Cited by 164Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCrime Patterns and Interventions

Evaluation of a National Prison-based Treatment Program for Sexual Offenders in England and Wales

Friendship, Caroline, Mann, Ruth E., Beech, Anthony R.·2003·Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Abstract

Treatment efficacy is described for a sample of sexual offenders who had undertaken treatment in United Kingdom prisons (N = 647) and for a retrospectively selected comparison group (N = 1,910). The outcomes under observation in this study were sexual, sexual and/or violent, and general reconviction. Treatment impact was also examined in relation to offenders' risk of reconviction. The treatment group had slightly lower 2-year sexual reconviction rates than the comparison group, but these differences were not statistically significant. Significant differences were found between the treatment and comparison group for sexual and/or violent reconviction. Further analysis suggested that treatment produced a reduction in the probability of sexual and/or violent reconviction (p <.05) when other relevant variables were controlled for. General reconviction rates were consistently lower in the treatment group, but these differences were not significant.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0886260503253236

Cites

30 of 30 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?

  • The psychologically based prison sex offender treatment programme (SOTP) in the UK was shown to reduce future violent and sex offending when analysed in combination.

    “whilst the psychologically based prison sex offender treatment programme (SOTP) in the UK was shown to reduce future violent and sex offending when analysed in combination”
  • Some programmes designed to reduce sexual offending may reduce further violent behaviour but not further reduce sexual offending.

    “This, however, introduces a further caveat in interpreting the evidence of efficacy as some programmes designed to reduce sexual offending may reduce further violent behaviour but not further reduce sexual offending.”
  • The SOTP failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in sex offending alone.

    “it failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in sex offending alone (Friendship 2003).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friendship, C., Mann, R. E., & Beech, A. R.
Affiliations
  • HM Prison Service (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
Venue
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Published
2003-07
Volume
18
Issue
7
Pages
744-759
ISSN
  • 0886-2605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6518
OpenAlex
W2111647749
Cited by
164
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 19
FWCI
11.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Interpersonal Violence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
Keywords
sexual offenders, prison-based treatment, offender rehabilitation, recidivism, sexual reoffending, violent reoffending, recidivism risk, treatment efficacy, England and Wales prisons
MeSH terms
Adult, England, Humans, Male, Prisoners, Recurrence, Retrospective Studies, Sex Offenses, Wales, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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