IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/772.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pick a number. Mapping recidivism measures and their consequences

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Recidivism studies differ with respect to samples, definitions and follow-up periods. While it is recognized that such differences hamper comparability, there is little systematic knowledge about how recidivism figures are affected. We explore how deliberate changes in the following three parameters affect the reported recidivism levels: 1) sample definition, 2) measure of recidivism, and 3) length of follow up. We use administrative records from Norway which allow using total offender populations and combining information from several sources. Our results show that the proportion of reoffenders varies from 9 to 53 percent, depending on how, among whom and for how long recidivism is measured.

Suggested Citation

  • Synøve Nygaard Andersen & Torbjørn Skardhamar, 2014. "Pick a number. Mapping recidivism measures and their consequences," Discussion Papers 772, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/en/forskning/discussion-papers/_attachment/166596
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Torbjørn Skardhamar & Kjetil Telle, 2009. "Life after prison The relationship between employment and re-incarceration," Discussion Papers 597, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Bowles, Roger Arthur & Florackis, Chrisostomos, 2007. "Duration of the time to reconviction: Evidence from UK prisoner discharge data," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 365-378.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Synøve N. Andersen & Kjetil Telle, 2016. "Electronic monitoring and recidivism. Quasi-experimental evidence from Norway," Discussion Papers 844, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Sivertsson, Fredrik, 2018. "Adulthood-limited offending: How much is there to explain?," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 58-70.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benjamin Monnery, 2015. "The determinants of recidivism among ex-prisoners: a survival analysis on French data," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 37-56, February.
    2. Bence Czafit & János Köllő, 2015. "Employment and wages before and after incarceration – evidence from Hungary," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Köllő, János & Czafit, Bence, 2014. "Labor Market Careers Before and After Incarceration," IZA Discussion Papers 8644, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Torbjørn Skardhamar & Kjetil Telle, 2009. "Life after prison The relationship between employment and re-incarceration," Discussion Papers 597, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    5. Thomas Søbirk Petersen, 2016. "Some Ethical Considerations on the use of Criminal Records in the Labor Market: in Defense of a New Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 443-453, December.
    6. János Kollo & Bence Czafit, 2014. "Labor Market Careers before and after Incarceration," Budapest Working Papers on the Labour Market 1408, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    7. Saputra, Sony & Pradiptyo, Rimawan, 2012. "On Assessment of the Supreme Court Decisions in Tackling Substance Misuse in Indonesia," MPRA Paper 36381, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Yonai, Shachar & Levine, Stephen Z. & Glicksohn, Joseph, 2013. "A national population based examination of the association between age-versatility trajectories and recidivism rates," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 467-476.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:772. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.