NEWSLETTER | edge4020

How do one's personal opinions and views of incarceration shape that individual's interpersonal relationships with offenders? For this particular project, societal perceptions of repeat criminal offenders were examined by comparing the positive and negative social responses to repeat offenders amongst members of the community of Cedar City, Utah. Some areas of interest that were delved into included employment opportunities, interpersonal relationships, entrustment of childcare, and education. The level of success one experiences when trying to become reintegrated into their community can largely impact their recidivism. While punitive measures taken against offenders can be major deterrents for committing the original crime, the manner in which one is welcomed back into society after their period of incarceration can act similarly to affect the decision to reoffend. The presence or absence of these factors can determine the success with which one is able to reintegrate into their community.

Subjects for this research were recruited from pools of students enrolled in psychology and criminal justice courses at Southern Utah University through a department-wide email sent to both of the aforementioned departments. This email included a brief description of and a link to the survey, which began with three demographic questions followed by twenty-seven multiple-choice questions answered on a Likert-type scale. Questions spanned a multitude of different community areas including childcare, education, and work environments, and were evaluated based on participant opinion of misdemeanant and felony offenders, as well as individuals with no criminal history. Scores were compiled for opinions of felons, misdemeanants, and individuals with no previous criminal history. Raw data was evaluated and these scores were analyzed using a paired-samples t-test, which showed that the differences in public perception of reoffenders in the community were not only what one would expect (with participants feeling the least comfortable with felons and the most comfortable with those who had no criminal history), but that they were also statistically significant.

As an individual seeking out employment in areas involving both the criminal justice and the psychology elements of my degree, I find most interesting why people do the things they do, especially as this pertains to criminal behaviors. While one can certainly fall prey to biases and stereotyped beliefs, the old adage that bad people do bad things is not necessarily reversible (bad things are done by bad people, and by bad people only). This being the case, I wanted to investigate some of the key factors that allow for community members engaging in criminal behaviors to continue to do so. As successful reintegration after incarceration can be one of the most important protective factors against reoffending, different areas of the community should be analyzed and reformed to perhaps allow for less of a continuance of criminal activity. If offenders are able to reintegrate into different areas of the community with ease, reintegration can be achieved and a desire to return to criminal behavior can be quenched by this sense of belonging. With a lesser likelihood for recidivism, criminal activity can be decreased and perhaps even further understood.

As with any research, I encountered tons of challenges along the way to finding success in this project. I proposed my project formally for the Community Engagement Center a couple of years ago. At that point in time, my project was entirely different, filled with big ideas that I thought could be brought to fruition with ease. I did not consider facing rejection from outside agencies after I had already had my project approved by my engagement center. I then proceeded to propose an entirely new project idea to my original engagement center and they were quick to let me know that I was perhaps no longer on track with what they stood for. I was pointed in the direction of the Creativity Engagement Center, where the proposal process was entirely different in format and just polishing up my proposal took some time. Having it approved was another thing entirely.

The length of this process also allowed for another change to be made to my (now second) proposal, demanding that I cut back and work with a less varied sample size. I learned how to gain approval from the university’s Institutional Review Board on the fly, as I had never taken any courses with instruction on how to do so. I composed an online survey and distributed it, only to see just barely over a quarter of my proposed sample size respond. I had to accept that my project was one that was adaptable, one that would continue to develop and change long after it had been proposed, and that it was one that would still be able to provide incredible experience in this area. I was able to find something that I was passionate about and pull together other areas of expertise from my departments to analyze and study this phenomenon.

With intentions to share the results of my study at Southern Utah University’s Festival of Excellence this coming April and plans to present at the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association’s conference during that same month, I hope to open up a discussion about my findings. The data gathered through my research has allowed for the conclusion that labels could be an important factor when attempting to reintegrate into the community after incarceration. Through education, members of the community can learn that labels such as “misdemeanant”, “felon”, and “reoffender” can be detrimental to recidivism rates and that the very actions being taken to protect the community from such individuals could actually be encouraging these individuals to continue down their criminal paths. These findings can in turn impact not only individuals who are trying to reintegrate after incarceration, but also all members of a community that are affecting these reintegration attempts. More thorough education can lead to more successful reintegration, which can lend a hand to lowering recidivism and crime rates.

After having successfully obtained a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice and psychology, I will be seeking out further education through a master’s program in criminology. My end goal is to take the education that I have gained and become a criminal profiler for the highest agency I can gain employment with. Results, presentations, discussion points, and any other information gleaned from all of these can not only be beneficial in graduate school and job interviews, but also in further graduate school research and in my future career. A deeper or more complete understanding of recidivism would allow for the ability to try combating it. Opportunities to educate the public in order to decrease recidivism rates would suggest a success in a career with aims to decrease criminal activity and crime rates.

“[This project], to me, is something that extends so much farther than just a class, a graduation requirement, an exciting talking point during a job interview – it’s something that I can take with me and have a more complete understanding of for the rest of my life, impacting my own opinions and behaviors in my future career.”