Correctional Rehabilitation and Human Functioning: An Embodied, Embedded, and Enactive Approach

<p>In order for correctional rehabilitation practices to be maximally effective, they should be grounded in well-developed psychological theory about the causes, development, and nature of crime. This thesis argues that these theories of crime should be based in an underlying perspective of human functioning, or how people work at a fundamental level. I argue that this level of theory has been neglected in theories of crime, as demonstrated through an evaluation of the Risk-Need-Responsivity model of rehabilitation, which currently stands as the most popular and widely used rehabilitation framework throughout much of the world. This perspective is understood to implicitly present a view of functioning which is reward-oriented, multifactorial, norm-based, and modular, resulting in limited explanatory value and diminished treatment efficacy. I then suggest an alternative model of functioning as being embodied, embedded, and enactive (3e). 3e places an emphasis on the individual as an embodied whole, in an adaptive relationship with their physical and social environment. 3e prioritises the affective experience and agency of the individual, with a commitment to viewing the person as a functional whole drawing on comprehensive multilevel explanations. I outline how this perspective could be used to inform the explanation of crime, before applying the model to an exemplar to demonstrate the potential treatment utility of a 3e approach to correctional rehabilitation, as opposed to an RNR approach.</p>

Correctional Rehabilitation and Human Functioning: An Embodied, Embedded, and Enactive Approach

<p>In order for correctional rehabilitation practices to be maximally effective, they should be grounded in well-developed psychological theory about the causes, development, and nature of crime. This thesis argues that these theories of crime should be based in an underlying perspective of human functioning, or how people work at a fundamental level. I argue that this level of theory has been neglected in theories of crime, as demonstrated through an evaluation of the Risk-Need-Responsivity model of rehabilitation, which currently stands as the most popular and widely used rehabilitation framework throughout much of the world. This perspective is understood to implicitly present a view of functioning which is reward-oriented, multifactorial, norm-based, and modular, resulting in limited explanatory value and diminished treatment efficacy. I then suggest an alternative model of functioning as being embodied, embedded, and enactive (3e). 3e places an emphasis on the individual as an embodied whole, in an adaptive relationship with their physical and social environment. 3e prioritises the affective experience and agency of the individual, with a commitment to viewing the person as a functional whole drawing on comprehensive multilevel explanations. I outline how this perspective could be used to inform the explanation of crime, before applying the model to an exemplar to demonstrate the potential treatment utility of a 3e approach to correctional rehabilitation, as opposed to an RNR approach.</p>

A MODEL OF ENGAGEMENT FOR CORRECTIONAL PRACTICE

<p>Despite recent advances in correctional rehabilitation, rates of treatment attrition remain high and low efficacy rates suggest improvements in treatment development and delivery are needed. Treatment engagement is an important concept which remains poorly understood. In order to enhance understanding and facilitate higher levels of engagement in treatment, robust theoretical models need to be developed. In light of this, two key questions need to be answered; (1) what is engagement? And (2) what are the underlying causal mechanisms which facilitate or hinder engagement? I explore the contributions of current conceptualisations and models of correctional treatment engagement. I explain how evolutionary psychology, agency, norms and the therapeutic alliance can contribute to our theoretical understanding. These concepts are then integrated to form the Model of Engagement for Correctional Practice. Engagement is conceptualised as a set of adaptive, goal-directed behaviours occurring as a result of the dynamic interactions between contextual, psychological and social processes. I argue that these factors influence the nature of the therapeutic alliance and subsequently participant engagement. The model is then evaluated in terms of critical features required for a robust theory of engagement. I then suggest some practice principles and guidelines to demonstrate how this model can be applied to enhance treatment engagement.</p>

A MODEL OF ENGAGEMENT FOR CORRECTIONAL PRACTICE

<p>Despite recent advances in correctional rehabilitation, rates of treatment attrition remain high and low efficacy rates suggest improvements in treatment development and delivery are needed. Treatment engagement is an important concept which remains poorly understood. In order to enhance understanding and facilitate higher levels of engagement in treatment, robust theoretical models need to be developed. In light of this, two key questions need to be answered; (1) what is engagement? And (2) what are the underlying causal mechanisms which facilitate or hinder engagement? I explore the contributions of current conceptualisations and models of correctional treatment engagement. I explain how evolutionary psychology, agency, norms and the therapeutic alliance can contribute to our theoretical understanding. These concepts are then integrated to form the Model of Engagement for Correctional Practice. Engagement is conceptualised as a set of adaptive, goal-directed behaviours occurring as a result of the dynamic interactions between contextual, psychological and social processes. I argue that these factors influence the nature of the therapeutic alliance and subsequently participant engagement. The model is then evaluated in terms of critical features required for a robust theory of engagement. I then suggest some practice principles and guidelines to demonstrate how this model can be applied to enhance treatment engagement.</p>

The reintegration officers’ perspectives on offenders to be discharged from community supervision in Singapore

Purpose This paper aims to focus on the perspectives of correctional officers supervising young offenders on community supervision in Singapore. Design/methodology/approach The study adopted a qualitative research framework, where attention was devoted to understanding the perspectives of eight reintegration officers, and what they perceived to have helped young offenders successfully discharged from community supervision. Findings The five essential factors that emerged are compliance to supervision conditions, education and/or employment, ability to cope and efforts to change, support and environment. Each factor is defensible and had been substantiated by past research that incorporates evidence-based practice in correctional rehabilitation for offenders. Research limitations/implications Due to constraints imposed on the research timeline, the five factors identified do not take into account societal-level barriers such as stigma, discrimination and inequalities, which are important factors that can be further explored in subsequent studies. Originality/value In Singapore, there is no research study on the Reintegration Officers' perspectives on what they deemed as critical for offenders to be discharged from community supervision. Understanding these key factors may help to shape future research in determining supervisees’ readiness for discharge from community supervision in Singapore. This knowledge gained could further inform and bolster the correctional rehabilitation services provided by SPS and be further developed into a tool that can be used to systematically assess the readiness of offenders to be discharged from community supervision.

Effects of Criminogenic Risk–Needs Assessment Feedback During Prerelease Correctional Rehabilitation

This pre–post follow-up randomized trial investigated the receptiveness and responsiveness of 82 incarcerated men undergoing reentry to feedback (discussion-based, form-based, or none–minimal) regarding their criminogenic risk–needs assessment results. Both short-term outcomes (self-perceived risk–needs, motivation for change, treatment readiness, and feedback satisfaction) and longer-term outcomes (intuitional conduct, rearrest, or halfway house return) were examined. As hypothesized, among study completers ( n = 67), motivation for change was significantly higher following discussion feedback, and both feedback formats were rated favorably by participants. Contrary to hypotheses, feedback recipients, including those who showed gains at post, did not appear reliably distinct from others on longer-term outcomes; nor were most outcomes significantly associated with baseline risk scores. Feedback about risk and needs may be useful in correctional treatment for motivation enhancement and treatment orienting, but special attention to measurement, contextual, and intensity factors is warranted.