We examine the level of overlap between offenders’ criminal networks (i.e., those with whom they discuss criminal activities and exchange criminal knowledge and skills) and offenders’ core... Show moreWe examine the level of overlap between offenders’ criminal networks (i.e., those with whom they discuss criminal activities and exchange criminal knowledge and skills) and offenders’ core discussion networks (i.e., those with whom they discuss important personal matters). We formulate four hypotheses based on social capital and focus theory. Empirical data from 1,904 Dutch pretrial detainees reveal that one third of the criminal network members also function as core discussion partners and that half of the criminal network members know at least one core discussion partner. This implies that offenders do not completely separate their criminal network from their core discussion network. Multilevel analyses show that this network overlap is larger if criminal network members live close to the offender and/or if they share multiple social settings. Our findings have implications for policies regarding the prevention of recidivism and the reintegration of offenders into society. Show less
Hickert, A.; Palmen, H.; Dirkzwager, A.J.E.; Nieuwbeerta, P. 2019
Objectives: To test the independent links between social support that exists prior to and during confinement with support after release for adult males incarcerated for an average of 11 months in... Show moreObjectives: To test the independent links between social support that exists prior to and during confinement with support after release for adult males incarcerated for an average of 11 months in the Netherlands. Methods: Longitudinal data from a large study on consequences of confinement, the Prison Project, are used to describe instrumental (live with) and expressive (core network) support before and after confinement from four sources (parent, partner, other family, friend) and during-confinement visits by the same groups. Multiequation models examine the contribution of preconfinement support and visits to postconfinement support, while also describing the interrelationship of support sources. Results: Preconfinement support is consistently related to receiving the same type after release. Receiving visits during confinement has a unique relationship with receiving postconfinement expressive support across all relational groups. Only visits from partners has an additional influence on instrumental support after release. Postconfinement support across provider groups is interrelated, with a positive correlation across providers for expressive support and a substitution effect for instrumental support between parents and partners. Conclusions: After controlling for important preconfinement differences in support, visits remain significantly related to postconfinement expressive support, suggesting a possible mechanism by which visits help improve reentry outcomes. Show less
Doekhie, J.; Ginneken, E. van; Dirkzwager, A.J.E.; Nieuwbeerta, P. 2019
Achtergrond In vergelijking met de algemene bevolking rapporteren gedetineerden veel psychische problemen. Een detentieperiode biedt mogelijkheden om de psychische gezondheid van gedetineerden te... Show moreAchtergrond In vergelijking met de algemene bevolking rapporteren gedetineerden veel psychische problemen. Een detentieperiode biedt mogelijkheden om de psychische gezondheid van gedetineerden te verbeteren. Hiervoor is een snelle systematische signalering van personen met psychische problemen belangrijk.DoelOnderzoeken van de psychometrische kenmerken van de Brief Symptom Inventory (bsi) in een gedetineerdenpopulatie.Methode1624 mannelijke gedetineerden uit alle penitentiaire inrichtingen vulden de bsi in. De volgende psychometrische kenmerken van de bsi-schalen werden onderzocht: de spreiding, interne consistentie van de bsi-schalen en de factorstructuur. Om de (criterium)validiteit te onderzoeken, werden bsi-scores van verschillende groepen met elkaar vergeleken.Resultaten Cronbachs α’s van de bsi-schalen varieerden van 0,97 tot 0,76. De gevonden factorstructuur kwam in belangrijke mate overeen met de veronderstelde negen klachtendimensies. Gedetineerden hadden significant hogere scores op de bsi dan mannen uit de algemene bevolking, maar significant lagere scores dan mannelijke psychiatrische patiënten. Gedetineerden die voor hun detentie behandeld waren voor psychische problemen scoorden significant hoger op de bsi dan gedetineerden bij wie dat niet het geval was.ConclusieDe bsi-vragenlijst heeft ook bij gedetineerden voldoende betrouwbare schalen en men kan er goed onderscheid mee maken tussen verschillende groepen. Show less
ObjectiveMental health problems are common in prison populations. Less is known about how mental health problems develop during imprisonment. The objective was to examine the longitudinal course of... Show moreObjectiveMental health problems are common in prison populations. Less is known about how mental health problems develop during imprisonment. The objective was to examine the longitudinal course of mental health symptoms during imprisonment and individual factors associated with the development of these sympMethodIn a prospective cohort study, 1.664 Dutch male prisoners were questioned 3 weeks after their arrival in detention. Those still in custody were questioned again after 3, 9, and 18 months. Multilevel analyses were conducted to identify predictors of the course of mental health symptoms.ResultsPrisoners reported continued elevated symptom levels compared to the general population. Inmates who entered detention with pre‐existing mental health problems and problematic alcohol/drugs use showed mental health improvements during detention.ConclusionThe high levels of prisoners’ mental health problems highlight the importance of addressing mental health issues in prison. Imprisonment does not have an overall negative effect on mental health. Show less
Dirkzwager, A.J.E.; Nieuwbeerta, P.; Beijersbergen, K.A.; Bosma, A.Q.; Cuyper, R. de; Doekhie, J.; ... ; Wermink, H. 2018