CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 207Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyCrime Patterns and Interventions

Religious programs and recidivism among former inmates in Prison Fellowship programs: A long-term follow-up study

Johnson, Byron R.·2004·Justice Quarterly
DOI 10.1080/07418820400095831
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In the mid-1990s, Prison Fellowship (PF), a nonprofit religious ministry to prisoners, commissioned a study to determine the relationship, if any, between religious programming and recidivism. Subsequent research found no difference between PF and non-PF inmates on measures of recidivism. Inmates most active in PF Bible studies, however, were significantly less likely to be arrested during a 1-year follow-up period. This study extends and improves on previous research by: (1) increasing the recidivism window from 1 to 8 years; (2) incorporating new approaches to measuring program participation; (3) including two measures of recidivism—rearrest and reincarceration; and (4) using survival analysis and proportional hazards modeling to present and analyze the data. Results from survival analyses indicate: (1) no difference in median time to rearrest or reincarceration between PF and non-PF groups throughout the 8-year study period; (2) participants with higher levels of participation in Bible studies were less likely to be rearrested at 2 and 3 years after release, though the effect diminishes over time; (3) statistical differences across groups only border significance at 2 and 3 years for reincarceration; and (4) proportional hazards modeling shows that high participation in Bible studies significantly reduces the hazard of rearrest at years 2 and 3.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07418820400095831

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Of the 60 delinquency/crime studies with quality ratings of 7 or higher, 49 (82%) reported inverse relationships and only one study found a positive relationship.

    “Of the 60 studies with quality ratings of 7 or higher, 49 (82%) reported inverse relationships [240–252] and only one study found a positive relationship [253].”

    From Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications (2012) · cites this paper as [245]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Johnson, B. R.
Affiliations
Baylor University (US)
Corresponding author
Johnson, Byron R.
ORCID
Johnson, Byron R.
Venue
Justice Quarterly
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2004-06-01
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
329-354
ISSN
  • 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9109
DOI
10.1080/07418820400095831
OpenAlex
W1974870788
Cited by
207
References
41
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
17.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
Keywords
recidivism, Bible study, rearrest, reincarceration, former prisoners, long-term follow-up, program participation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review