When Focusing Deterrence Fails: Examining Differences of Deterrence Effects Among Offender Types

• In Event: Mechanistic Criminology: A Critique of Deterrence Theory

Abstract

Though empirically shown to “work” to reduce recidivism among different settings and populations, focused deterrence strategies in community corrections also have substantial evidence of negative cases—those not effectively deterred. In spite of their popularity, the extent to which and reasons why such focused deterrence strategies work to reduce reoffending is still somewhat of a mystery. From contextual expectations of deterrence and rational choice theories, the purpose of this paper is to examine these negative cases to explicate possible reasons as to why an intervention failed in some situations but was effective in others. Using data from Washington State’s Swift-and-Certain policy for community supervision, we provide a statistical exploration of offender types based on criminogenic needs information. Furthermore, we borrow insights from mechanistic criminology (Proctor and Niemeyer, forthcoming) to identify how neurological, psychological, and social mechanisms operating outside of the normal scope conditions of deterrence theory potentially explain the presence of negative cases within the study.  We then discuss the relevance of these mechanisms for public policies pertaining to recidivism.

Authors

• Christopher M. Campbell, Portland State University

• Richard E. Niemeyer, Solomon Boxer

• K. Ryan Proctor, Avila University