,” 52 Journal of Criminology, Criminal Law, and Police Science 145.Google Scholar
HAMMOND, Kenneth R., Thomas R., STEWART, Berndt, BREHMER, and Derick O., STEINMAN (1975) “Social-Judgment Theory,” in Kaplan, Martin and Schwartz, Steven (eds.), Human Judgment and Decision Processes. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
HEINZ, Anne M., John P., HEINZ, Stephen, SENDEROWITZ, and Mary Anne, VANCE (1967) “Sentencing by Parole Board: An Evaluation,” 67 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1.Google Scholar
HOFFMAN, Peter B. (1973) Paroling Policy Feedback (Supplemental Report 8). Davis, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency Research Center.Google Scholar
KONEČNI, Vladimir J. and Ebbe B., EBBESEN (1979) “External Validity of Research in Legal Psychology,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 39.Google Scholar
KONEČNI, Vladimir J. (eds.) (1982) The Criminal Justice System: A Social-Psychological Analysis. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
KRESS, Jack M. (1980) Prescription for Justice: The Theory and Practice of Sentencing Guidelines. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
UCHTENSTEIN, Sarah and Baruch, FISCHHOFF (1977) “Do Those Who Know More Also Know More About How Much They Know? The Calibration of Probability Judgments,” 20 Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 159.Google Scholar
MCCLEARY, Richard (1978) Dangerous Men. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
MONAHAN, John (1981) Predicting Violent Behavior: An Assessment of Clinical Techniques. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
National Council on Crime and Delinquency (1966) Parole Resource Book. Parole Resource Book: Selection for Parole. Washington, D.C.: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.Google Scholar
National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (1978) Determinate Sentencing: Reform or Regression? Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
NEITHERCUTT, M.G. (1972) “Parole Violation Patterns and Commitment Offense,” 9 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 87.Google Scholar
RICH, W.D., L.P., SUTTON, T.R., CLEAR, and M.J., SAKS (1982) Sentencing by Mathematics: An Evaluation of the Early Attempts to Develop and Implement Sentencing Guidelines (in press).Google Scholar
RUBACK, R. Barry (1981) “Perceived Honesty in the Parole Interview,” 7 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 677.Google Scholar
SAWYER, Jack (1966) “Measurement and Prediction, Clinical and Statistical,” 66 Psychological Bulletin 178.Google Scholar
SECHREST, Lee, Susan O., WHITE, and Elizabeth D., BROWN (eds.) (1979) The Rehabilitation of Criminal Offenders: Problems and Prospects. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
STANLEY, David T. (1976) Prisoners Among Us: The Problem of Parole. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
UNDERWOOD, Barbara O. (1979) “Law and the Crystal Ball: Predicting Behavior with Statistical Inference and Individualized Judgment” 88 Yale Law Journal 1408.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Commonwealth ex rel. Rambeau v. Rundel, 445 Pa. 8, 314 A.2d 842 (1973).Google Scholar