Social interaction between employee and offender in supervised probationary freedom in Finland

References

• Bennet, P., & Shuker, R. (2010). Improving prisoner-staff relationships: Exporting Grendon’s good practice. The Howard Journal, 49(5), 491–502.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City: Anchor Books.
   Google Scholar
• Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking. A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bülow, W. (2014). Electronic monitoring of offenders: An ethical review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 20, 505–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnett, R., & McNeill, F. (2005). The place of the officer–offender relationship in assisting offenders to desist from crime. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 52(3), 221–242.
   Google Scholar
• Burr, V. (2015). Social constructionism. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Crewe, B., Liebling, A., & Hulley, S. (2015). Staff-prisoner relationships, staff professionalism, and the use of authority in public- and private-sector prisons. Law & Social Inquiry, 40(2), 309–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Criminal Sanctions Agency. Community sanctions offices. Retrieved from https://www.rikosseuraamus.fi/en/index/units/communitysanctionsoffices.html
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 133–168.
   Google Scholar
• Farrall, S., & Calverley, A. (2005). Understanding desistance from crime: Emerging theoretical directions in resettlement and rehabilitation. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hager, P., & Johnsson, M. C. (2009). Working outside the comfort of competence in a corrections centre: Toward collective competence. Human Resource Development International, 12(5), 493–509.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, R. (2014). The electronic monitoring of offenders: Penal moderation or penal excess? Crime, Law and Social Change, 62, 475–488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, S. (2013). Assisted desistance and experiences of probation supervision. Probation Journal, 60(2), 136–151.
   Google Scholar
• Laub, J., & Sampson, R. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. Crime and Justice, 28, 1–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leggett, K., & Hirons, B. (2006). Security and dynamic security in a therapeutic community prison. In M. Parker & J. Kingsley (Eds.), Dynamic security: The democratic therapeutic community in prison (pp. 232–241). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Libling, A., Price, D., & Shefer, G. (2011). Staff-prisoner relationship: The heart of the prison work. In The prison officer (2nd ed., pp. 83–120). Collumpton: William Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Maguire, M., & Raynor, P. (2006). How the resettlement of prisoners promotes desistance from crime: Or does it? Criminology & Criminal Justice, 6(1), 9–38.
   Google Scholar
• Mäkipää, L. (2010). Valvotun koevapauden toimeenpano ja sovellettavuus [Enforcement and applicability of supervised probationary freedom in Finland]. Helsinki: National research institute of legal policy research report, 249.
   Google Scholar
• Maruna, S., & LeBel, T. P. (2010). The desistance paradigm in correctional practice: From programs to lives. In F. McNeill, P. Raynor, & C. Trotter (Eds.), Offender supervision: New directions in theory, research and practice (pp. 65–89). Collumpton: William Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• McCulloch, T. (2005). Probation, social context and desistance: Retracing the relationship. Probation Journal, 52(1), 8–22.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, F. (2004). Supporting desistance in probation practice: A response to Maruna, Porter and Carvalho. Probation Journal, 51(3), 241–247.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, F., Farral, S., Lightowler, C., & Maruna, S. (2012). How and why people stop offending: Discovering desistance (IRISS Insights, no.15). Published April 2012 on IRISS - The Institute for Research and Innovation in Social Services.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, M. (2010). The art of the possible – Public protection in a closed establishment. Prison Service Journal, 189, 21–24.
   Google Scholar
• Nellis, M. (2014). Understanding the electronic monitoring of offenders in Europe: Expansion, regulation and prospects. Crime, Law and Social Change, 62(4), 489–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peltola, S., & Vesala, K. M. (2013). Constructing entrepreneurial orientation in a selling context: The qualitative attitude approach. Poznan University of Economics Review, 13(1), 26–47.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J. (1996). Discourse analysis and constructionist approaches: Theoretical background. In J. T. E. Richardson (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (pp. 125–140). Leicester: British Psychological Society.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J. (1998). Discursive social psychology: From attitudes to evaluative practices. European Review of Social Psychology, 9(1), 233–266.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J. (2004). Discourse analysis. In M. Hardy & A. Bryman (Eds.), Handbook of data analysis (pp. 607–624). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pyysiäinen, J., & Vesala, K. M. (2013). Activating farmers. Uses of entrepreneurship discourse in the rhetoric of policy implementers. Discourse & Communication, 7(1), 55–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rantanen, T, & Lindqvist, M. (2018). Valvottu koevapaus ja siihen liittyvä päihdekuntoutus rikoksentekijöiden kuntoutuksessa [supervied probationary freedom and the associated substance abuse rehabilitation in the rehabilitation of a perpetrator]. Janus, 26(1), 3–20. doi:10.30668/janus.63165
   Google Scholar
• Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland (2012). The Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity (TENK).
   Google Scholar
• Seppänen, L., Heikkilä, H., Kira, M., Lallimo, J., Ruotsala, R., Schaupp, M., … Ala-Laurinaho, A. (2014). Palveluverkostojen muuttuvat toimintakonseptit. Asiakasymmärrys, välineet ja työhyvinvointi verkostoyhteistyössä [Changing operational concepts of service networks. Customer knowledge, tools and well-being at work in network cooperation]. Tampere: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics of the Criminal Sanctions Agency. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.rikosseuraamus.fi/material/attachments/rise/julkaisut-tilastollinenvuosikirja/xZlsnncf1/RISE_Statistical_Yearbook2017.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tait, S. (2011). A typology of prison officer approaches to care. European Journal of Criminology, 8(6), 440–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Act on the Amendment the Probationary Liberty under Supervision Act (404/2015). Finlex.
   Google Scholar
• The Probationary Liberty under Supervision Act (629/2013). Finlex.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, S. (2010). Case management in corrections: Evidence, issues and challenges. In F. McNeill, P. Raynor, & C. Trotter (Eds.), Offender supervision. New directions in theory, research and practice (pp. 344–366). Collumpton: William Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Vanhaelemeesch, D., Beken, T. V., & Vandevelde, S. (2014). Punishment at home: Offenders’ experiences with electronic monitoring. European Journal of Criminology, 11(3), 273–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verkuyten, M. (1998). Attitudes in public discourse: Speakers’ own orientations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 17(3), 302–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vesala, K. M., & Rantanen, T. (2007). Laadullinen asennetutkimus: Lähtökohtia, periaatteita, mahdollisuuksia [Qualitative attitude approach: Departure points, principles, possibilities]. In K. M.Vesala & T. Rantanen (Eds.), Argumentaatio ja tulkinta: Laadullisen asennetutkimuksen lähestymistapa [Argumentation and interpretation: Qualitative attitude approach] (pp. 11–61). Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
   Google Scholar
• Ylisassi, H., Seppänen., L., Uusitalo, H., Kalavainen, S., & Piispanen, P. (2016). Aktivoiva lähityö: Vankiloiden valvonta- ja ohjaushenkilöstö vuorovaikutuksellista lähityötä kehittämässä [Activating Interactive Work: Developing reciprocal interactive work in prisons with supervision and rehabilitation staff]. Criminal Sanctions Agency publication series, 2. Helsinki: Criminal Sanctions Agency.
   Google Scholar