Abstract
ABSTRACT Meta-analyses of the correctional treatment literature have become increasingly common in recent years. While these analyses have made significant contributions to our understanding of“what works” with offenders, they have been the subject of considerable scholarly criticism. This article discusses these critiques by revisiting Gottfredson's (1979) discussion of“treatment destruction techniques,” and argues that much of the attacks leveled against the meta-analyses of the correctional rehabilitation literature are not as damaging as critics often contend. The implications for future meta-analyses of the“what works” literature are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
