Individuals in the criminal justice system show differences in cooperative behaviour: Implications from cooperative games.

BACKGROUND: The high rate of incarceration in the USA warrants continued exploration into understanding and ameliorating criminal behaviour. The growing use of cooperative games to measure developing prosocial behaviours has never been explored in a US criminal justice population. AIMS: The aim of this study is to examine cooperative game play among offenders under supervision in the community. We hypothesised that the offenders would use more guarded and self-preserving strategies and be more likely to excel in short-lived interactions than law-abiding community citizens. METHODS: Community supervised offenders (83) and general population comparison participants (41) were recruited by town centre adverts placed in popular shops. Using the supervision centres as venues, all participants were asked to complete four cooperative games (prisoner's dilemma, public goods game, ultimatum game and trust game), not knowing the identity of the other player who was always, in fact, the experimenter. RESULTS: The offender and general population groups were similar in age (early 30s), sex (2/3 men), race (45% white) and IQ distribution (low average range). Offenders made lower offers in the ultimatum game, had lower scores in the prisoner's dilemma, made lower investments and offered lower returns in the trust game and contributed less in the public goods game. CONCLUSIONS: Even community-based offenders thus seem to have deficits in the kinds of gameplay, which are informed by theories of social cooperation, but the direction of relationship with offending remains unclear. The apparent deficits may reflect adaptation to a hostile environment where trust and reciprocity are not rewarded. It is also important to recognise that these community-based offenders did develop play indicative of trust and reciprocity, they just did so more slowly than the comparison group. This may have implications for allowing time for rapport to develop in supervisory relationships. Finally, offenders may benefit from learning that although more guarded behaviours may be adaptive in a rough neighbourhood or in jail, they may be maladaptive and limit their success in other settings such as the work place.

What does self-identified drug of choice tell us about individuals under community corrections supervision?

OBJECTIVES: The term "drug of choice" (DOC) refers to substance abusers' preferred drug and this information often adds to the clinical picture of the patient because substance users often meet diagnostic criteria for dependence on multiple drugs. Characteristics such as age, race, marital status, and psychiatric illnesses have been shown to differentiate among individuals with different DOC preferences. However, no studies have examined DOC in the context of criminal behavior and other drug dependencies. METHODS: The participants (N = 15,475) of a community corrections program, Treatment Alternatives for Safer Communities (TASC), were classified by DOC for the 4 main drugs of abuse (alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, and opioids) and each drug class was compared with the other 3 DOC using binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Alcohol as DOC was associated with being older, white, male, having private health insurance, being medicated for a mental health disorder, and having a criminal history of person offenses. Cocaine as DOC was associated with being older, black, female, attempting suicide, having less than a high school education, living in a shelter or with relatives, being unemployed, being uninsured, being physically and sexually abused, and committing property and court offenses but not person or substance offenses. Marijuana as DOC was associated with being younger, black, male, never being married, and committing substance but not property or court offenses. Opioids as DOC were associated with being white, female, being married, higher education, being unemployed, and being medicated for a mental health disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there were substantial differences between the 4 DOC groups, and the results are commensurate with expectations based on the abuse and dependency literature.