2021/10/27 by Michael D. Trood, Benjamin Spivak, James R. P. Ogloff · 1 citation
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending #Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis #Crime Patterns and Interventions
paper · doi:10.1080/13218719.2021.1956385
openalex publication_date 2021/10/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/14
This meta-analysis compares recidivism reduction in problem-solving courts employing judicial supervision in Australia and New Zealand to traditional processes. Using a four-phased search strategy, 16 studies totalling a treatment sample of 6588 individuals and 32,147 comparison participants were identified from 7161 unique records. Meta-analyses indicate that the problem-solving courts significantly reduced both the odds and incidences of recidivism compared with standard justice processes but that the heterogeneity observed within the latter analysis plus reliance on weak methodologies limits the strength of these conclusions. Studies at risk of bias may have had an undue influence on the odds of recidivism analysis. Additionally, the benefits of treatment on the incidence of recidivism are closely linked to the overlap of measurement and treatment periods. The findings suggest a positive impact from judicial supervision but further rigorous research is needed that closely matches experimental samples, strictly measures participants post-intervention and meticulously reports pertinent information.