DOI: 10.3886/icpsr06986
title: Multisite Evaluation of Shock Incarceration: [Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas], 1987-1992
title: Archival Version

description: This study analyzes shock incarceration (boot camp)
 programs in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South
 Carolina, and Texas. In each state, offenders who participated in boot
 camps were compared with demographically similar offenders who were
 sentenced to prison, probation, or parole. The impact of shock
 incarceration on offenders was assessed in two major areas: (1)
 changes in offenders' attitudes, expectations, and outlook during
 incarceration (self-report/attitude data), and (2) performance during
 and adjustment to community supervision after incarceration (community
 supervision data). The self-report/attitude data include variables
 measuring criminal history, drinking and drug abuse, and attitudes
 toward the shock incarceration program, as well as demographic
 variables, such as age, race, employment, income, education, and
 military experience. The community supervision data contain
 information on offenders' behaviors during community supervision, such
 as arrests, absconding incidents, jail time, drug use, education and
 employment experiences, financial and residential stability, and
 contacts with community supervision officers, along with
 demographic variables, such as age and race. In addition to these key
 areas, more detailed data were collected in Louisiana, including a
 psychological assessment, a risk and needs assessment, and a community
 supervision follow-up at two different time periods (Parts 11-18). For
 most states, the subjects sampled in the self-report/attitude survey
 were different from those who were surveyed in the community
 supervision phase of data collection. Data collection practices and
 sample structures differed by state, and therefore the data files are
 organized to explore the impact of shock incarceration at the state
level. For each state, the unit of analysis is the offender.
description: This study was designed to analyze shock
 incarceration (boot camp) programs in Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
 Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. It was guided
 primarily by two research questions: (1) Are shock incarceration
 programs successful in fulfilling stated program goals? and (2) What
 particular components of shock incarceration programs lead to success
or failure in fulfilling program goals?
description: This study consists of two main parts: offender
 comparison and change during incarceration (self-report/attitude data)
 and offender adjustment to community supervision (community
 supervision data). Self-report/attitude data are available for five
 states (Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and South Carolina). In
 each state, a sample of shock incarceration inmates was compared to a
 sample of traditional prison inmates during incarceration. Subjects in
 both samples completed a self-report questionnaire twice in a repeated
 measure design. The first questionnaire was completed early in their
 incarceration and the second was administered approximately 90 days
 later, except in Louisiana where the survey was administered at three
 points in time. The questionnaire consisted of personal history and
 attitude items. Demographic data were also collected on each subject
 from official records. Community supervision data, which are available
 for all seven states, were compiled to compare three samples of
 offenders: (1) shock incarceration graduates, (2) offenders on
 probation or parole, and (3) shock incarceration dropouts. In most
 states, data were collected at three-month intervals for one year. In
 Oklahoma, data were collected at two time periods. Offenders in Texas
 were followed for two years. In Louisiana, subjects were evaluated
 after one year and again after two years. For most states, the
 subjects sampled in the self-report/attitude survey were different
 from those who were surveyed in the community supervision of data
 collection. Data collection practices and sample structures differed
 by state, and therefore the data files are organized to explore the impact
 of shock incarceration at the state level. For each state, the unit of
analysis is the shock or comparison group offender.
description: The self-report/attitude data files measure
 offender comparison and change during incarceration. The same core
 questionnaire was used in Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and South
 Carolina. Variables in these files include type of crime committed,
 prior arrests and convictions, juvenile delinquency, drinking and drug
 use, attitudes toward the shock program, asocial attitudes, and
 demographic information, such as age, race, employment, income,
 education, and military experience. The South Carolina file also has a
 sex variable, since the sample includes both men and women. The other
 data files measure offender adjustment to community supervision. The
 same core questionnaire was used in Florida, Georgia, and South
 Carolina. Variables in these files include type of crime committed,
 prior arrests and convictions, and demographic information, such as
 age and race. In addition, information about offenders' behaviors
 during community supervision was recorded, including arrests,
 absconding incidents, jail time, pending violations, revocations, drug
 use, educational and employment experiences, financial and residential
 stability, overall progress in the program, and number and types of
 contacts with community supervision officers. The South Carolina file
 contains an additional variable, age at first arrest. The Georgia
 file contains additional variables from a two-year follow-up that
 measure arrests, revocations, abscondings, and legal releases. The
 Louisiana files contain more detailed information than the other state
 files (Parts 11-18). In addition to similar self-report and community
 supervision variables, the Louisiana data provide other
 attitude and psychological variables. These include the Jessness
 personality inventory, attitudes toward shock incarceration, locus of
 control, perceived control of events, coping methods, state-trait
anxiety, assertive interactions, and conflicts in prison.
description: Response Rates: Not applicable.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used, along with the
 Jessness Antisocial Attitudes Scale, a Motivation to Change scale, a
 Beneficial Expectation scale, an Attitudes Towards Prison/IMPACT
(shock) scale, and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory items.
description: States were selected based on the existence of shock
 incarceration programs that varied along key hypothesized dimensions.
 Respondents were sampled differently in each state. In many cases
 convenience samples were used, selecting the first offenders that met
 the eligibility criteria until the sample goal was reached. In other
cases, random sampling was used.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Florida Self-Report/Attitude Data
DS2: Georgia Self-Report/Attitude Data
DS3: South Carolina Self-Report/Attitude Data
DS4: Oklahoma Self-Report/Attitude Data
DS5: Florida Community Supervision Data
DS6: Georgia Community Supervision Data
DS7: South Carolina Community Supervision Data
DS8: Oklahoma Community Supervision Data
DS9: Illinois Community Supervision Data
DS10: Texas Community Supervision Data
DS11: Louisiana Demographic Records for Community Supervision Data
DS12: Louisiana Demographic Records for Self-Report Data
DS13: Louisiana Psychological Data
DS14: Louisiana Self-Report Data
DS15: Louisiana Attitude Data
DS16: Louisiana Risk/Needs Assessment Data
DS17: Louisiana One-Year Community Supervision Follow-Up Data
DS18: Louisiana Two-Year Community Supervision Follow-Up Data
description: All states with shock incarceration programs and all
youthful offenders serving sentences in state institutions.
description: The codebook and data collection instruments are
 provided as Portable Document Format (PDF) files. The PDF file format
 was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using
 PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on
 how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided through the
ICPSR Website on the Internet.