Cited by 43Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesCriminal Justice and Penology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Closing the Revolving Door?: Substance Abuse Treatment as an Alternative to Traditional Sentencing for Drug-Dependent Offenders

Warner, Tara D., Kramer, John H.·2009·Criminal Justice and Behavior

Abstract

The criminal justice system is often viewed as a revolving door for drug-dependent offenders due to its failure to recognize the association between addiction and offending, and repeated incarceration of drug-dependent offenders has contributed to prison overcrowding. The authors evaluated the effectiveness of Pennsylvania's drug and alcohol treatment-based intermediate punishment, Restrictive Intermediate Punishments (RIP/D&A), at reducing the risk of rearrest. Rearrest was compared at 12, 24, and 36 months postrelease. Offenders who successfully completed treatment had a lower risk of rearrest than traditionally sentenced offenders in general and county jail and probation offenders specifically. However, offenders sentenced to RIP/D&A who did not successfully complete treatment were more at risk for rearrest than traditionally sentenced offenders in general. Also, offenders sentenced to state incarceration had a lower risk of rearrest than RIP/D&A participants, regardless of program completion.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0093854808326743

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Bucklen, K.B., 2005, Research in Review, 8, 1
  2. Dupont-Morales, T., 2001, Assessment of county restrictive intermediate punishment programming
  3. Farabee, D., 1998, Federal Probation, 62, 3
  4. Gottfredson, D., 2003, Criminology, 2, 171
  5. Harrell, A., 2002, Criminology, 1, 189
  6. Kramer, J.H., 2006, Evaluation of RIP/D&A treatment: Final report (Subgrant No. 2003-DS-19-14576)
  7. Martinson, R., 1974, The Public Interest, 35, 22
  8. Ulmer, J.T., 2002, Restrictive intermediate punishments and recidivism in Pennsylvania

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Warner, T. D., & Kramer, J. H.
Affiliations
  • Bowling Green State University (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Warner, Tara D.
Venue
Criminal Justice and Behavior
Published
2008-10-20
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
89-109
ISSN
  • 0093-8548 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3594
OpenAlex
W2126045708
Cited by
43
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
8.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Criminal Justice and Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
revolving door, drug-involved offenders, drug and alcohol treatment, rearrest, recidivism, prison overcrowding, treatment completion

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