The Effect of Prosocial and Antisocial Relationships Structure on Offenders’ Optimism towards Desistance
Publication: Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Volume 64, Number 2
Abstract
Abstract
At the end of his career, Carlo Morselli started to be interested in how the structure of social relations could influence offenders’ prospects for reintegration and desistance. This article analyzes the data from his research project on that topic. The impacts of offenders’ relationships have traditionally been discussed from a dichotomous, risk-centered perspective opposing antisocial and prosocial peers. Social network studies allow a step back and a global view of the contexts and processes in which relationships shape trajectories. This article focuses on the ego networks of offenders as they reintegrate with society and sheds light on triadic patterns associated with increased optimism toward desistance. Interviews were conducted with residents of halfway houses (48 men and 24 women), with offenders followed by a community agency (25 men), and with incarcerated youth offenders (24 male teenagers). Structured interviews addressed multiple aspects of the lives of the offenders, including their social relations, prosocial and antisocial. A mixed-method approach was used to understand the influence of social relations in the perception of desistance potential success. First, logistic regressions were used to assess the effect of individual’s and egocentric networks’ characteristics on optimism toward desistance. Second, case studies of ego network sociograms illustrate the results and suggest hypotheses about processes that may explain them. Results show that optimism is higher when prosocial personal networks are denser, and is lower when antisocial networks are open, and as antisocial peers are connected to prosocial ties. The implications of these patterns for offenders’ desistance and network-based interventions are discussed.
Résumé
Vers la fin de sa carrière, Carlo Morselli a commencé à s’intéresser à l’influence de la structure des relations sociales sur les perspectives de réintégration et de désistance des contrevenantes. Cet article analyse les données de son projet de recherche sur ce sujet. Les répercussions des relations des contrevenantes sont habituellement considérées dans une perspective dichotomique centrée sur le risque, qui oppose les personnes antisociales et prosociales de son entourage. L’étude des réseaux sociaux permet de prendre du recul et donne une vision d’ensemble des contextes et des processus qui influencent les parcours. Cet article porte en particulier sur les réseaux sociaux égocentriques des contrevenantes qui réintègrent la société. Il met en lumière les configurations triadiques associées à un optimisme accru envers la désistance. Des entrevues ont été conduites avec des résidentes de maisons de transition (48 hommes et 24 femmes), des contrevenants suivis par un organisme communautaire (25 hommes) et des jeunes contrevenants incarcérés (24 adolescents). Les entretiens structurés abordent de nombreux aspects de la vie des contrevenant·e·s, y compris leurs relations sociales, prosociales et antisociales. La méthode mixte utilisée permet de comprendre l’influence des relations sociales sur la perception d’une désistance potentiellement réussie. D’abord, l’effet des caractéristiques de l’individu et de ses réseaux égocentriques sur l’optimisme envers la désistance est évalué au moyen de régressions logistiques. Ensuite, des études de cas portant sur des sociogrammes de réseaux égocentriques illustrent les résultats obtenus et suggèrent des hypothèses quant aux processus qui pourraient les expliquer. Les résultats montrent que l’optimisme est plus élevé quand les réseaux personnels prosociaux sont plus denses, et plus bas quand les réseaux antisociaux sont ouverts et que des pairs antisociaux se greffent aux relations prosociales. Les conséquences de ces configurations sur la désistance des contrevenant·e·s et les interventions basées sur les réseaux sont ensuite présentées.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Agnew, R. and J.M. Kaufman 2016. Anomie, Strain and Subcultural Theories of Crime. London: Routledge.
Andrews, D.A. and J. Bonta 2006. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct, 4th ed. Cincinnati: LexisNexis/Anderson.
Andrews, D.A., J. Bonta, and J.S. Wormith 2011. The risk–need–responsivity (RNR) model. Criminal Justice and Behavior 38(7): 735–55.
Barry, C.M. and K.R. Wentzel 2006. Friend influence on prosocial behavior: The role of motivational factors and friendship characteristics. Developmental Psychology 42(1): 153–63.
Boman, J.H. and T.J. Mowen 2017. Building the ties that bind, breaking the ties that don’t: Family support, criminal peers, and re-entry success. Criminology and Public Policy 16(3): 751–72.
Bonta, J. and D.A. Andrews 2007. Risk–Need–Responsivity Model for Offender Assessment and Rehabilitation. Ottawa: Public Safety Canada.
Burt, R.S. 1992. Structural Holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burt, R.S. 2005. Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cid, J. and J. Marti 2012. Turning points and returning points: Understanding the role of family ties in the process of desistance. European Journal of Criminology 9(6): 603–20.
Cloward, R.A. and L.E. Ohlin 1960. Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York: Free Press.
Cohen, A.K. 1965. The sociology of the deviant act: Anomie theory and beyond. American Sociological Review 30(1): 5–14.
Crossley, N., E. Bellotti, G. Edwards, M.G. Everett, J. Koskinen, and M. Tranmer 2015. Social Network Analysis for Ego-Nets: Social Network Analysis for Actor-Centred Networks. London: Sage Publications.
Davis, C., S.J. Bahr, and C. Ward 2012. The process of offender reintegration: Perceptions of what helps prisoners reenter society. Criminology and Criminal Justice 13(4): 446–69.
Doherty, E.G. 2006. Self-control, social bonds, and desistance: A test of life-course interdependence. Criminology 44(4): 807–33.
Duwe, G. and V. Clark 2011. Blessed be the social tie that binds: The effects of prison visitation on offender recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review 24(3): 271–96.
Emirbayer, M. 1997. Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology 103(2): 281–317.
Everett, M. and S.P. Borgatti 2005. Ego network betweenness. Social Networks 27(1): 31–8.
Farrall, S. 2002. Rethinking What Works with Offenders: Probation, Social Context and Desistance from Crime. Cullompton, UK: Willan Publishing.
Farrall, S. and S. Maruna 2004. Desistance‐focused criminal justice policy research: Introduction to a special issue on desistance from crime and public policy. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 43(4): 358–67.
Galambos, N.L., F. Shichen, R.M. Horne, M.D. Johnson, and H.J. Krahn 2018. Trajectories of perceived support from family, friends, and lovers in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(10): 1418–38.
Gideon, L. 2010. Drug offenders’ perceptions of motivation: The role of motivation in rehabilitation and reintegration. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 54(4): 597–610. Medline:19299528
Giordano, P.C., S.A. Cernokovich, and D.D. Holland 2003. Changes in friendship relations over the life course: Implications for desistance from crime. Criminology 41(2): 293–328.
Graffam, J., A. Shinkfield, B. Lavelle, and W. McPherson 2004. Variables affecting successful reintegration as perceived by offenders and professionals. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 40(1–2): 147–71.
Granovetter, M. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–80.
Granovetter, M. 1982. The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In Social Structure and Network Analysis, ed. P.V. Marsden and N. Lin, 201–33. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Griffiths, C.T., Y. Dandurand, and D. Murdoch 2007. The Social Reintegration of Offenders and Crime Prevention. Ottawa: National Crime Prevention Centre.
Haynie, D.L. 2001. Delinquent peers revisited: Does network structure matter? American Journal of Sociology 106(4): 1013–57.
Hirschi, T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kalish, Y. and G. Robins 2006. Psychological predispositions and network structure: The relationship between individual predispositions, structural holes and network closure. Social Networks 28(1): 56–84.
Katerndahl, D., S. Burge, R. Ferrer, J. Becho, and R. Wood 2013. Differences in social network structure and support among women in violent relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 28(9): 1948–64. Medline:23262818
Krackhardt, D. 1992. The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action, ed. N. Nohria and R.G. Eccles, 216–39. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Krackhardt, D. 1999. The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations 16: 183–210.
Kreager, D.A., D.R. Schaefer, M. Bouchard, D.L. Haynie, S. Wakefield, J. Young, and G. Zajac 2016. Toward a criminology of inmate networks. Justice Quarterly 33(6): 1000–28. Medline:27616815
Laub, J.H. and R.J. Sampson 1993. Turning points in the life course: Why changes matter to the study of crime. Criminology 31(3): 301–25.
Lin, N. 1999. Building a network theory of social capital. In Social Capital, ed. Nan Lin, Karen Cook, and Ronald S. Burt, 28–51. New York: Routledge.
Lloyd, C.D. and R.C. Serin 2012. Agency and outcome expectancies for crime desistance: Measuring offenders’ personal beliefs about change. Psychology, Crime and Law 18(6): 543–65.
Marin, A. and K.N. Hampton 2007. Simplifying the personal network name generator: Alternatives to traditional multiple and single name generators. Field Methods 19(2): 163–93.
Martín, A.M., M. Padrón Goya, and S. Redondo 2019. Early narratives of desistance from crime in different prison regimes. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context 11(2): 71–9.
Maruna, S. 2011. Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Roform and Rebuild Their Lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Maruna, S. and T.P. Lebel 2002. Revisiting ex-prisoner re-entry: A buzzword in search of a narrative. In Reform and Punishment, ed. S. Rex and M. Tonry, 115–80.Cullompton: Willan.
Massoglia, M. and C. Uggen 2010. Settling down and aging out: Toward an interactionist theory of desistance and the transition to adulthood. American Journal of Sociology 116(2): 543–82. Medline:21340047
McNeill, F. 2006. A desistance paradigm for offender management. Criminology and Criminal Justice 6(1): 39–62.
Mehra, A., M. Kilduff, and D.J. Brass 2001. The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 46(1): 121–46.
Morselli, C. 2001. Structuring Mr. Nice: Entrepreneurial opportunities and brokerage positioning in the cannabis trade. Crime, Law and Social Change 35(3): 203–44.
Morselli, C. 2009. Inside Criminal Networks, Vol. 8. New York: Springer.
Morselli, C. 2012. Assessing network patterns in illegal firearm markets. Crime, Law and Social Change 57(2): 129–49.
Morselli, C., A. Gariepy, and C. Gagnon 2016. L’enchâssement social et la délinquance des pairs. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 58(3): 385–414.
Morselli, C. and P. Tremblay 2004. Criminal achievement, offender networks and the benefits of low self-control. Criminology 42(3): 773–804.
Morselli, C. and P. Tremblay 2010. Interviewing and validity issues in self-report research with incarcerated offenders: The Quebec inmate survey. In Offenders on Offending: Learning about Crime from Criminals, ed. W. Bernasco, 68–83. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Nolet, A.M., C. Morselli, and M.M. Cousineau 2021. The social network of victims of domestic violence: A network-based intervention model to improve relational autonomy. Violence against Women 27(10): 1630–54. Medline:32814488
Perry, B., B.A. Pescosolido, and S.P. Borgatti 2018. Egocentric Network Analysis: Foundations, Methods, and Models (Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rutter, N. and U. Barr 2021. Being a “good woman”: Stigma, relationships and desistance. Probation Journal 68(2): 166–85.
Saint-Charles, J., P. Mongeau, and J.F. Biron 2008. A communication perspective on video lottery terminals. International Gambling Studies 8(3): 233–47.
Sampson, R.J. and J.H. Laub 1990. Crime and deviance over the life course: The salience of adult social bonds. American Sociological Review 55(5): 609–27.
Sampson, R.J. and J.H. Laub 2003. Life‐course desisters? Trajectories of crime among delinquent boys followed to age 70. Criminology 41(3): 555–92.
Scott, J. 2017. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London: Sage.
Sutherland, E.H. 1947. Principles of Criminology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Taxman, F.S. 2017. Are you asking me to change my friends? Criminology and Public Policy 16(3): 775–82.
Uggen, C. and J. Staff 2001. Work as a turning point for criminal offenders. Corrections Management Quarterly 5: 1–16.
Visher, C.A., L. Winterfield, and M.B. Coggeshall 2005. Ex-offender employment programs and recidivism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology 1(3): 295–316.
Weaver, B. 2012. The relational context of desistance: Some implications and opportunities for social policy. Social Policy and Administration 46(4): 395–412.
Wright, B.R., A. Caspi, T.E. Moffitt, and P.A. Silva 2001. The effects of social ties on crime vary by criminal propensity: A life-course model of interdependence. Criminology 39(2): 321–51.
Wright, J.P. and F.T. Cullen 2004. Employment, peers, and life-course transitions. Justice Quarterly 21(1): 183–205.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Volume 64 • Number 2 • April 2022
Pages: 59 - 81
Copyright
© 2022 CJCCJ / RCCJP.
History
Received: 31 January 2022
Revision received: 31 January 2022
Accepted: 2 February 2022
Published in print: April 2022
Published online: 26 May 2022
Keywords:
Mots-clés :
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Related Content
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Download article citation data for:
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 2022 64:2, 59-81
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 2022 64:2, 59-81