Author
Listed:
- Spohr, Stephanie A.
- Taxman, Faye S.
- Walters, Scott T.
Abstract
The criminal justice system tends to emphasize external contingencies (e.g., fees, jail time) to motivate offender compliance. However, people’s reasons for desistance vary considerably. This study evaluated the acceptability, utility, and predictive validity of questions that ask about people’s reasons for wanting to successfully complete probation. Substance-using probationers (N=113) participated in a web-based computer intervention that targeted substance use and treatment initiation. Questions around seven dimensions of reasons for completing probation were developed to provide tailored feedback during the web-based program. A principle components factor analysis found that survey items loaded onto two distinct factors. Factor one, “Tangible Loss” focused on external and present-focused reasons. Factor two, “Better Life” focused on internal and future-focused reasons. There was a significant negative association between Better Life scores and days of substance use after two months (β=−0.31, SE=0.13, p<0.05). There was a significant positive association with Better Life scores and days of treatment attendance (β=1.46, SE=0.26, p<0.001). Tangible Loss scores were no associated with substance use and treatment attendance. These findings may help to create more effective motivational tracks in e-health interventions, and may complement traditional motivation measures with an explicit focus on people’s stated reasons for wanting to complete probation.
Suggested Citation
Spohr, Stephanie A. & Taxman, Faye S. & Walters, Scott T., 2017.
"People’s reasons for wanting to complete probation: Use and predictive validity in an e-health intervention,"
Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 144-149.
Handle:
RePEc:eee:epplan:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:144-149
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.01.001
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:144-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.