The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Incapacitation: penal confinement and the restraint of crime
Abstract
The one, sure way that imprisonment prevents crime is by restraining offenders from committing crimes while they are locked up. Called by experts in criminology, this effect has become the dominant justification for imprisonment in the United States, where well over a million persons are currently in jails and prisons, and public figures who want to appear tough on crime periodically urge that we throw away the key. How useful is the modern prison in restraining crime, and at what cost? How much do we really know about incapacitation and its effectiveness? This book is the first comprehensive assessment of incapacitation. Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins show the increasing reliance on restraint to justify imprisonment, analyze the existing theories on incapacitation's effects, assess the current empirical research, report a new study, and explore the links between what is known about incapacitation and what it tells us about our criminal justice policy. An insightful evaluation of a pressing policy issue, Incapacitation is a vital contribution to the current debates on our criminal justice system.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Monetary Costs and Benefits of Crime Prevention Programs
Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2000) · Crime and Justice · doi:10.1086/652202 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1995-10-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 33-1242-33-1242
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1970101137
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Incapacitation: penal confinement and the restraint of crime. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.33-1242
- The paper
- Incapacitation: penal confinement and the restraint of crime. (1995). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.33-1242
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
