NCJ Number
185239
Journal
Canadian Journal of Criminology Volume: 42 Issue: 4 Dated: October 2000 Pages: 421-447
Date Published
October 2000
Length
27 pages
Annotation
This study examined the decision making processes underlying recommendations to the National Parole Board in Canada, with emphasis on consistency and biases in recommendations between decisions made under the unstructured criteria in the current Correctional Service of Canada decision making guidelines and those made under more structured guidelines.
Abstract
The participants were 68 case management officers recruited from medium-security Federal institutions for males in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, and a matched sample of 67 community members obtained through nonprofit community organizations in Regina, Saskatchewan. The research tested the hypothesis that the use of structured criteria would eliminate the negative effects of a potentially biasing variable (race) and would increase consistency in decision making. Results indicated that consistency in decision making would have increased if participants who used the structured criteria had relied exclusively on the tabled risk score. Results also indicated that native offenders were not less likely than white offenders to be recommended for parole. Furthermore, case management officers were not more consistent in their recommendations than were the community sample. Findings suggested that consistency in decision making by case management officers is not as high as would be desirable and that consistency between trained and experienced correctional personnel is no higher than that among laypersons. Further research should focus on conditional release recommendations and should guide change and its practical implementation. Tables, notes, and 58 references (Author abstract modified)