Talk:Recidivism

message: The update to this page is expected go up later this evening.  The link to our sandbox is Shanti's Sandbox.  Baileyshanti (talk) 20:15, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: The update

message: Measurement of recidivism by sexual offenders is a "catch me if you can" endeavor, since offenders know their honed deception abilities assure they face a very low likelihood that their sexual abuse episodes will be detected or reported. Polygraph testing (see reports by Mrs. Cory Jewell-Jensen and separately by Dr. Anna Salter from their pedophile panel research) show even in treatment the offenders are highly unlikely to be truthful about their reoffending, especially if its disclosure is not self-serving. Law Enforcement, Corrections, and Parole authorities who are charged with minimizing recidivism, have a built-in incentive to keep the definition vague and to allocate scarce investigation resources elsewhere. (dallburn@SafeHarborResources.org July 13, 2005)
* As reported on BBC Radio 4 on 2 September 2005, the United States of America has a 60% recidivism rate, whereas the UK has a 50% recidivism rate. The UK attributes its lower recidivism rate to its focus on rehabilitation and education of prisoners as opposed to the US focus more on punishment, deterent and keeping potentially dangerous individuals away from society. - Recidivism in regards to what? Drugs? Alcohol? Sexual assault? This paragraph should specify. -Branddobbe 19:41, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The deeper problem with the BBC citation is not that it fails to give proper sources, but that it's used at all. A news gathering organization does not research; what are needed are actual statisitics from actual studies, or from Corrections UK, Corrections Canada, the US Justice dept, etc. To lead off with a BBC report is to announce: this is not a serious article.
In the comments on that first section, someone has added a riff on sexual offenders and their ability to hide their own recidivism. I can see the relevance to the TOPIC, but not to this section. Perhaps some studies on pedophile recidivism rates would merit a sub-section of the article.
Further down the page, we have an amazing (perhaps Foucaldian) assertion that recidivism depends on who's defining the violation. Well, with respect, that's a debate that belongs elsewhere, maybe in an article on social deviance, with normative definitions of recidivism as the focus of a critique (and it could link to this page). Otherwise, it merely confuses the topic, by introducing more theoretical concerns where they are not warranted, or, it seems to me, particularly well-grounded. First give the normative meanings and discuss them, then link to the critiques, and the methodological concerns. The writer begins this section with the assertion that the word "effectively" means continued rebellion against authority; again, and with respect, it doesn't. The root form simply means to fall again, and was originally used in the 16th and 17th centuries to label religious apostates or backsliders (see OED). Its application to criminal behaviour is relatively recent, but it has nothing to do with authority per se; that is something the writer has imported into the definition. 
Recividism has also been combatted by trying to educate and retrain prisoners, that is, to make up for some of the social and educational deficits that led them to crime in the first place. Wherever that discussion is, it belongs on this page, since such programs have been shown to have an effect on reducing rates of recidivism. Keep in mind too, that almost all studies have shown that recidivism across most prison systems is slightly below 50 percent, that is, more than half of prisoners returned to society manage not to get busted again. Whether that is because they become better criminals, or because they go straight, is another discussion that perhaps should be on this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theonemacduff (talk • contribs) 21:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overall critique of page - v. weak article 

message: No citations, tagging for cleanup. 86.133.229.194 (talk) 03:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No citations

message: Deleted the claim about this phrase, I don't believe it belongs in the article, is likely unverifiable and a quick search shows at least 5 other alleged originations of this term. 86.133.229.194 (talk) 03:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Div"

message: Looks like the standard "therapy makes psychopaths more manipulative" was the intended claim here rather than "therapy makes psycopaths" but without the benefit of the book...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.178.244 (talk) 14:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: The low recidivism rates of murderers and rapists was interesting. Does anyone have the rates for paedophiles? It's often plastered across certain "news" sources that such individuals are prone to recidivism, yet one wonders if this is truly the case. 87.112.178.244 (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paedophilia Offences 

message: What's the difference between these two sections exactly? I'd suggest just putting all the info in one Statistics section. Theshibboleth (talk) 22:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charts vs. Statistics? 

message: Hi there, just a drive-by note to say that I think Repeat offender should redirect here, possibly via a disambig page, but my preference would be straight here. Cheers. 205.228.108.58 (talk) 03:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeat Offender redirect 

message: I find that the statistics are very skewed towards keeping offenders imprisoned.  If you take the conviction rates of the general population, 15%, and compare them to those who have offended but have earned a pardon, 4%, the stats listed here (40%??) just don't pan out.  Source: http://www.expresspardons.com/bill-c-23b-requires-calm-and-measured-response/
(I am no affiliated the company, just looking for a supporting source.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.70.212.100 (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pardon me? 

message: I just completed an arrgumentative paper on rehabilitaion in prisons. I found that the recidivism rates are lower when inmates  sucessfuly complete rehabilitation programs. Upon research, I found that most prisons and the general idea behind them are on the right track on paper but how come the system is failing to meet their missions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justdrea2012 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rehabilitation is needed to lower recidivism rates 

message: The last sentence of this paragraph is not supported with an adequete citation:
In an effort to equalize the racial make up of those in Rikers, the NYPD is sending whites and women to jail for miner nonviolent crimes at the highest rate in the country. [23]
23.^ BARBARA ROSS, JANON FISHER $1.2M jury award for Playboy beauty February 21, 2012 http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-02-21/news/31084792_1_cab-driver-jury-verdict-cops
This article highlights an incident where Stephanie Adams was awarded damages by a jury for being mishandled by police officers after an incident with a cab driver.  Not only does this article not state or cite statistics pertaining to whites or women being sent to Rikers island at a higher rate than other parts in the country, it does not even contain anything which suggests that this is true.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badguy15 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsupported claim in 4.1 

message: The article mentions the US and UK, but what about other nations? It seems likely bringing the Scandinavian nations in here could be interesting to many readers due to the extraordinarily low recidivism rates (About 20% in Norway for example, a quick Google reveals this source: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00.html#ixzz0n9t8l6FT )
El.vegaro (talk) 07:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other nations? 

message: Content:
The content is good, yet very broad. Thinking about who the audience will be, it could help to break it down a bit more. A way to do this would be to also talk about the offenses that African-Americans are criminalized for in comparison to Whites. What are the differences in charges? What are the differences in served time? What are the differences in type of crime? You could also create various links that you don’t have to go into detail (because they already have wiki pages) but can further explain recidivism, such as linking it to institutionalized racism, school-to-prison pipeline, private prisons, prison-industrial complex etc.
“A cultural re-grounding of African Americans is important to improve self-esteem and help develop a sense of community” is a bit confusing. Is this “cultural re-grounding of African Americans” and “develop[ment] of a sense of community” Is this referring to something that should take place while they are imprisoned? Or is it a broader comment in regards to people of African descent?
In regards to the programs that address “social skills training and social problem solving,” it would be helpful to be more specific. What are examples of these programs? What type of social skills? What type of social problems would they address?
Also, because recidivism is related to racism, it would be great to mention programs that educate employers, detention centers, prisons, and communities about this unjust situation. You could also mention groups that are trying to address prison abolition. You could make a link to The New Jim Crow or Angela Davis.
There are a few places where grammar could be tweaked-I (Becca) would be happy to help. I love proofreading (seriously). Also, the term "Caucasian" is a misnomer for white people-if you look it up on Wikipedia, it leads you to information about peoples of the Caucasus region (the border of Europe and Asia). I understand that can be tricky if your source uses the classification "Caucasian" though.
Additionally, the section titled "Reducing Recidivism Among African-Americans" seems a little unclear to me (Becca)-the language about conformity implies heightened social control, and I'm not sure that's what the intended meaning is. (I hope that makes sense!)
Figure:
Did you make this image? Is it an original? If so it’s great! if not it would be good to turn it into a simplistic chart/graph. Otherwise, good job.
If you make another graph, it may be helpful to have something specifically about recidivism--the current graph refers generically to incarceration rates.
References:
The references in the introduction do not have a link. We were unable to check the quality and appropriateness of the rest of the references because you did not include your sources, so just remember to try to vary your sources so they aren't all one type (textbooks, primary literature, and review articles are mentioned in the rubric). Also, you didn’t include a content box.
=== Peer Review Response ===
Thank you for your feedback; it was definitely insightful. We agree in part with your assessment of the broad nature of our contribution. Because this article deals solely with recidivism, we did not feel it was appropriate to discuss charges, institutional racism, etc. However, we will take your suggestion and provide links to the appropriate pages so that the reader can explore further if they wish.
We will also take your suggestion regarding mentioning programs that work to reduce recidivism. In addition, we will work to clear up the confusion within the section "Reducing Recidivism Among African-Americans". We are definitely not trying to convey that African-Americans should conform.
The figure was found on the website the librarian showed us in class (the name escapes me at this moment). We will consider creating our own figure, or at the very least, provide better citations for it.
We apologize for the references. We are still trying to work out the bugs. We will have that complete this weekend.
Again, thank you for your insights. We will use them to strengthen our article. Baileyshanti (talk) 16:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review and Responses During the Educational Assignment in Winter 2014 

message: Thank you for your feedback; it was definitely insightful. We agree in part with your assessment of the broad nature of our contribution. Because this article deals solely with recidivism, we did not feel it was appropriate to discuss charges, institutional racism, etc. However, we will take your suggestion and provide links to the appropriate pages so that the reader can explore further if they wish.
We will also take your suggestion regarding mentioning programs that work to reduce recidivism. In addition, we will work to clear up the confusion within the section "Reducing Recidivism Among African-Americans". We are definitely not trying to convey that African-Americans should conform.
The figure was found on the website the librarian showed us in class (the name escapes me at this moment). We will consider creating our own figure, or at the very least, provide better citations for it.
We apologize for the references. We are still trying to work out the bugs. We will have that complete this weekend.
Again, thank you for your insights. We will use them to strengthen our article. Baileyshanti (talk) 16:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review Response 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Recidivism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120403072111/http://reentrypolicy.org/Report/About to http://reentrypolicy.org/Report/About
*Added  tag to http://triweb.tresearch.org/download/issue_briefs/Exploring%20the%20Intersection%20of%20Mental%20Health%20and%20Recidivism.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article touches upon statistics from studies published in 2009, however, the statistics from said study are from 1994 which can seem very outdated considering the altered political climate on incarceration since 1994 which has effects on crime statistics. This can be seen in the overview section of the article with a graph that is used from statistics in 1994. Thus, the numbers used from the study may not correctly represent today or even the past five years which can lead to misleading representations of recidivism. There are statistics that are up to date such as statistics taken from the BJS which were last updated in 2005 and are still the statistics used currently on their website. As has already been addressed earlier on the talk page there are areas of the article that are missing citations.
Looking at the California section of this article it does seem to be out of date. Upon researching on the California Department of Corrections website in 2009, the recidivism rate was lower than what was mentioned in the article."2013 Outcome Evaluation Report", "California Department of Corrections and Rehabiliation", January 2014 Moreover, California is no longer the state with the highest recidivism rate in the nation according to a PEW study conducted from 2004-2007."State Of Recidivism", "The Pew Center on the States", April 2011  The California portion of the article is very disconnected as it states what the offenders receive while in prison but it does not make a connection to recidivism rates. I also researched the citation link [41] and found that it directs me to the top story page on the California Government website of Governor Jerry Brown. The issue lies in  the fact that the 'top story' updates to new issues periodically, so I could not find information or statistics in regards to the prison system or recidivism as the current 'top story' when I reviewed the article (11/7/2017) was on the European Union and there was no clear way to find a quick link to what the California recidivism section was written upon.Mgmarkulin (talk) 18:32, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of Date Information and missing content 

message: The article touches upon stakeholders or those affected by recidivism. It does mention many of those affected, however,  it does not mention the taxpayers. Tax payers are adversely affected as their tax money goes into the prison system instead of other places of society.."The High Budgetary Cost of Incarceration", "Center for Economic and Policy Research", 2010 Moreover, the price to house an inmate is consistently rising as they are provided housing, food, health care and other programs. It is not only the fact that tax money is funneled to provide these necessary functions for inmates but a person who pays taxes (whether sales tax or income tax) and is an active consumer in the economy is no longer a tax producer in the economy as they are now a tax consumer once incarcerated. 
Another section that could be added is global recidivism rates, especially in countries that can be deemed similar to the united states whether democratically or economically."A Systematic Review of Criminal Recidivism Rates Worldwide: Current Difficulties and Recommendations for Best Practice", "PLoS One", 2015 This would allow for more context on a global scale. Also mentioned on the talk page was that places in Northern Europe have very low recidivism rates which can then be added to this article on ways to look at or try to deal with recidivism. Moreover, there could be more context added on many of the state statistics as the information seems very narrow especially in a state such as California with one of the highest recidivism rates. What are causes of recidivism pertaining to California? Are there any policies measures that have been put in place to aide in lowering recidivism? Have past policies worked or failed? Has the recidivism rate dropped in a  10 year span, 20 year span, and so on?Mgmarkulin (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What could be added 

message: In this article there are a few mentions of how education can reduce recidivism. However, there was more of a concerted effort to view recidivism in relation to finding employment. Education has been stated in studies to reduce recidivism significantly.."Justice and Education Departments Announce New Research Showing Prison Education Reduces Recidivism, Saves Money, Improves Employment", "The United States Department of Justice", 2013 Moreover, there are different statistics when an inmate has obtained a GED, an inmate has taken one college course or an inmate has completed an Associates Degree. There should be an expansion or a section created to address the effects that education has on individuals within the prison system or those that have been released from the system.Mgmarkulin (talk) 19:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education and Recidivism 

message: The 15th reference has a typo in the name of the primary author: it should be Tripodi, not Tripoli. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Velteau (talk • contribs) 01:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo in References 

message: — Assignment last updated by Editi2000 (talk) 02:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access