What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews

David Weisburd; David P Farrington; Charlotte Gill; Mimi Ajzenstadt; Trevor Bennett; Kate Bowers; Michael S. Caudy; Katharine Holloway; Shane  Johnson; Friedrich Lösel; Jacqueline Mallender; Amanda  Perry; Liansheng Larry Tang; Faye  Taxman; Cody Telep; Rory Tierney; Maria M. Ttofi; Carolyn  Watson; David B.  Wilson; Alese Wooditch

doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12298

What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews

David Weisburd, David P Farrington, Charlotte Gill, Mimi Ajzenstadt, Trevor Bennett, Kate Bowers, Michael S. Caudy, Katharine Holloway, Shane Johnson, Friedrich Lösel, Jacqueline Mallender, Amanda Perry, Liansheng Larry Tang, Faye Taxman, Cody Telep, Rory Tierney, Maria M. Ttofi, Carolyn Watson, David B. Wilson, Alese Wooditch

Criminology, Policing and Security Research and Innovation Group

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Research Summary
Just four decades ago, the predominant narrative in crime prevention and rehabilitation was that nothing works. Since that time, criminologists have accumulated a wide body of evidence about programs and practices in systematic reviews. In this article, we summarize what is known in seven broad criminal justice areas by drawing on 118 systematic reviews. Although not everything works, through our “review of reviews,” we provide persuasive evidence of the effectiveness of programs, policies, and practices across a variety of intervention areas.

Policy Implications
It is time to abandon the idea that “nothing works,” not only in corrections but also in developmental, community, and situational prevention; sentencing; policing; and drug treatment. Nevertheless, key gaps remain in our knowledge base. The results of systematic reviews should provide more specific guidance to practitioners. In many areas few randomized evaluations have been conducted. Finally, researchers, through their studies and systematic reviews, must pay more attention to cost–benefit analysis, qualitative research, and descriptive validity.

Original language	English
Article number	16(2)
Pages (from-to)	1-35
Number of pages	35
Journal	Criminology and Public Policy
Volume	16
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12298
Publication status	Published - 22 May 2017

Keywords

crime prevention
rehabilitation
systematic reviews
meta-analysis
program evaluation

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/1745-9133.12298Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

1 Chapter

Drug Interventions
Holloway, K. & Bennett, T., 2016, What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: Lessons from Systematic Reviews. Weisburd, D., Farrington, D. P. & Gill, C. (eds.). New York: Springer, p. 219-236 (Springer Series on Evidence-Based Crime Policy).
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Cite this

Weisburd, D., Farrington, D. P., Gill, C., Ajzenstadt, M., Bennett, T., Bowers, K., Caudy, M. S., Holloway, K., Johnson, S., Lösel, F., Mallender, J., Perry, A., Tang, L. L., Taxman, F., Telep, C., Tierney, R., Ttofi, M. M., Watson, C., Wilson, D. B., & Wooditch, A. (2017). What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews. Criminology and Public Policy, 16(2), 1-35. Article 16(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12298

@article{af36c9b430924490b76ff756d57dfd59,

title = "What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews",

abstract = "Research SummaryJust four decades ago, the predominant narrative in crime prevention and rehabilitation was that nothing works. Since that time, criminologists have accumulated a wide body of evidence about programs and practices in systematic reviews. In this article, we summarize what is known in seven broad criminal justice areas by drawing on 118 systematic reviews. Although not everything works, through our “review of reviews,” we provide persuasive evidence of the effectiveness of programs, policies, and practices across a variety of intervention areas.Policy ImplicationsIt is time to abandon the idea that “nothing works,” not only in corrections but also in developmental, community, and situational prevention; sentencing; policing; and drug treatment. Nevertheless, key gaps remain in our knowledge base. The results of systematic reviews should provide more specific guidance to practitioners. In many areas few randomized evaluations have been conducted. Finally, researchers, through their studies and systematic reviews, must pay more attention to cost–benefit analysis, qualitative research, and descriptive validity.",

keywords = "crime prevention, rehabilitation, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, program evaluation",

author = "David Weisburd and Farrington, {David P} and Charlotte Gill and Mimi Ajzenstadt and Trevor Bennett and Kate Bowers and Caudy, {Michael S.} and Katharine Holloway and Shane Johnson and Friedrich L{\"o}sel and Jacqueline Mallender and Amanda Perry and Tang, {Liansheng Larry} and Faye Taxman and Cody Telep and Rory Tierney and Ttofi, {Maria M.} and Carolyn Watson and Wilson, {David B.} and Alese Wooditch",

year = "2017",

month = may,

day = "22",

doi = "10.1111/1745-9133.12298",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "1--35",

journal = "Criminology and Public Policy",

issn = "1745-9133",

publisher = "Wiley",

number = "2",

}

Weisburd, D, Farrington, DP, Gill, C, Ajzenstadt, M, Bennett, T, Bowers, K, Caudy, MS, Holloway, K, Johnson, S, Lösel, F, Mallender, J, Perry, A, Tang, LL, Taxman, F, Telep, C, Tierney, R, Ttofi, MM, Watson, C, Wilson, DB & Wooditch, A 2017, 'What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews', Criminology and Public Policy, vol. 16, no. 2, 16(2), pp. 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12298

TY - JOUR

T1 - What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation

T2 - An Assessment of Systematic Reviews

AU - Weisburd, David

AU - Farrington, David P

AU - Gill, Charlotte

AU - Ajzenstadt, Mimi

AU - Bennett, Trevor

AU - Bowers, Kate

AU - Caudy, Michael S.

AU - Holloway, Katharine

AU - Johnson, Shane

AU - Lösel, Friedrich

AU - Mallender, Jacqueline

AU - Perry, Amanda

AU - Tang, Liansheng Larry

AU - Taxman, Faye

AU - Telep, Cody

AU - Tierney, Rory

AU - Ttofi, Maria M.

AU - Watson, Carolyn

AU - Wilson, David B.

AU - Wooditch, Alese

PY - 2017/5/22

Y1 - 2017/5/22

N2 - Research SummaryJust four decades ago, the predominant narrative in crime prevention and rehabilitation was that nothing works. Since that time, criminologists have accumulated a wide body of evidence about programs and practices in systematic reviews. In this article, we summarize what is known in seven broad criminal justice areas by drawing on 118 systematic reviews. Although not everything works, through our “review of reviews,” we provide persuasive evidence of the effectiveness of programs, policies, and practices across a variety of intervention areas.Policy ImplicationsIt is time to abandon the idea that “nothing works,” not only in corrections but also in developmental, community, and situational prevention; sentencing; policing; and drug treatment. Nevertheless, key gaps remain in our knowledge base. The results of systematic reviews should provide more specific guidance to practitioners. In many areas few randomized evaluations have been conducted. Finally, researchers, through their studies and systematic reviews, must pay more attention to cost–benefit analysis, qualitative research, and descriptive validity.

AB - Research SummaryJust four decades ago, the predominant narrative in crime prevention and rehabilitation was that nothing works. Since that time, criminologists have accumulated a wide body of evidence about programs and practices in systematic reviews. In this article, we summarize what is known in seven broad criminal justice areas by drawing on 118 systematic reviews. Although not everything works, through our “review of reviews,” we provide persuasive evidence of the effectiveness of programs, policies, and practices across a variety of intervention areas.Policy ImplicationsIt is time to abandon the idea that “nothing works,” not only in corrections but also in developmental, community, and situational prevention; sentencing; policing; and drug treatment. Nevertheless, key gaps remain in our knowledge base. The results of systematic reviews should provide more specific guidance to practitioners. In many areas few randomized evaluations have been conducted. Finally, researchers, through their studies and systematic reviews, must pay more attention to cost–benefit analysis, qualitative research, and descriptive validity.

KW - crime prevention

KW - rehabilitation

KW - systematic reviews

KW - meta-analysis

KW - program evaluation

U2 - 10.1111/1745-9133.12298

DO - 10.1111/1745-9133.12298

M3 - Article

SN - 1745-9133

VL - 16

SP - 1

EP - 35

JO - Criminology and Public Policy

JF - Criminology and Public Policy

IS - 2

M1 - 16(2)

ER -

What Works in Crime Prevention and Rehabilitation: An Assessment of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Research output

Drug Interventions

Cite this