Recidivism is a persistent threat that affects nearly every ex-offender after their release. Numerous studies have proven that offenders and their families are adversely affected by incarceration during and after time served (Olver, Stockdale & Wormith, 2011; Scurich & Monahan, 2016). As a result of their new status as an ex-offender, many individuals experience severe examples of discrimination, social stigma, and implicit bias mainly within the realm of employment. And these experiences can seem unending, even for ex-offenders who have resolved to never return to criminal activities. However, these external factors, coupled with negative interpersonal dialogue and interactions, can distort an ex-offender’s perception of recidivism as their only choice to fulfill their needs and responsibilities to themselves and their families (Kroner & Yessine, 2013). This study will examine the experiences of ex-offenders and their use of intervention methods to minimize the external and internal factors of situations with high probabilities of encouraging recidivism. The main premise of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the threat of recidivism by exploring individual experiences. Therefore, the chosen method of data collection includes an interview and self-reporting questionnaire.

Purpose Statement

The study will explore ex-offenders’ use of intervention methods to address and minimize the threat of recidivism. Examining from a phenomenological approach, the study questionnaire will be very useful in providing re-entry program coordinators and ex-offenders a detailed look at the prevalence of recidivism. Furthermore, this knowledge will help both groups to understand the external and internal triggers that increase the probability of recidivism and help them to create effective intervention methods, strengthen or rebuild existing re-entry training modules, and create specialized support options such as ex-offender support groups and mentor/mentee-style sponsorships. No other country in the world has the highest population of incarcerated citizens than the United States (Scurich & Monahan, 2016). Millions of citizens live under the legal status of ex-offender, which has seriously damaging ramifications such as limited work offerings, often well below livable wages (Kroner & Yassine, 2013; Scurich & Monahan, 2016). Therefore, this study will provide beneficial information to improve the lives of ex-offenders and their families, and by extension, the state of American society as a whole.

Viable Research Questions

The guiding question for this study is: what are the experiences of ex-offenders with using intervention methods to minimize the external and internal factors of situations with high probabilities of encouraging recidivism? Participant responses to this question will more than likely provide remarkable insight but lack a factor of measurability. However, the goal of this study is to glean valuable data to inform and encourage ex-offenders, their families, and re-entry program coordinators and correctional facilities to create new intervention programming and rebuild pre-existing programs for effectiveness in achieving successful re-entry into society and consistently combatting recidivism.

Research Plan

A qualitative research study design has been chosen as it is the best way to address the type of data to be gathered: personal and highly subjective experiences. A quantitative study design would not fit this study’s needs as variable analysis, predictive findings, and correlations are not desired (Creswell, 2009). This study is rooted in discovering the cross-section of human experiences in dealing with the threat of recidivism. Therefore, this study is focused on gathering experiences, culminating into a portrait of the human experience of ex-offenders dealing with recidivism threat. Often, ex-offenders are perceived and treated as less than human and this study seeks to restore their humanity by discovering meaningful examples of resilience or otherwise within their experiences.

This study is of personal interest to me as I have a younger sibling who has been incarcerated since he was 17. He will be released by the middle of 2018 or sooner and I believe this study would be valuable to our family and other affected families. I plan to be the primary study contact and interview administrator. The desired population for this study is ex-offenders selected from responses to a call for participants in the form of a letter mailed to fifty halfway houses and re-entry programs within the State of Texas. The population will consist of a random selection of male and female ex-offenders with a goal of selecting 100 ex-offenders.

The interview will be semi-structured, consisting of an interview and the self-reporting questionnaire. The interview is designed to address several factors regarding effective recidivism intervention. However, the interview will not be so stringent as to restrict participant expression. Questionnaire responses will provide the desired data (Creswell, 2009). Both elements will provide participant experiences to answer the proposed research question.

Cultural context seems to be the most valid cause for ethical concern as accounting for this factor will influence response analysis and interpretation. It will also be necessary to have an even mix of gender and ethnicity to present a more accurate cross-section of the general ex-offender population. Some ethnicities will have to deal with different external and internal factors with regards to recidivism and these differences will also have an affect on the generalization of study findings.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Analysis of the research data will be handled by the author, using the Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis model (Smith & Osborn, 2003). The study author will review participant responses, paying close attention to recognizing reoccurring patterns, meanings, and themes. This must be carefully conducted while maintaining consistent awareness of interpretation bias due to personal interests. As suggested by Creswell (2009) coding will be used to add to the usefulness of the analyzed data. And finally, as another measure of accountability and ethical repose, a select group of unaffiliated researchers will review and audit the study findings.

Mitigating Threats to Validity

Consistent and responsible documentation of all steps of author/participant interaction will be implemented to maintain study validity. Transcribed participant responses will be reviewed for errors, as will coding methods for consistency. After the data has been audited and approved, the study findings will be presented to study participants via follow-up interviews. These follow-up or after-care interviews are vital to assess accuracy of data interpretation and study integrity.

.

\

References

• Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ↩1 ↩2 ↩3
• Kroner, D. G., & Yessine, A. K. (2013). Changing risk factors that impact recidivism: In search of mechanisms of change. Law and Human Behavior, 37(5), 321. ↩
• Olver, M. E., Stockdale, K. C., & Wormith, J. S. (2011). A meta-analysis of predictors of offender treatment attrition and its relationship to recidivism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(1), 6. ↩
• Scurich, N., & Monahan, J. (2016). Evidence-based sentencing: Public openness and opposition to using gender, age, and race as risk factors for recidivism. Law and Human Behavior, 40(1), 36-41. ↩1 ↩2 ↩3
• Smith, J. A. & Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to methods (2^(nd) ed.) (pp 53-80). London, UK: Sage Publications. ↩