Dr. Tajuddeen A. Williams

Three Abbreviated Research Plans

· Personal Essays

Quantitative Research Plan

This quantitative study examines what external and internal factors contribute to recidivism, how ex-offenders view and address recidivism due to these factors, and determines which interventions are most effective in minimizing the probability of recidivism. The following abbreviated research plan includes an introduction, study purpose, viable research questions, hypotheses, and a preliminary research plan.

Introduction

Recidivism can be likened to an ever-present possibility after an individual has been released from incarceration. Several studies have shown that incarceration affects both the prisoner and their families (Olver, Stockdale, & Wormith, 2011; Scurich & Monahan, 2015). Moreover, due to lack of employment, social stigma, and implicit bias, the interplay of external and internal factors thrust ex-offenders into situations where recidivism seems to be the only solution to capable of satisfying basic needs (Kroner & Yessine, 2013). This study will focus on examining what external and internal factors contribute to recidivism and discovering which interventions will be most effective in minimizing the probability of recidivism. Designing effective recidivism interventions will require a comprehensive understanding of the experiences of ex-offenders who have very few methods of meeting their basic needs.

It will also be important to understand how these experiences affect their self-image and perception from family, friends, and the general public (e.g.: potential employers and law enforcement). To gain a comprehensive view of the contributing factors, a survey design was chosen to gather a selection of ex-offenders' personal experiences with reoccurring situations where basic needs fail to be sufficiently satisfied. This survey design also gathers data concerning which interventions will be most effective in minimizing the probability of recidivism by adequately satisfying the basic needs of ex-offenders and their families.

Purpose Statement

The goal of this research study is to determine what external and internal factors contribute to recidivism, their influence, and to discover which interventions are most effective in minimizing the probability of recidivism. The United States has the highest population incarcerated citizens than any other country (Scurich & Monahan, 2015). As a result, millions of people live with the legal status of being an ex-offender. Incarceration bears an indelible mark upon the mental and physical health of many individuals. However, the effects of incarceration go further to affect the ability of ex-offenders to resettle within society, to satisfy the basic needs of themselves and their families, and to repair and build interpersonal relationships (Kroner & Yessine, 2013; Scurich & Monahan, 2015).

Using a survey will aid in generalizing experiences of the study participants to the general ex-offender population. This survey will be vital in understanding the factors that seemingly cause ex-offenders to believe they have no other choice but to return to crime to satisfy their needs. Moreover, it will also help shed light on the main interventions that will contribute to addressing internal and external pressures and minimize the probability of recidivism.

Viable Research Questions and Hypotheses

Viable Research Questions

Do external factors contribute to recidivism?

Do internal factors contribute to recidivism?

Does utilizing intervention techniques affect how ex-offenders view and address recidivism?

Answering these questions can be achieved by reviewing participant responses to the research survey. Measuring survey responses with a numerically assigned, Likert-type scale seems to be the most efficient method of data acquisition (Creswell, 2009). The effectiveness of specific interventions has already been documented in various research studies. Moreover, this research study will complement prior knowledge of recidivism by determining the type and influence of external and internal factors contributing to recidivism and which interventions adequately minimize the strength of these factors.

Hypotheses

External factors affect how individuals view and address recidivism.

Internal factors affect how individuals view and address recidivism.

Intervention techniques minimize external and internal factors that influence how individuals see and address recidivism.

These directional hypotheses can be measured by examining what external and internal factors contribute to recidivism, how they influence individual views of recidivism, and what intervention techniques minimize the effects of these factors.

Research Plan

The purpose of the research study is to gain insight of a cross-section of the general population of individuals who are ex-offenders between the ages of 25 to 65 to examine the effects of external and internal factors and invention effectiveness in minimizing these factors that can lead to recidivism. The study sample will be comprised of responses from ex-offenders to surveys sent (after authorized permission from authorities) to fifty halfway houses and re-entry programs servicing male and female ex-offenders within the state of Texas. Per response ratios, all or a random selection of individuals will participate in the study. This population was chosen due to the high probability of recidivism amongst ex-offenders. The preferred method of data collection for this study is the survey method via a self-reporting framework or questionnaire (Creswell, 2009).

This approach was chosen due to the necessity of obtaining direct accounts of individual experiences of ex-offenders regarding situations where external and internal factors affect their view of recidivism and what interventions have been effective in minimizing these factors. The survey vehicle for this research was designed specifically for this study. The dependent variable in all three hypotheses is the address (and avoidance) of recidivism. The independent variables are external factors, internal factors, and intervention techniques or methods.

The survey is designed to identify how participants detect and are affected by external and internal factors, how they assess problematic situations created by these factors, and what intervention techniques or methods they utilize to address these factors. For comparative data analysis and accurate interpretation, the study finding will account for and present the number of returned and non-returned surveys to address the internal validity threat of attrition (Creswell, 2009).

Furthermore, wave analysis will be used to measure for response change from study start to completion. The independent variables will be compared via an analysis of variance. The dependent and independent variables will be assessed through descriptive analysis, which will further determine the mean, deviation, and range of scoring of study variables.

Qualitative Research Plan

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 et al., 2011; Scurich & Monahan, 2015). As a result of their new status as an ex-offender, many individuals experience extreme examples of discrimination, social stigma, and implicit bias mainly within the realm of employment. Moreover, these experiences can seem unending, even for ex-offenders who have resolved never to 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, 2015). 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 & Yessine, 2013; Scurich & Monahan, 2015). 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 in 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 effect 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, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). 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. Also, finally, as another measure of accountability and ethical repose, a select group of independent 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 aftercare interviews are vital to assess the accuracy of data interpretation and study integrity.

Mixed-Method Research Plan

Re-entry into society after incarceration can be one of the most harrowing experiences. This experience is often wrought with many obstacles, which can lead individuals towards recidivism. Studies show that incarceration affects the offender and their families, even after release (Olver et al., 2011; Scurich & Monahan, 2015). As the United States ranks as having the highest population of incarcerated individuals, millions of citizens struggle each day with the work of re-entering society as contributing members (Kroner & Yessine, 2013). Experiencing these struggles over a period can severely increase an individual's stress level, which can lead to a higher risk of recidivism.

There are external and internal factors ex-offenders must minimize or eliminate to remain successful in avoiding recidivism. Moreover, stress-induced recidivism is one of the main types of recidivism, stemming from financial stress due to factors like limited job options and lack of a livable wage. Coupled with the stress of fulfilling familial responsibilities and needs, understanding how individuals successfully deal with the threat of stress-induced recidivism creates a foundation for a solid research study to discover how these intervention methods can be used for helping other current and future ex-offenders do the same.

Purpose Statement

This study will explore perceived expectations of intervention methods for recidivism avoidance by ex-offenders and, by measuring cortisol levels, determine if a physical benefit exists in using intervention methods to avoid stress-induced recidivism (Austin-Ketch et al., 2012). This research study will help deepen the understanding of possible correlations between perceived attitudes toward intervention methods, determine if individual stress levels can potentially indicate recidivism risk, and aid in the creation of re-entry programs that directly address the needs of ex-offenders.

Viable Research Questions and Hypotheses

This study is based on two main questions:

  • How do ex-offenders perceive the benefits of using intervention methods to manage stress-induced recidivism?

  • Will cortisol level measurements vary due to perceptions of intervention method use to manage stress-induced recidivism?

The first question is qualitative in nature and will require gathering individual accounts of experiences. The second question requires a quantifiable answer, which can be gathered through cortisol level measurements.

The second question is designed to answer a hypothesis, which states that ex-offenders who utilize intervention methods to manage the threat of stress-related recidivism will have lower cortisol levels than ex-offenders who do not utilize intervention methods to manage the threat of stress-related recidivism. The required data for answering this hypothesis is quantifiable by measuring participant cortisol levels.

Research Plan

This study employs a mixed-methods research design, working with responses and cortisol measurements from participants who are ex-offenders between the ages of 25 to 65. The sample will be selected from responses from inhabitants of 50 halfway houses and re-entry programs administered by the State of Texas. The study author will randomly select 100 ex-offenders to participate, 50 males and 50 females.

Qualitative and quantitative research methods are used to provide a multi-dimensional approach to data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Creswell (2009) mentions this approach can work to minimize the threat of single-approach bias drastically. Moreover, examining a research topic from various vantage points can provide a more accurate view and understanding of the topic, interpreted data, and strengthen accurate and efficient implementation and generalization.

As a result, this study is split into two phases. The first phase will focus on gathering self-reported accounts of individual experiences with situations with a high probability of stress-induced recidivism. This phase is tasked with gathering and analyzing experiences of dealing with the threat of stress and how it can lead to recidivism. Moreover, this phase is focused on presenting the humanity of the participants, showing how stressful life after incarceration can be without access to certain resources and with overwhelming perception bias towards ex-offenders (Kroner & Yessine, 2013; Scurich & Monahan, 2015).

The second phase involved biometric data by measuring cortisol levels of participants over a period. This phase is experimental in that it seeks to determine a statistical correlation between the perception of intervention methods for managing the threat of stress-induced recidivism and cortisol levels. Administering the study phases in this order allows the quantitative data to support the qualitative data. Therefore, management of the threat of stress-induced recidivism is the dependent variable and intervention method is the independent variable.

The first phase will be administered by interview, which will be semi-structured, consisting of an interview designed to address recidivism intervention without restricting participant expression. Participants will be interviewed three times during the study and their cortisol levels will be measured during each of these interviews.

The Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis model will be used to analyze the qualitative and quantitative data after compilation (Smith et al., 2009). The author will maintain awareness of inherent bias while interpreting the meaning of participant experiences. The consistency of the qualitative data will be measured via coding, with the compiled qualitative data being audited by a neutral researcher (Creswell, 2009). The qualitative data will be analyzed to determine standard deviations, means, and score ranges. To determine statistical significance between perceptions of stress-induced recidivism threat management and cortisol levels, a t-test will be used. Threats of validity will be addressed by documenting both study phases. Finally, a follow-up interview will be conducted with study participants, where the study findings will be presented to verify the integrity and interpretation of the study findings.

Strengths and Limitations

Quantitative Research

A strength with quantitative research is that the findings can be generalized. Since the information is typically numerical, the data lends itself to easy statistical analysis. Likewise, being as such, the data is consistent, reliable, and precise. One major advantage that it has over qualitative research is that it tends to have higher credibility. People like to see numbers. Also, predictions can be made off of the data due to its consistency. Quantitative research is also more suitable for studying large numbers of people.

Among the limitations of quantitative research, a researcher may miss out on phenomena due to confirmation bias. Data produced may be too general to fit other groups or individuals. Data collected may not be able to explain complex issues because it lacks the robustness in order to do so.

Qualitative Research

Unlike qualitative research methods which provides results in numbers, qualitative research’s strengths lie in the ability to provide details about behavior, which is something that quantitative studies cannot compare to. Human experience is what qualifies this data and it can be more meaningful than data gathered in quantitative research. Another particular strength about qualitative research is that issues can be evaluated in depth and it is not limited to a scale. If new information emerges, the framework of research can be revised.

One of the down sides to qualitative research is that the presence of the researcher is required in order to gather data. Much of the research is dependent on the skills of the researcher and this can open the research to bias as well as other idiosyncrasies. One of the issues I have run across is dealing with insular communities because of the issue of anonymity and confidentiality. If you’re studying a group that’s closed off or even a cult, willing participants want to know that anything that they say cannot and will not be traced back to them. Due to the how the data is collected, qualitative research can be very time consuming as well.

Mixed Methods Research

Due to the ability of using both quantitative and qualitative methods, mixed methods can strengthen the weaknesses of each. By combining the two, as a researcher I would not be limited to only one type of data collection which could strengthen my findings in the long run. It’s also a bit more practical because as a researcher, I’m able to use all methods possible in order to research my problem.

Unfortunately, though it gains the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research methods, it also inherits its weaknesses. One of which is that it is time consuming to do and likewise, it’s not easy. Analyzing the data is not easy either and could be confusing mainly due to the amount of data collected. In order to do mixed method research, it requires the researcher to have knowledge of data collection of both methods. Typically, researchers are either familiar with one type of research. However, to get the maximum benefit of mixed method research, it requires that a researcher be able to present both, not one or the other.

References

← All posts