The effects of judicial supervision on recidivism of offenders in Australia and New Zealand: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

This meta-analysis compares recidivism reduction in problem-solving courts employing judicial supervision in Australia and New Zealand to traditional processes. Using a four-phased search strategy, 16 studies totalling a treatment sample of 6588 individuals and 32,147 comparison participants were identified from 7161 unique records. Meta-analyses indicate that the problem-solving courts significantly reduced both the odds and incidences of recidivism compared with standard justice processes but that the heterogeneity observed within the latter analysis plus reliance on weak methodologies limits the strength of these conclusions. Studies at risk of bias may have had an undue influence on the odds of recidivism analysis. Additionally, the benefits of treatment on the incidence of recidivism are closely linked to the overlap of measurement and treatment periods. The findings suggest a positive impact from judicial supervision but further rigorous research is needed that closely matches experimental samples, strictly measures participants post-intervention and meticulously reports pertinent information.

Keywords:

• judicial supervision
• judicial monitoring
• problem-solving courts
• recidivism
• therapeutic jurisprudence

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to all individuals who supplied or assisted with obtaining requested information.

Ethical standards

Declaration of conflicts of interest

Michael D. Trood has declared no conflicts of interest

Benjamin L. Spivak has declared no conflicts of interest

James R. P. Ogloff has declared no conflicts of interest

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Data availability statement

The raw data and accompanying code script may be accessed online at https://github.com/mtrood/effects-of-judicial-supervision-on-recidivisim-of-offenders-in-Australia-and-New-Zealand.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material is available via the “Supplementary” tab on the article’s online page (https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1956385).