This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by SUNDT, J. L. Articles by TURNER, M. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Tenacity of the Rehabilitative Ideal Revisited

Have Attitudes Toward Offender Treatment Changed?

Southern Illinois University at Carbondale

FRANCIS T. CULLEN

University of Cincinnati

BRANDON K. APPLEGATE

University of Central Florida

MICHAEL G. TURNER

University of Cincinnati

Previous research has shown that the public endorses rehabilitation as a core goal of corrections. Over the past decade, however, the campaign to get tough on crime has grown in strength. In this context, the question emerges as to whether support for rehabilitation has diminished or maintained its hold on public thinking. The authors address this issue by replicating a 1986 study by Cullen, Skovron, Scott, and Burton that explored attitudes toward correctional treatment. The data reveal that citizens' support for rehabilitation has declined meaningfully. Even so, the public continues to view treatment as a legitimate correctional objective, especially for juvenile and nonviolent offenders.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 4, 426-442 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854898025004002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. M. Perelman and C. B. Clements Beliefs About What Works in Juvenile Rehabilitation: The Influence of Attitudes on Support for "Get Tough" and Evidence-Based Interventions Criminal Justice and Behavior, February 1, 2009; 36(2): 184 - 197. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. P. Mears, C. Mancini, M. Gertz, and J. Bratton Sex Crimes, Children, and Pornography: Public Views and Public Policy Crime Delinquency, October 1, 2008; 54(4): 532 - 559. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Mascini and D. Houtman Rehabilitation and Repression: Reassessing their Ideological Embeddedness Br. J. Criminol., September 1, 2006; 46(5): 822 - 836. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. K. Applegate, R. K. Davis, C. W. Otto, R. Surette, and B. J. McCarthy The Multifunction Jail: Policy Makers' Views of the Goals of Local Incarceration Criminal Justice Policy Review, June 1, 2003; 14(2): 155 - 170. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. M. Moon, F. T. Cullen, and J. P. Wright It Takes a Village: Public Willingness to Help Wayward Youths Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, January 1, 2003; 1(1): 32 - 45. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Lenz "Luxuries" in Prison: The Relationship Between Amenity Funding and Public Support Crime Delinquency, October 1, 2002; 48(4): 499 - 525. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Cao and F. T. Cullen Thinking about Crime and Control: A Comparative Study of Chinese and American Ideology International Criminal Justice Review, May 1, 2001; 11(1): 58 - 81. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. M. Moon, J. L. Sundt, F. T. Cullen, and J. P. Wright Is Child Saving Dead? Public Support for Juvenile Rehabilitation Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2000; 46(1): 38 - 60. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wright, and M. B. Chamlin Social Support and Social Reform: A Progressive Crime Control Agenda Crime Delinquency, April 1, 1999; 45(2): 188 - 207. [Abstract] [PDF]