Predicting recidivism: psychosocial collateral consequences among registered offenders

References

• Ackerman, A. R., Sacks, M., & Greenberg, D. F. (2012). Legislation targeting sex offenders: Are recent policies effective in reducing rape? Justice Quarterly, 29(6), 858–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.566887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, H.R. 4472, 109th. (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Agan, A. (2011). Sex offender registries: Fear without function? Journal of Law and Economics, 54, 207–239. https://doi.org/10.1086/658483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Babchishin, K. M., & Helmus, L. M. (2016). The influence of base rates on correlations: An evaluation of proposed alternative effect sizes with real-world data. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 1021–1031. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0627-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bazemore, G., & Stinchcomb, J. (2004). A civic engagement model of reentry: Involving community through service and restorative justice. Fed. Probation, 68, 14–24.
   Google Scholar
• Bonnar-Kidd, K. K. (2010). Sexual offender laws and prevention of sexual violence or recidivism. American Journal of Public Health, 100(3), 412–419. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2008.153254
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, K., Spencer, J., & Deakin, J. (2007). The reintegration of sex offenders: Barriers and opportunities for employment. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, 46(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2007.00452.x
   Google Scholar
• Budd, K. M., & Mancini, C. M. (2016). Crime control theater: Public (mis)perceptions of the effectiveness of sex offender residence restrictions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22(4), 362–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burchfield, K. B., & Mingus, W. (2008). Not in my neighborhood: Assessing registered sex offenders’ experiences with local social capital and social control. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(3), 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854807311375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chajewski, M., & Mercado, C. C. (2009). An evaluation of sex offender residency restriction functioning in town, county, and city-wide jurisdictions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403408320845
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, G. S., Ogundimu, E. O., & Altman, D. G. (2016). Sample size considerations for the external validation of a multivariable prognostic model: A resampling study. Statistics in Medicine, 35(2), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craun, S. W., & Bierie, D. M. (2014). Are the collateral consequences of being a registered sex offender as bad as we think: A methodological research note. Fed. Probation, 78, 28–31.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, W., & Hensley, C. (2001). Contextualizing sex offender management legislation and policy: Evaluating the problem of latent consequences in community notification laws. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X01451006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, D., Trahan, A., & Laird, K. (2021). Shame and blame: Secondary stigma among families of convicted sex offenders. Criminology & Criminal Justice. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211017391
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, E. (2020). Toward a focused conceptualization and measurement of collateral consequences: A systematic review. Sexual Abuse, 34, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063220981906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, E., Sanchez, D., & Ferrara, M. L. (2021). Measuring collateral consequences among individuals registered for a sexual offense: Development of the sexual offender collateral consequences measure. Sexual Abuse, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632211019733
   Google Scholar
• Hanson, R. K., Bourgon, G., Helmus, L., & Hodgson, S. (2009). The principles of effective correctional treatment also apply to sexual offenders: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(9), 865–891. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809338545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, R. K., Harris, A. J. R., Letourneau, E., Helmus, L. M., & Thornton, D. (2018). Reductions in risk based on time offense-free in the community: Once a sexual offender, not always a sexual offender. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(6), 1154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, A. J. R., & Hanson, R. K. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question (Vol. 3). Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, E. M., & Rolfe, S. M. (2016). “The Sleeping Army”: Necropolitics and the Collateral Consequences of Being a Sex OffenderThe sleeping army”: Necropolitics and the collateral consequences of being a sex offender. Deviant Behavior, 38(9), 975–990. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1229947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, 42 U.S.C. 14071. (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Jeglic, E. L., Mercado, C. C., & Levenson, J. S. (2012). The prevalence and correlates of depression and hopelessness among sex offenders subject to community notification and residence restriction legislation. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(1), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-010-9096-9
   Google Scholar
• Jennings, W. G., Zgoba, K. M., & Tewksbury, R. (2012). A comparative longitudinal analysis of recidivism trajectories and collateral consequences for sex and non-sex offenders released since the implementation of sex offender registration and community notification. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(3), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.662062
   Google Scholar
• Kruttschnitt, C., Uggen, C., & Shelton, K. (2000). Predictors of desistance among sex offenders: The interaction of formal and informal social controls. Justice Quarterly, 17(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820000094481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langan, P., Schmitt, E., & Durose, M. (2003). Recidivism of Sex offenders released from prison in 1994. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 15(1), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2002.15.1.58
   Google Scholar
• Lasher, M. P., & McGrath, R. J. (2012). The impact of community notification on sex offender reintegration: A quantitative review of the research literature. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X10387524
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lester, J. L. (2007). Off to elba: The legitimacy of sex offender residence and employment restrictions. Akron L. Rev, 40, 1–37.
   Google Scholar
• Letourneau, E. J., & Armstrong, K. S. (2008). Recidivism rates for registered and nonregistered juvenile sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse, 20(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063208324661
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Letourneau, E. J., Bandyopadhyay, D., Armstrong, K. S., & Sinha, D. (2010). Do sex offender registration and notification requirements deter juvenile sex crimes? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(5), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810363562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levenson, J., & Tewksbury, R. (2009). Collateral damage: Family members of registered sex offenders. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(1-2), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-008-9055-x
   Google Scholar
• Levenson, J. S. (2018). Sex offender management policies and evidence-based recommendations for registry reform. Current Psychiatry Reports, 20(21), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-018-0884-0
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levenson, J. S., & Cotter, L. P. (2005). The effect of megan’s Law on sex offender reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986204271676
   Google Scholar
• Levenson, J. S., D'Amora, D. A., & Hern, A. L. (2007). Megan's law and its impact on community re-entry for sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25(4), 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.770
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloyd, C. D., & Serin, R. C. (2012). Agency and outcome expectancies for crime desistance: measuring offenders’ personal beliefs about change. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(6), 543–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2010.511221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logan, W. A. (2013). Informal collateral consequences. Wash. L. Rev, 88, 1103–1118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Megan’s Law, Pub. L. No. 104-145, 110 Stat. 1345. (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Meloy, M., Curtis, K., & Boatwright, J. (2013). The sponsors of sex offender bills speak up: Policy makers’ perceptions of sex offenders, sex crimes, and sex offender legislation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(4), 438–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854812455740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercado, C. C., Alvarez, S., & Levenson, J. (2008). The impact of specialized sex offender legislation on community reentry. Sexual Abuse, 20(2), 188–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063208317540
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mingus, W., & Burchfield, K. B. (2012). From prison to integration: Applying modified labeling theory to sex offenders. Criminal Justice Studies, 25(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2012.657906
   Google Scholar
• Moore, K., Stuewig, J., & Tangney, J. (2013). Jail inmates’ perceived and anticipated stigma: Implications for post-release functioning. Self and Identity, 12(5), 527–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2012.702425
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, K. E., Stuewig, J. B., & Tangney, J. P. (2016). The effect of stigma on criminal offenders’ functioning: A longitudinal mediational model. Deviant Behavior, 37(2), 196–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2014.1004035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Motivans, M. (2015). Federal justice statistics, 2011-2012. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Pham, A. T., Nunes, K. L., Maimone, S., & Hermann, C. A. (2021). How accurately can researchers measure criminal history, sexual deviance, and risk of sexual recidivism from self-report information alone? Journal of Sexual Aggression, 27, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2020.1741709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinard, M. (2006). An integrated perspective on the collateral consequences of criminal convictions and reentry issues faced by formerly incarcerated individuals. BUL Rev, 86, 623–690.
   Google Scholar
• Prescott, J. J., & Rockoff, J. E. (2011). Do sex offender registration and notification laws affect criminal behavior? The Journal of Law and Economics, 54(1), 161–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/658485
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przybylski, R. (2015). Recidivism of adult sexual offenders. U.S. Department of Justice, Sex Offender Management Assessment and Planning Initiative. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID¼271086.
   Google Scholar
• Ragusa-Salerno, L. M., & Zgoba, K. M. (2012). Taking stock of 20 years of sex offender laws and research: An examination of whether sex offender legislation has helped or hindered our efforts. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(3), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.662069
   Google Scholar
• Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC area, Cohen's d, and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29(5), 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-6832-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbers, M. L. (2009). Lifers on the outside: Sex offenders and disintegrative shaming. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X07312953
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J. (2008). The mythical divide between collateral and direct consequences of criminal convictions: Involuntary commitment of sexually violent predators. Minn. L. Rev, 93, 670–740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolfe, S. M. (2017). When a sex offender comes to visit: A national assessment of travel restrictions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403417742948
   Google Scholar
• Sample, L. L., & Bray, T. M. (2003). Are sex offenders dangerous? Criminology & Public Policy, 3(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2003.tb00024.x
   Google Scholar
• Sample, L. L., & Bray, T. M. (2006). Are sex offenders different? An examination of rearrest patterns. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403405282916
   Google Scholar
• Sandler, J. C., Freeman, N. J., & Socia, K. M. (2008). Does a watched pot boil? A time-series analysis of New York state's sex offender registration and notification law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14(4), 284–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013881
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaible, L. M., & Hughes, L. A. (2011). Crime, shame, reintegration, and cross-national homicide: A partial test of reintegrative shaming theory. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(1), 104–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2010.01193.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SociaJrK. M., & Stamatel, J. P. (2010). Assumptions and evidence behind sex offender laws: Registration, community notification, and residence restrictions. Sociology Compass, 4(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2009.00251.x
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, J. (1986). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Tangney, J. P., Stuewig, J., & Martinez, A. G. (2014). Two faces of shame: The roles of shame and guilt in predicting recidivism. Psychological Science, 25(3), 799–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613508790
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R. (2005). Collateral consequences of sex offender registration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986204271704
   Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R. (2012). Stigmatization of sex offenders. Deviant Behavior, 33(8), 606–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2011.636690
   Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R., Jennings, W. G., & Zgoba, K. M. (2012). A longitudinal examination of sex offender recidivism prior to and following the implementation of SORN. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30(3), 308–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.1009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R., & Mustaine, E. H. (2007). Collateral consequences and community re-entry for registered sex offenders with child victims: Are the challenges even greater?
   Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R., & Zgoba, K. M. (2010). Collateral Consequences and Community Re-Entry for Registered Sex Offenders with Child Victims: Are the Challenges Even Greater?Perceptions and coping with punishment: How registered sex offenders respond to stress, internet restrictions, and the collateral consequences of registration. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 46(1-2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509670802071550
   Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, R. T., & Jennings, W. G. (2010). Assessing the impact of sex offender registration and community notification on sex-offending trajectories. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(5), 570–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810363570
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Texas Code of Criminal Procedure - CRIM P Art. 62.007. (2021). Risk Assessment Review Committee; Sex Offender Screening Tool. Retrieved on 01/01/2022 from: https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/docs/cr/htm/cr.62.htm
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, D. (2006). Age and sexual recidivism: A variable connection. Sexual Abuse, 18(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320601800202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Travis, J. (2005). But they all come back: Facing the challenges of prisoner reentry. Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Smeden, M., de Groot, J. A., Moons, K. G., Collins, G. S., Altman, D. G., Eijkemans, M. J., & Reitsma, J. B. (2016). No rationale for 1 variable per 10 events criterion for binary logistic regression analysis. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0267-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergouwe, Y., Steyerberg, E. W., Eijkemans, M. J. C., & Habbeman, J. D. F. (2005). Substantial effective samples sizes were required for external validation studies of predictive logistic regression models. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(5), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.06.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vittinghoff, E., & McCulloch, C. E. (2007). Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. American Journal of Epidemiology, 165(6), 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwk052
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakefield, H. (2006). The vilification of sex offenders: Do laws targeting sex offenders increase recidivism and sexual violence. Journal of Sexual Offender Civil Commitment: Science and the Law, 1, 141–149.
   Google Scholar
• Wheelock, D. (2005). Collateral consequences and racial inequality: Felon status restrictions as a system of disadvantage. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986204271702
   Google Scholar
• Wheelock, D., & Uggen, C. (2005). Race, poverty and punishment: The impact of criminal sanctions on racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic inequality. The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Persist, 23–47.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3), 1–13. http://ro.ecu.edu.au/jephc/vol8/iss3/1 https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93
   Google Scholar
• Worthington, R. L., & Navarro, R. L. (2003). Pathways to the future: Analyzing the contents of a content analysis. The Counseling Psychologist, 31(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000002239402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zevitz, R. G., & Farkas, M. A. (2000). Sex offender community notification: Assessing the impact in wisconsin. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Zgoba, K. M., Levenson, J., & McKee, T. (2009). Examining the impact of sex offender residence restrictions on housing availability. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20(1), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403408322119
   Google Scholar