MyData:What Is MyData? | Login/Account Info | Download Saved Files | Logout
Description & Citation--Study No. 4383 | |
Bibliographic Description | |
| ICPSR Study No.: | 4383 |
|---|---|
| Persistent URL: | http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04383 |
| Title: | Effects of Short-Term Batterer Treatment for Detained Arrestees in Sacramento County, California, 1999-2000 |
| Principal Investigator(s): | Bruce G. Taylor, Police Foundation |
| Christopher D. Maxwell, Michigan State University | |
| Funding Agency: | United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice |
| Grant Number: | 98-IJ-CX-K014 |
| Bibliographic Citation: | Taylor, Bruce G., and Christopher D. Maxwell. EFFECTS OF SHORT-TERM BATTERER TREATMENT FOR DETAINED ARRESTEES IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 1999-2000 [Computer file]. ICPSR04383-v1. Sacramento, CA: California State University [producer], 2000. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2007-02-13. doi:10.3886/ICPSR04383 |
Scope of Study | |
| Summary: | This study evaluated the effects of a program for detained arrestees developed by the Sacramento Sheriff's Department. The program was set up as an early intervention program to provide domestic violence (DV) education for arrestees during their time of detention before going to court. This evaluation used an experimental design. The researchers randomly assigned 629 batterers to either the batterer treatment wing of the jail or to a no-treatment control group in another wing of the jail. Interviews were conducted with the batterers and victims shortly after the arrest that placed the batterer in the Sacramento jail (Parts 1 and 2) and again six months after the intervention or control condition was concluded (Parts 3 and 4). Official police arrest data on recidivism were also collected post-arrest (Part 5). Interviews were conducted over the phone, except for the baseline batterer interviews that were done in the jail, and for those who were not available for interviewing, over the phone. Activities of the batterer treatment program included: mandatory detention in a special DV jail wing supervised by correction officers who had received special DV training, batterer educational workshops, daily Twelve-Step Drug/Alcohol addiction support groups, and strict regulations on television watching (special nonviolent educational programs were the only available programs). Batterer education classes were held daily, and the research team checked attendance logs. The arrestees were required at least to attend the program classes and Narcotics Anonymous/Alcoholics Anonymous groups and sit quietly. For the control group, participants were assigned to the regular part of the jail and received the usual incarceration experience of persons detained in the Sacramento County Jail (including no treatment services). Official police arrest data on recidivism were analyzed for up to one year post-arrest (Part 5). Treatment implementation data (Part 6), which records the frequency of the batterer's attendance in the various treatment programs offered in the special DV jail wing, and variables used in the analysis for the project's final report (Part 7) are also available with this collection. In addition to general demographic variables such as age, race, religion, source of income, and employment situation, specific variables are gathered for specific datasets. Variables collected in Parts 1 and 2 (Batterer and Victim Baseline Data) include information regarding whether or not the batterer was in the treatment or control group, the relationship between the batterer and victim, and types of injuries the victim received. Parts 3 and 4 (Batterer and Victim Six-Month Data) contain variables related to employment and living situation, as well as any additional assistance either party received since the arrest event. Variables in Part 5 (Tracking Database) include the date, location, and length of interviews. Part 6 (Treatment and Implementation Data) contains variables related to the different programs the batterer in the experimental group may have participated in. The variables for Part 7 (Supplemental Final Report Variables) include information about the study participants such as whether all four interviews were completed and the presence of any new domestic violence charges. |
| Subject Term(s): | domestic assault, domestic violence, offenders, recidivism, treatment, treatment outcome, violence against women |
| Smallest Geographic Unit: | None |
| Geographic Coverage: | California, United States |
| Time Period: | 1999 - 2000 |
| Date(s) of Collection: | September 27, 1999 - August 6, 2000 |
| Unit of Observation: | individual |
| Universe: | Adult males under the jurisdiction of Sacramento County who were arrested for domestic violence offenses between September 27, 1999 and August 6, 2000. |
| Data Type: | survey data, event/transaction data, and administrative records data |
Methodology | |
| Purpose of the Study: | This study evaluated the effects of a program for detained arrestees developed in the Sacramento Sheriff's Department. The program was set up as an early intervention program to provide domestic violence (DV) education for arrestees during their time of detention before going to court. The program objectives were to raise awareness ("break down the wall of denial") for DV offenders, educate program participants on nonviolent conflict resolution skills, increase receptivity to long-term treatment, provide the opportunity for drug and alcohol intervention, and reduce domestic violence recidivism. The objectives of the research were to evaluate the effectiveness of this program against a no-treatment control group on reductions in DV recidivism. |
| Study Design: | This evaluation used an experimental design. Data were collected on 629 arrest cases for male-perpetrated domestic violence in Sacramento County, California from September 27, 1999 to August 6, 2000. The researchers randomly assigned the batterers to either the batterer treatment wing of the jail or to a no-treatment control group in another wing of the jail. Interviews were conducted with the batterers and victims shortly after the arrest that placed the batterer in the Sacramento jail (Parts 1 and 2) and again six months after the intervention or control condition was concluded (Parts 3 and 4). Official police arrest data on recidivism were also collected for up to one year post-arrest (Part 5). Interviews were conducted over the phone, except for the baseline batterer interviews that were done in the jail, and for those who were not available for interviewing over the phone. The survey instruments all took on average about 40 to 45 minutes to administer by a trained interviewer. In order to ensure full voluntary subject participation, an extensive interviewer-training program was put in place. Activities of the batterer treatment program included: mandatory detention in a special DV jail wing that was supervised by correction officers who had received special DV training, batterer educational workshops, daily Twelve-Step Drug/Alcohol addiction support groups, and strict regulations on television watching (special nonviolent educational programs were the only available programs). Batterer education classes were held daily, and the research team checked attendance logs. These classes were conducted by Men Allied Nationally Against Living in Violent Environments (MANALIVE) and by Women Escaping A Violent Environment (WEAVE) on a rotating basis. The classes were about three hours in length. The average length of incarceration for the DV arrestees was about five days, during which they received the interventions while held in the special wing of the jail. The arrestees were required at least to attend the program classes and Narcotics Anonymous/Alcoholics Anonymous groups and sit quietly. For the control group, participants were assigned to the regular part of the jail and received the usual incarceration experience of persons detained in the Sacramento County Jail (including no treatment services). The research team conducted announced and unannounced assessments of the fidelity of the interventions, during which a sampling of intervention sessions were observed, coded, and compared to the written curriculum by two independent raters present in each of the sessions. Inter-rater reliability exceeded 95 percent, with over a 90 percent agreement between what was occurring in the sessions compared to the curriculum. Treatment implementation data (Part 6), which records the frequency of the batterer's attendance in the various treatment programs offered in the special DV jail wing, and includes variables used in the analysis for the project's final report (Part 7) are also available with this collection. |
| Sample: | Persons eligible to enter the experiment included adult men: (1) who had been arrested for a misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense in Sacramento County, California, against a female victim, (2) who did not put forward a $10,000 bail, (3) who had no criminal gang affiliations, and (4) who had no prior history of serving a sentence in jail or prison for one year or greater. The selection of DV arrestees into the special wing of the jail was not a voluntary process. Between September 27, 1999 and August 6, 2000, the Sacramento County Main Jail booked approximately 50,000 male arrestees. Of those, about 5 percent or 2,500 were arrested on DV offenses. The batterer program excluded 50 percent of DV arrestees because of prior convictions. Therefore, the program's eligibility pool was 1,040 cases for the 10-month study intake period. The study lost an additional 370 cases due to arrestees making bail and 41 cases for a variety of other reasons. The final sample consisted of 629 adult males arrested for a misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense in Sacramento County, California, against a female victim. The researchers had to contend with the possibility of men in the experiment getting re-arrested and re-entering the experiment. Each time a person was entered into the experiment, the research staff checked the experiment log for a previous entry. For the 95 repeat cases, the study team assigned each back to their original condition (47 treatment and 48 control cases) to maintain a clear distinction between the treatment and control groups. No discernible pattern to these 95 cases was found in terms of differences between the treatment and control groups. |
| Data Source: | Baseline and six-month follow-up data for this study were gathered through both face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews with batterers and victims. Additional one-year tracking recidivism data were obtained from official police arrest data. |
| Mode of Data Collection: | face-to-face interview |
| telephone interview | |
| record abstracts | |
| Description of Variables: | In addition to general demographic variables such as age, race, religion, source of income, and employment situation, specific variables are gathered for specific datasets. Variables in Parts 1 and 2 (Batterer Baseline and Victim Baseline datasets) include information about whether or not the batterer was in the treatment or control group, reason for batterer arrest, relationship to victim/batterer, types of injuries the victim received, interactions with the police, and drug/alcohol use. In Parts 3 and 4 (Batterer and Victim Six-Month Data) information is included on employment, living situation, any assistance or counseling received, the batterer and victim's relationship to one another, and whether either one of them had had any other relationships since the arrest. Information specific to the batterer six-month follow-up includes any additional violent behavior and any drug and/or alcohol use. Information specific to the victim six-month follow up includes variables regarding her experiences with the legal system regarding this case and any violence experienced by the batterer since the arrest. In Part 5 (Tracking Database), variables include the date, location, and length of the interview, and whether or not the individual was involved in the program, and if so, whether or not he was in the experimental or control group. Part 6 (Treatment Implementation Data) contains variables related to the multiple types of treatment and intervention programs batterers were offered in jail, such as the frequency of attendance in Changing Courses and Man Alive classes. In Part 7 (Supplemental Final Report Variables), the data include information about the study participants such as whether all four interviews were completed, any new domestic violence charges, and if so, the amount of time that passed between completing the treatment and the new charges. |
| Response Rates: | For the batterers, 90 percent (560 of 629) completed the baseline interview. Batterer six-month follow-up self-report data was available for only about 20 percent of the sample (119 of 629). As for the victims, 33 percent (208 of 629) completed the baseline interview and 22.7 percent (143 of 629) completed the six-month follow-up interview. Nonsignificant model findings lent support to the idea that the victims and batterers who completed an interview were not significantly different than those who did not. Official 12-month follow-up police data were available for 93 percent (582 of 629) of the batterers. |
| Presence of Common Scales: | The study used a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale II (Straus et al., 1996) that has sub-scales for controlling behavior, psychological abuse, threats of physical assault, actual physical and sexual assault, and injuries. |
Access and Availability | |
| Note: | A list of the data formats available for this study can be found in the summary of holdings. Detailed file-level information (such as record length, case count, and variable count) is listed in the file manifest. |
| Restrictions: | The data are restricted from general dissemination. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement form and specify the reasons for the request. A copy of the Restricted Data Use Agreement form can be requested by calling 800-999-0960. Researchers can also download this form as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file from the download page associated with this dataset. Completed forms should be returned to: Director, National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, Institute for Social Research, P.O. Box 1248, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248, or by fax: 734-647-8200. |
| Original ICPSR Release: | 2007-02-13 |
| Dataset(s): |
|
