Résumés
Résumé
Dans son plan stratégique, le ministère de la Sécurité publique du Québec souligne les problèmes actuels de surpopulation carcérale au Québec. Ce phénomène peut contribuer à une augmentation des conflits vécus par les détenus et, par extension, à l’émergence des incidents disciplinaires. Dans un tel contexte, il semble nécessaire d’améliorer la gestion du risque lié à ce type d’incidents. Dans le cadre de cet article, l’objectif principal visé est de mettre à l’épreuve la validité prédictive du LS/CMI sur l’occurrence des incidents disciplinaires. L’échantillon consiste en 934 détenus incarcérés au Service correctionnel du Québec (SCQ) entre janvier et décembre 2007. Durant cette même période, tous les détenus ont été évalués dans les semaines suivant leur admission avec la version québécoise du LS/CMI. Les résultats permettent de confirmer l’efficacité du LS/CMI dans la prédiction des incidents disciplinaires, et ce, indépendamment de leur nature et de leur cible.
Mots-clés :
- Incidents disciplinaires,
- prison,
- gestion du risque,
- instrument actuariel
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to address the critical need to improve accuracy in risk assessment for prison misconducts and hence improve decision-making. With the increased prison crowding in the correctional facilities in Quebec, there is a critical need for the development of better instruments to assist clinicians in their task. Since February 2007, all offenders sentenced for a violent crime or to six month or more are now evaluated with the French-Canadian version of the LS/CMI. Although the LS/CMI is generally good at predicting recidivism, it was not specifically designed to predict prison misconducts. The present study investigates the potential predictive validity of the LS/CMI. The sample consisted of 934 male offenders sentenced for a violent crime or to 6 month or more in the Correctional Services of Quebec between February 2007 and December 2007. In general, results indicate that the LS/CMI can predict violent and non violent misconducts.
Keywords:
- Prison,
- misconducts,
- risk assessment,
- actuarial
Resumen
En su plan estratégico, el ministerio de Seguridad pública de Quebec destaca los problemas actuales de sobrepoblación en las cárceles de Quebec. Dicho fenómeno corre el riesgo de contribuir al aumento de conflictos entre los detenidos y, por extensión, a la emergencia de incidentes disciplinarios. En ese contexto, se vuelve necesario mejorar la gestión de riesgos asociados a ese tipo de incidentes. El objetivo principal del presente estudio fue poner a prueba la validez predictiva del LS/CMI sobre ocurrencia de incidentes disciplinarios. La muestra consistió en 934 detenidos encarcelados en el Servicio correccional de Quebec (SCQ) entre enero y diciembre de 2007. Durante ese periodo, todos los detenidos fueron evaluados en las semanas que siguieron a su admisión con la versión canadiense del LS/CMI. Los resultados permiten confirmar la eficacia del LS/CMI en la predicción de incidentes disciplinarios independientemente de su naturaleza.
Palabras clave:
- Incidentes disciplinarios,
- prisión,
- gestión de riesgo,
- herramienta
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised. Toronto : Multi-Healt Systems.
- Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). Psychology of criminal conduct (4e éd.). Newark (NJ) : Anderson Publishing Co.
- Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2004). Manual for the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). Toronto, Canada : Multi-Health Systems.
- Andrews, D. A., Dowden, C., & Rettinger, J. L. (2001). Special populations within Canada. In J. A. Winterdyck (Ed.), Corrections in Canada : Social reactions to crime (170-212). Toronto, Ontario : Prentice Hall.
- Assemblée nationale du Québec (2009). L’état des services correctionnels au Québec. Journal des débats de la commission des institutions, 41 (15).
- Bonta, J. (1989). Native inmates : Institutional responses, risks, and needs. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 31, 49-62.
- Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1987). The diversion of incarcerated offenders to correctional halfway houses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24, 302-323.
- Boutet, M. (2008). L’intimidation dans le parcours criminel des gangs de rue. Séminaire Gangs et Délinquance, Montréal, Canada.
- Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., & Kaemmer, B. (1989). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) : Manual for administration and scoring. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
- Cao, L., Zhao, J., &Van Dine, S. (1997). Prison disciplinary tickets : A test of the deprivation and importation models. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 103-113.
- Cooper, R. P., & Werner, P. D. (1990). Predicting violence in newly admitted inmates : A lens model analysis of staff decision making. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 431-447.
- Coulson, G., Ilacqua, G., Nutbrown, V., Giulekas, D., & Cudjoe, F. (1996). Predictive utility of the LSI for incarcerated female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 427-439.
- Cunningham, M. D., & Sorensen, J. R. (2006). Actuarial models for assessing prison violence risk : Revisions and extensions of the risk assessment scale for prison (RASP). Assessment, 13, 253-265.
- Cunningham, M. D., & Sorensen, J. R. (2007). Predictive factors for violent misconduct in close custody. The Prison Journal, 87, 241-253.
- Cunningham, M., Sorensen, J., & Reidy, T. (2005). An actuarial model for assessment of prison violence risk among maximum security inmates. Assessment, 12, 40-49.
- DeLisi, M., & Munoz, E. A. (2003). Future dangerousness revisited. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 14, 287-305.
- DeLisi, M., Berg, M. T., & Hochstetler, A. (2004). Gang members, career criminals and prison violence : further specification of the importation model of inmate behaviour. Criminal Justice Studies, 17, 369-383.
- DiIulio, J. (1991). No escape : The future of American corrections. New York : Basic Books.
- Edens, J. F., Poythress, N. G., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (1999). Identifying inmates at risk for disciplinary infractions : A comparison of two measures of psychopathy. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17, 435-443.
- Ellis, D. (1984). Crowding and prison violence. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 11 (3), 277-308.
- Endrass, J., Rossegger, A., Urbaniok, F., Laubacher, A., & Vetter, S. (Sous presse). Predicting violent infractions in a Swiss state penitentiary : a replication study of the PCL-R in a population of sex and violent offenders.
- Flanagan, T. J. (1983). Correlates of institutional misconduct among state prisoners. Criminology, 21, 29-39.
- Gaes, G. G., & McGuire, J. W. (1985). Prison violence : The contribution of crowding versus other determinants of prison assault rates. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22, 41-65.
- Gaes, G. G., Wallace, S., Gilman, E., Klein-Saffran, J., & Suppa, S. (2002). The influence of prison gang affiliation on violence and other prison misconduct. The Prison Journal, 82 (3), 359-385.
- Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Law, M. (1997). Predicting prison misconducts. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 414-431.
- Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2002). Is the PCL-R really the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk ? A lesson in knowledge cumulation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 397-426.
- Girard, L. (1999). The Level of Supervision Inventory – Ontario Revision : Risk/need assessment and recidivisms. Thèse de doctorat inédite, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario.
- Girard, L., & Wormith, J. S. (2004). The Predictive Validity of the Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision on General and Violent Recidivism among Various Offender Groups. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 150-181.
- Goetting, A., & Howsen, R. M. (1986). Correlates of prisoner misconduct. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2, 49-67.
- Guay, J. P. (2008). Mesurer les gangs et l’appartenance aux gangs. Séminaire Gangs et Délinquance, Montréal, Canada.
- Griffin, M. L., & Hepburn, J. R. (2006). The effect of gang affiliation on violent misconduct among inmates during the early years of confinement. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 419-466.
- Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (1999). Static-99 : Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders (User Report No. 99-02). Ottawa, Canada : Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
- Hare, R. D. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto : Multi-Health Systems.
- Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Violent Recidivism of Mentally Disordered Offenders : The Developement of a Statistical Prediction Intrument. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 315-335.
- Hochstetler, A., & DeLisi, M. (2005). Importation, deprivation, and varieties of serving time : An integrated-lifestyle-exposure model of prison offending. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 257-266.
- Hoge, R. D., Andrews, D. A., & Leschied, A.W. (1995). The Risk/Need Inventory. The Ministry of Community and Social Services. Toronto, Ontario.
- Hollin, C. V., & Palmer, E. M. (2003). The Level of Service Inventory-Revised profile of English prisoners : Risk and reconviction analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 347-366.
- Jiang, S., & Fisher-Giorlando, M. (2002). Inmate misconduct : A test of the deprivation, importation, and situational models. The Prison Journal, 82, 335-358.
- Kroner, D., & Mills, J. (2001). The accuracy of five risk appraisal instruments in predicting institutional misconduct and new convictions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 471-489.
- Landreville, P., & Charest, M. (2004). Analyse prospective de la population des établissements de détention du Québec : Rapport final. Montréal : Centre international de criminologie comparée.
- Lovell, D., & Jemelka, R. (1996). When inmates misbehave : The costs of discipline. The Prison Journal, 76, 165-179.
- Loza, W., & Dhaliwal, G. (1997). Psychometric evaluation of the Risk Appraisal Guide (RAG) : A tool for assessing violent recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 779-793.
- Mackenzie, D. L. (1987). Age and adjustment to prison : Interactions with attitudes and anxiety. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 14, 427-447.
- McCorkle, R. C., Miethe, T. D., & Drass, K. A. (1995). The roots of prison violence : A test of deprivation, management, and ‘not-so total’ institution models. Crime and Delinquency, 41, 317–331.
- Megargee, E. I. (1976). Population density and disruptive behaviour in a prison setting. In A. K. Cohen, G. F. Cole & R. G. Bailey (Eds.), Prison Violence (135-144). Lexington, MA : Heath.
- Ministère de la Sécurité publique du Québec (2005). Plan stratégique 2005-2008. Québec : Gouvernement du Québec.
- Nowicka-Sroga, M. (2003). The Level of Service Inventory – Ontario Revision and phase II, young offenders. Canadian Psychology, 44 (2a), 21.
- Ouimet, M. (1993). Surveiller qui ? Une étude des infractions disciplinaires commises par les personnes incarcérées. Forum, Recherche sur l’actualité correctionnelle, 5 (2), 40.
- O’Donnell, I., & Edgar, K. (1998). Routine victimisation in prisons. The Howard Journal, 37 (3), 266-279.
- Paterline, B. A., & Petersen, D. M. (1999). Structural and social psychological determinants of prisonization. Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 427-441.
- Ralph, P. H., & Marquart, J. W. (1991). Gang violence in Texas prisons. The Prison Journal, 71, 38-49.
- Reisig, M. (2002). Administrative control and inmate homicide. Homicide Studies, 6, 84-103.
- Rettinger, J. (1998). A recidivism follow-up study to investigate risk and need within a sample of provincially sentenced women. Thèse de doctorat, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
- Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1995). Violent recidivism : Assessing predictive validity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 737-748.
- Robinson, D., & Mirabelli, L. (1996). Rapport de synthèse. Résumé des constatations du Sondage national auprès des détenus. Numéro B-14, Canada : Division de la recherche et développement correctionnels, Services correctionnels du Canada.
- Ruback, R. B., & Carr, T. S. (1993). Prison crowding over time ; The relationship of density and changes in density ti infractions rates. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 130-148.
- Serin, R. C. (1991). Psychopathy and violence in criminals. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 423-431.
- Service correctionnel du Canada (2007). Rapport sur le rendement. Canada : Service correctionnel du Canada.
- Shelden, R. G. (1991). A comparison of gang members and non-gang members in a prison setting. The Prison Journal, 71, 50-60.
- Shields, I. W. (1993). The use of the Young Offender-Level of Service Inventory (YO-LSI) with adolescents. IARCA Journal, 5, 10-26.
- Shields, I. W., & Simourd, D. J. (1991). Predicting predatory behavior in a population of incarcerated young offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 180-194.
- Sjostedt, G., & Grann, M. (2002) Risk assessment : What is being predicted by actuarial prediction instrument ? International journal of forensic mental health, 1 (2), 179-183.
- Sparring, M. (1982). The Youth Service LSI. Thèse de doctorat inédite, Departement de Psychologie, Carleton University, Ottawa.
- Swets, J. A. (1988). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems, Science, 240 (4857), 1285-1293.
- Tartaro, C. (2002). The impact of density on jail violence. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 499-510.
- Toch, H. (1977). Living in prison : The ecology of survival. New York : The Free Press.
- Thomas, C. W., & Foster, S. C. (1973). The importation model perspective on imate social roles : An empirical test. The Sociological Quaterly, 14, 226-234.
- Trulson, C. R. (2007). Determinants of disruption : Institutional misconduct among State-Committed delinquents. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 7-34.
- Van Voorhis, P. (1994). Measuring prison disciplinary problems : A multiple indicators approach to understanding prison adjustment. Justice Quarterly, 11, 679-709.
- Walters, G. D. (2003). Predicting institutional adjustment and recidivism with the Psychopathy Checklist factor scores : A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 541-558.
- Walters, G. D., Duncan, S. A., & Geyer, M. D. (2003). Predicting disciplinary adjustment in inmates undergoing forensic evaluation : A direct comparison of the PCL-R and PAI. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 14, 382-393.
- Walters, G. D., White, T. W., & Denney, D. (1991). The Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form : Preliminary data. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 406-418.
- Webster, C. D., Eaves, D., Douglas, K., & Wintrup, A. (1995). The HCR-20 Scheme : The assessment of dangerousness and risk. Vancouver : Simon Fraser University and Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University Press.
- Winfree, L. T., Mays, G. L., Crowley, J. E., & Peat, B. J. (1994). Drug history and prisonization : Toward understanding variations in inmate institutional adaptations. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 38, 281-296.
- Wooldredge, J. D. (1991). Correlates of deviant behavior among inmates of U.S. correctional facilities. Journal of Crime and Justice, 14, 1-25.
- Wooldredge, J. D., Griffin, T., & Pratt, T. C. (2001). The relevance of hierarchical models for empirical study of inmate behavior. Justice Quarterly, 18, 901-929.
- Wright, K. N. (1985). Developing the Prison Environment Inventory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22, 257-77.
- Wright, K. N. (1991). A study of individual, environmental, and interactive effects in explaining adjustment to prison. Justice Quarterly, 8, 217-242.
- Young, M. H., Justice, J. V., & Erdberg, P. (2004). Assault in prison and assault in prison psychiatric treatment. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 29, 1-9.
- Zamble, E. (1992). Behavior and adaptation in long-term prison inmates : Descriptive longitudinal results. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19, 409-425.