Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by CARROLL, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by BURKE, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluation and Prediction in Expert Parole Decisions

JOHN S. CARROLL

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

PAMELA A. BURKE

BellCorp

Parole decisions are based on a combination of evaluations of prior conduct and predictions of future conduct, depending on the perceived role of the parole decision in the criminal justice system and on the personal ideologies of individual decision makers. Evaluative and predictive judgments are based on diagnostic attributions regarding the causes of criminal behavior. Two experiments using realistic case materials and expert decision makers from two state parole boards are reported that explore attributions, evaluations, and predictions in parole decisions as a function of case evidence, structural position of the parole decision within the criminal justice system, and guidelines recommendations. Results showed good support for the attributional model, in that evaluations for punishment are important only when judges give no minimum sentence. However, reactions to a drug habit were difficult to interpret. Guidelines seemed to have less impact than case based recommendations.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 17, No. 3, 315-332 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854890017003006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
M. J. LEIBER and A. C. WOODRICK
Religious Beliefs, Attributional Styles, and Adherence to Correctional Orientations
Criminal Justice and Behavior, December 1, 1997; 24(4): 495 - 511.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Criminal Justice ReviewHome page
R. L. Curtis Jr. and W. A. Reese II
Framed Attributions and Shaped Accounts: A Study of Dispositional Process in Juvenile Justice
Criminal Justice Review, September 1, 1994; 19(2): 244 - 270.
[Abstract]