Does GPS supervision of intimate partner violence defendants reduce pretrial misconduct? Evidence from a quasi-experimental study

dc.contributor.authorGrommon, Eric
dc.contributor.authorRydberg, Jason
dc.contributor.authorCarter, Jeremy G.
dc.contributor.departmentSchool of Public and Environmental Affairsen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-22T17:09:20Z
dc.date.available2019-02-22T17:09:20Z
dc.date.issued2017-12
dc.description.abstractObjectives This research examines the effect global positioning system (GPS) technology supervision has on pretrial misconduct for defendants facing intimate partner violence charges. Methods Drawing on data from one pretrial services division, a retrospective quasi-experimental design was constructed to examine failure to appear to court, failure to appear to meetings with pretrial services, and rearrest outcomes between defendants ordered to pretrial GPS supervision and a comparison group of defendants ordered to pretrial supervision without the use of monitoring technology. Cox regression models were used to assess differences between quasi-experimental conditions. To enhance internal validity and mitigate model dependence, we utilized and compared results across four counterfactual comparison groups (propensity score matching, Mahalanobis distance matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and marginal mean weighting through stratification). Results Pretrial GPS supervision was no more or less effective than traditional, non-technology based pretrial supervision in reducing the risk of failure to appear to court or the risk of rearrest. GPS supervision did reduce the risk of failing to appear to meetings with pretrial services staff. Conclusions The results suggest that GPS supervision may hold untapped case management benefits for pretrial probation officers, a pragmatic focus that may be overshadowed by efforts to mitigate the risk of pretrial misconduct. Further, the results contribute to ongoing discussions on bail reform, pretrial practice, and the movement to reduce local jail populations. Although the cost savings are not entirely clear, relatively higher risk defendants can be managed in the community and produce outcomes that are comparable to other defendants. The results also call into question the ability of matching procedures to construct appropriate counterfactuals in an era where risk assessment informs criminal justice decision-making. Weighting techniques outperformed matching strategies.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationGrommon, E., Rydberg, J., & Carter, J. G. (2017). Does GPS supervision of intimate partner violence defendants reduce pretrial misconduct? Evidence from a quasi-experimental study. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 13(4), 483-504. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-017-9304-4en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/18445
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s11292-017-9304-4en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Experimental Criminologyen_US
dc.rightsIUPUI Open Access Policyen_US
dc.sourceAuthoren_US
dc.subjectdomestic violenceen_US
dc.subjectGPS supervisionen_US
dc.subjectintimate partner violenceen_US
dc.titleDoes GPS supervision of intimate partner violence defendants reduce pretrial misconduct? Evidence from a quasi-experimental studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Grommon_2017_does.pdf
Size:
1 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: