The Counseling Psychologist

Transcription

1 The Counseling Psychologist Vocational Interventions with Offenders: Interdisciplinary Research, Theory, and Integration Femina P. Varghese The Counseling Psychologist : 1011 originally published online 5 December 2012 DOI: / The online version of this article can be found at: Published by: On behalf of: Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association Additional services and information for The Counseling Psychologist can be found at: Alerts: Subscriptions: Reprints: Permissions: >> Version of Record - Sep 4, 2013 OnlineFirst Version of Record - Dec 5, 2012 What is This? Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS on October 15, 2013

2 462369TCP / The Counseling PsychologistVarghese The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalspermissions.nav Major Contribution Vocational Interventions with Offenders: Interdisciplinary Research, Theory, and Integration The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) The Author(s) 2012 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalspermissions.nav DOI: / tcp.sagepub.com Femina P. Varghese 1 Abstract Vocational interventions for criminal justice populations have existed for years in various forms, but have traditionally not used an interdisciplinary approach and have shown significant limitations in effectiveness. This article informs scholars and practitioners of interdisciplinary research on vocational interventions and how knowledge from criminal justice literature and career theory can be combined so that relevant and effective theory-based vocational interventions for offenders and ex-offenders can be developed. Such an integrative approach would address the limitations of existing approaches and would foster the development of vocational interventions that go beyond what is offered currently. A model summarizing this integrative approach is provided. This article concludes by presenting understudied areas in offender career development, such as offenders willingness to work, illegal employment as a form of work, and the implications of a criminal record on career development. Continued research in these areas can promote effective rehabilitative efforts that meet the vocational needs of this marginalized population. Keywords career, work, offender, interventions, vocational programs, recidivism 1 University of Central Arkansas, Conway, AR, USA Corresponding Author: Femina P. Varghese, Department of Psychology and Counseling, University of Central Arkansas, 201 Donaghey Ave., Conway, AR 72035, USA. fvarghese@uca.edu

3 1012 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) For offenders, the long-term effectiveness of vocational interventions is measured not simply in terms of career outcomes, such as employment, but also in terms of how the interventions translate to a decreased return to criminal behavior, also termed recidivism (see Redcross, Bloom, Azurdia, Zweig, & Pendus, 2009; Visher, Winterfield, & Coggeshall, 2005). Counseling psychology offers numerous vocational theories that have been applied effectively for a variety of populations in the form of vocational interventions. However, vocational interventions that target noncriminal populations may not be equally effective for offenders who face unique challenges in regard to their employment options (Harris & Keller, 2005) as well as unique personal characteristics that place them at risk of reoffending (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Walters, 1990). Therefore, there is a need for counseling psychologists to understand the distinctive characteristics of offenders and apply them to vocational theory so they can develop vocational interventions that are relevant for this population. Existing vocational interventions for offenders, often termed vocational programs in the correctional literature, are limited in their effectiveness. Whereas there are numerous benefits in helping offenders find gainful employment, including decreasing recidivism (see Varghese & Cummings, 2012), many vocational programs appear to demonstrate little to no effectiveness in decreasing recidivism (Visher et al., 2005), with some vocational programs showing higher rates of recidivism among participants compared to nonparticipants (see Brewster & Sharp, 2002). This suggests that current vocational programs may not be altering attitudes and behaviors to discourage criminal behavior (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Such limitations among current programs have caused experts within the field of criminal justice to assert that there is still a great need to develop effective offender interventions (Petersilia, 2004), particularly quality vocational interventions based on established principles of effectiveness (Lawrence, Mears, Dubin, & Travis, 2002). Considering this need, this article provides pertinent information for practitioners and scholars on the factors relevant for developing effective vocational interventions for offenders and ex-offenders. First, literature on existing vocational interventions with criminal justice populations is reviewed. Then, principles from the criminal justice literature on effective interventions for offenders are described. The criminal justice principles are then combined with social cognitive career theory (SCCT; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994) to present an integrative approach to developing theoretically grounded vocational interventions for offenders. This article provides viable

4 Varghese 1013 information that can be used in correctional programs as well as in individual counseling to benefit offenders and ex-offenders. Similar to the introduction, this article will use the term offender to include those who are within a prison setting as well as those who may be serving a community sentence (i.e., parole or probation). The term ex-offender will be used to describe those who are no longer incarcerated or serving a sentence. Limitations of Existing Vocational Interventions Vocational interventions for offenders have existed for years in the form of various vocational programs (Travis & Petersilia, 2001). These vocational interventions are diverse and consist of programs that engage the offender in actual paid employment in the community (work release), focus on training for specific jobs (job training), help offenders obtain a general equivalency diploma or college education (vocational education), employ offenders within the prison (prison or correctional industries), and teach offenders job search skills both within and outside of prison (job counseling or employment readiness) (Bouffard, Mackenzie, & Hickman, 2000; Lawrence et al., 2002; Phipps, Korinek, Aos, & Lieb, 1999). Despite their diversity, the effectiveness of these prison- and community-based programs has yet to be fully established in the literature. Most of the research on these vocational programs has not benefitted from rigorous experimental design that uses random assignment (see Bouffard et al., 2000; Hurry, Brazier, Parker, & Wilson, 2006; Phipps et al., 1999; Wilson, Gallagher, & MacKenzie, 2000). What can be ascertained from the few investigations that did use more rigorous designs is that comprehensive vocational interventions that counseled offenders on employment development, job readiness skills, and job search before placing offenders in paid employment appeared the most promising in decreasing recidivism (Hurry et al., 2006; Phipps et al., 1999; Redcross et al., 2009). Notably, less effective programs were those that were not comprehensive but focused simply on one particular intervention, such as job placement (Hurry et al., 2006; Phipps et al., 1999). Importantly, none of the existing reviews on offender vocational programs revealed details of changes within the offender as a result of the programs, but focused on outcomes such as recidivism and, to a lesser degree, employment (e.g., Bouffard et al., 2000; Hurry et al., 2006; Phipps et al., 1999; Wilson, et al., 2000; Visher et al., 2005). Finally, very few vocational programs were developed specifically for women and ethnic minorities (Hurry et al., 2006).

5 1014 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) The Importance of Offender Attitudes The current literature reveals a need to use more rigorous methods when investigating the effectiveness of interventions for offenders as well as a need to understand the offenders perspectives regarding work that may lead to better employment outcomes. Qualitative studies may also be valuable, particularly in understanding offenders meaning of work. As indicated in the introduction to this issue (Varghese & Cummings, 2012), correctional programs have been traditionally viewed from a sociological perspective, and thus overarching outcomes such as recidivism have been the focus instead of specific personal characteristics, such as attitudes within the offender, which stems from a psychological perspective (see Petersilia, 2004). Undeniably, outcomes such as recidivism are important in offender interventions, but understanding offender characteristics such as attitudes is also critical because they may mediate the relationship between the vocational intervention and the desired outcome. The majority of existing employment programs, however, are not focused on targeting offenders attitudes, particularly career attitudes. In fact, Vernick and Reardon (2001) investigated correctional vocational programs in the nation and found that the majority of vocational programs have failed to include a career development component that changes offenders career thoughts and attitudes. Due to this oversight, offenders are not receiving the needed assistance in career decision making, job search, and the development of positive attitudes toward work (Vernick & Reardon, 2001). Vernick and Reardon asserted that because of such deficits, vocational programs are likely to continue to be limited in effectiveness because they are not making needed changes within the offender. Counseling psychology as a discipline has promise in its ability to incorporate the career-development component in offender vocational interventions and to shed light on the value of modifying career attitudes. For example, two studies published within counseling journals (i.e., Feldman & Marinelli, 1975; Filella-Guiu & Blanch-Plana, 2002) have revealed the effectiveness of changing offender career attitudes. Although dated, Feldman and Marinelli (1975) used an experimental design that randomly assigned 90 inmates to an experimental group, a control group that was briefly provided an explanation of career planning, and another control group given no career information. The experimental group received the full intervention of six sessions, including an explanation of career planning, discussion of positive vocational statements (p. 360), career assessment with individualized consultation, and a group discussion of the program. Results indicate that the experimental

6 Varghese 1015 group had significantly higher scores on a measure of vocational maturity than did the other two groups, which shows that vocational maturity can be increased among offenders. Employment and recidivism were not measured as outcome variables in this study. Filella-Guiu and Blanch-Plana (2002) evaluated a program in Spain that included educating offenders on their rights and responsibilities as employees, informing offenders on job market and job selection, and teaching offenders job search skills (e.g., information on potential avenues to seek employment, skills in completing a job application, and interviewing skills). An evaluation of 196 total offenders assigned to an experimental group or a control group found that those who participated in the program had increased levels of professional self-esteem (p. 61), knowledge about work, and knowledge in job search. The program also showed effectiveness on job obtainment, as 6-month post-program preliminary results (using only released participants) reveal that program participants were more successful in finding jobs (48%) than were those in the control group (23%; Filella-Guiu & Blanch- Plana, 2002). No information on recidivism was provided in their study. Although changing career attitudes alone has not evidenced reductions in recidivism targeting cognitions does predict decreases in recidivism. Van Voorhis, Spruance, Ritchey, Listwan, and Seabrook (2004) evaluated the Georgia Cognitive Skills Program (p. 282), which educated offenders in seven areas: problem solving, creative thinking, social skills, management of emotions, negotiation skills, values enhancement, and critical reasoning (p. 287). Their study consisted of randomly assigning 498 parolees to an experimental group or a control group. Employment and recidivism rates were then evaluated after participants completed the program. Results indicate that, at 3-month follow-up, program completers were more likely to be employed (78.4%) than were controls (67%; Van Voorhis et al., 2004). However, no employment differences between completers and controls were found at the 6- and 9-month follow-ups (Van Voorhis et al., 2004). Regarding recidivism, at 30-month follow-up, after controlling for risk factors such as history of violence, number of imprisonments, and education, those who completed the program recidivated less (27%) than did nonparticipants (44%) and those who had dropped out of the study (66%; Van Voorhis et al., 2004). The literature demonstrates that targeting career attitudes and skills increases positive vocational outcomes, and targeting cognitions decreases recidivism. The following study suggests that targeting both employment attitudes as well as cognitions has implications for increasing vocational outcomes and decreasing recidivism. A study by Bucklen and Zajac (2009) that used surveys and interviews found that negative employment attitudes, high

7 1016 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) levels of antisocial attitudes, deficits in problem solving, and unrealistic expectations (p. 239) were related to violating parole. In regard to employment, Bucklen and Zajac studied parole successes (p. 245, those who did not violate parole or recidivate) and parole violators (p. 239), and both groups reported equal ability in finding a job. Parole successes, however, were more likely to keep a job, had higher job satisfaction, received higher pay, and were less likely to make complaints regarding income than were parole violators (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009). The greatest difference between parole successes and parole violators was found in their employment attitudes: parole successes were willing to work any job, whereas violators were unwilling to work entry-level positions (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009). Violators also had more feelings of entitlement to higher paying jobs (p. 253) and had unrealistic beliefs toward work (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009). The authors found that although parole successes also complained about their work situation, including pay, they were more likely to believe in their ability to overcome these obstacles and, therefore, did not vacate the jobs immediately; instead, they viewed their job as a potential step toward an even better job. In other words, parole successes appeared to have greater self-efficacy toward their ability to overcome barriers to obtain better jobs than did parole failures. Bucklen and Zajac suggested that offenders would benefit from interventions that not only increase job search skills but also from those that develop problem-solving skills and social skills, decrease negative cognitions, and increase positive attitudes toward work. Principles for Effective Offender Interventions: Risk, Need, and Responsivity Taken together, the literature suggests that a helpful approach to increasing positive career outcomes and decreasing negative criminal outcomes is by changing specific offender characteristics, particularly criminal attitudes and behaviors. This is consistent with research from criminal justice literature indicating that effective offender interventions use approaches that target critical criminal attitudes and behaviors, while programs that do not target such characteristics have been demonstrated to be ineffective or harmful (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). To create effective interventions for offenders that not only increase employment but also decrease recidivism, an understanding of the criminal justice literature on the factors related to decreasing recidivism is needed. Although numerous approaches that endeavor to decrease criminal reoffending exist, including restorative justice methods (see Umbreit & Armour, 2011), diversion programs (see Porter, 2011), and

8 Varghese 1017 punitive approaches (see Frost, 2006), the approach that has consistently been found to be the most effective in reducing recidivism is the psychological approach as presented by the Risk, Need, and Responsivity (RNR) model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990), also referred to as the RNR approach. The RNR approach is a model of effective correctional assessment and crime prevention services (Andrews & Bonta, 2010, p. 47) that specifies the factors that need to be targeted to decrease offenders return to criminal behavior; the model also specifies effective ways to deliver interventions for offenders. The RNR approach consists of three main principles: risk, need, and responsivity. The fundamental concepts of these principles are described next so that counseling psychologists can apply them to career theory for the purpose of developing relevant and effective vocational interventions for offenders. Those interested in reading further on these principles can consult Andrews and Bonta (2010), Gendreau (1996), Cullen and Gendreau (2000), and other related literature from these authors. Risk The principle of risk is central in the RNR approach and refers to the risk of recidivism (i.e., likelihood of committing further crimes) (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Lowencamp & Latessa, 2004). It is important that interventions correspond to the risk level of the offender, with those at greater risk of recidivism targeted for more intense interventions than those at lower risk (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Offender risk factors are categorized into the Central Eight: friendship with criminal peers (antisocial/criminal associates), substance use, employment and education problems, criminal history (record), antisocial (criminal) attitudes, antisocial personality, poor family relationships, and lack of pro-social recreational activities (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Among these eight risk factors are the Big Four, which are the most strongly related to recidivism: antisocial attitudes, antisocial personality patterns, antisocial associates, and criminal record (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). According to the risk principle, offenders who are at high risk of reoffending, which is measured by the endorsement of high levels of the eight risk factors, should receive intensive treatments, whereas lower risk offenders do not need such intensive treatments (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Intensive treatments last between three to nine months (p. 120) and utilize 40% to 70% of the offender s time while in the program (Gendreau, 1996, p. 120). If those at lower risk of recidivism are given such intensive interventions, they are more likely to recidivate (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Although the reason

9 1018 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) for this is not yet clear, it has been suggested that low-risk offenders recidivate when given more intense interventions because in the process they may be exposed to higher risk peers who may model unhealthy ways to behave (Lowencamp & Latessa, 2004). In addition, such intensive services may serve to unsettle the protective prosocial factors these offenders and ex-offenders may already possess by taking them away from prosocial family and friends and placing them with antisocial peers; the services might also take time away from a prosocial job they may already possess (Lowencamp & Latessa, 2004). Several assessments are available to distinguish the level of risk for each offender, such as the Level of Service Inventory Revised (Andrews & Bonta, 1995) and the Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised (Hare, 1990) as well as other risk assessments (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Counseling psychologists interested in working with offenders are encouraged to become knowledgeable in the use of these and other risk assessments so that offenders can benefit from appropriate intervention intensity. Need The next principle in RNR is the principle of need. Whereas the principle of risk denotes the importance of targeting those at higher risk of offending with intensive treatment and emphasizes the importance of risk assessment (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), this principle emphasizes that effective interventions target the criminogenic needs of offenders as the primary goal in treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Andrews et al., 1990; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Offenders have many needs deserving of treatment but not all of these needs are associated with their criminal behavior (Bonta & Andrews, 2007, p. 5). Criminogenic needs are characteristics endorsed by offenders that increase their risk for recidivism and can be altered (Gendreau, Little, & Goggin, 1996). In other words, criminogenic needs are those factors that can influence whether an offender will return to a life of crime and can also be changed through interventions. A meta-analysis of 131 studies found that criminogenic needs were the strongest predictors of recidivism as opposed to noncriminogenic needs such as personal distress (Gendreau et al., 1996). While personal distress can be changed, it is not the best predictor of recidivism and, therefore, not a criminogenic need (Gendreau et al., 1996). In addition, while criminal history is a predictor of recidivism, it cannot be changed; thus, it is not a criminogenic need (Gendreau et al., 1996). Therefore, all but one of the Central Eight risk factors are criminogenic needs; the one factor that is not criminogenic is criminal history because it is historical and cannot be changed (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Bonta & Andrews, 2007).

10 Varghese 1019 It is important that criminogenic needs be a primary target of treatment (Andrews, 1989) because programs that do not intentionally target any of the areas of criminogenic need are less likely to reduce recidivism and may even increase recidivism (Andrews et al., 1990; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). For example, programs that target self-esteem but do not target criminogenic needs may increase recidivism by improving the way an offender feels about himself even when committing crimes (Andrews et al., 1990; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). By targeting such noncriminogenic factors (e.g., selfesteem, anxiety, mental illness) as foremost in interventions as opposed to secondary issues, recidivism is unlikely to be decreased and the offender may continue to engage in criminal behavior (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). The RNR approach encourages those working with offenders to assess for both criminogenic needs and offender strengths and endeavor to transform the criminogenic needs into areas of strengths (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Gendreau, Goggin, and Gray (1998) reported that although employment is a clear predictor of recidivism and a criminogenic need, current offender risk assessments do not adequately investigate offenders employment-related attitudes, values, and skills. In other words, although job obtainment and employment stability are associated with decreased recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), risk assessments typically do not ask detailed questions regarding offenders attitudes, values, and beliefs regarding work (Gendreau et al., 1998). Yet these may influence gainful employment. Currently, there is a lack of vocational measures that assess offenders needs and strengths (Thompson & Cummings, 2010). This is a deficit that counseling psychologists who have expertise in vocational psychology and offenders can fill. For example, counseling psychologists who are knowledgeable of offender vocational issues can create career measures appropriate for offenders, such as an offender employment barriers scale or an offender job search self-efficacy scale. Such measures can help assess the employment needs and strengths of each offender and interventions can then be personalized to meet the areas of need and build on areas of strength. Responsivity The third principle in RNR is responsivity, which indicates that interventions need to be responsive to what works for offenders while taking into account their individual differences (e.g., personality) and needs (e.g., learning disability) (Gendreau, 1996). Responsivity refers to the importance of choosing interventions that have shown effectiveness specifically for offenders and not simply applying to offenders interventions that have worked for other populations (e.g., privileged groups) without evidence of effectiveness with

11 1020 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) offenders (Andrews, 1989). According to Andrews and Bonta (2010), sociallearning and cognitive-behavioral approaches appear to be the most successful with offenders. In particular, interventions that target high-risk offenders, use structured approaches, develop skills such as problem solving, include modeling of positive behavior, and reinforce good behavior are the most effective (Gendreau, 1996). Interventions for offenders that are non-directive, focus primarily on talk therapy, allow open expressions of anger, and are mainly focused on understanding unconscious processes are among the least effective (Cullen & Gendreau, 2000; Gendreau, 1996). These approaches, although potentially therapeutic in increasing insight and awareness, are less effective for offenders compared to the aforementioned approaches because they are less focused on teaching offenders new ways to behave (Latessa & Lowencamp, 2006). In addition, the principle of responsivity emphasizes the need to understand the individual factors of offenders, such as individual strengths, personality, race, gender, and learning preferences, and to create interventions customized for these differences (Bonta & Andrews, 2007, p. 129). Therefore, there is room to research and tailor interventions to the specific needs and cultures of the offenders. The principle of responsivity is consistent with counseling psychology ideals because it indicates the importance of establishing a strong therapeutic relationship, building on offender strengths, and taking steps to reduce barriers (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Considering the importance of client factors and the therapeutic relationship on the overall improvement of a client in psychotherapy (see Wampold, 2001), the principle of responsivity s emphasis in the therapeutic relationship and the individual needs of the offender is very relevant with regard to fostering change within the offender. In addition, the principles of RNR encourage researchers and practitioners to use structured assessments to inform interventions and to apply appropriate clinical judgment throughout work with offenders (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). The RNR approach also recognizes that the community can play an important role in discouraging criminal behavior; therefore, interventions in the community are preferred, but RNR can also be used in other settings, such as prisons (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). The RNR principles have evidenced effectiveness in reducing recidivism. Results of a meta-analysis of 225 studies found that interventions targeting the RNR risk factors reduced recidivism (e.g., reconvictions, parole violations, and rearrest; Andrews & Dowden, 2006). In particular, the principle of risk was supported more strongly in studies that also followed the other two principles of need and responsivity (Andrews & Dowden, 2006). Notably, the principle of risk was supported by studies conducted both in prison and in

12 Varghese 1021 the community, regardless of race, and was more strongly evidenced among young offenders and women (Andrews & Dowden, 2006). Similarly, Dowden, Antonowicz, and Andrews (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of 24 studies and found that offender interventions that used the RNR principles yielded more successful outcomes than those that did not. In addition, Wormith, Althouse, Simpson, Reitzel, Fagan, and Morgan (2007) investigated select meta-analytic reviews on offender treatment and reported that effective interventions used the RNR principles. In particular, in regard to vocational programs, those that used RNR were more effective than those that did not (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010). RNR: Need for Vocational Theory Evidence indicates that the RNR approach offers relevant principles that can be applied effectively in working with offenders to decrease recidivism. Yet the RNR model taken alone is still limited for offender vocational interventions because mechanisms relevant to career development are not specified in the approach. This deficit limits RNR s utility to fully explicate and promote positive career outcomes for criminal justice populations. This limitation is significant because the career-development component is much needed in vocational interventions for this population (Vernick & Reardon, 2001). Fortunately, counseling psychology offers several theories that are focused on career development, although these theories have yet to be combined with RNR principles to address critical criminal variables to reduce recidivism. The effectiveness of offender vocational interventions is measured by both decreases in recidivism and increases in vocational outcomes (e.g., Redcross et al., 2009). Therefore, an integrative approach is needed that pairs the principles of RNR with vocational theory to address both the criminal component and the career component. The principles of RNR indicate that social learning and cognitive-behavioral interventions that build on strengths and use modeling, cognitive skills, and behavioral approaches are the most efficacious for offenders (Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Whereas several vocational theories may be relevant in this regard (e.g., Krumboltz s social learning theory), social cognitive career theory (SCCT; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994) also appears to be relevant to integrate with RNR to develop theory-based vocational interventions for offenders (see Varghese & Cummings, 2012). As the introduction article delineates (see Varghese & Cummings, 2012), the extant literature on vocational theory with criminal justice populations is limited and there is room to

13 1022 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) examine how this and other career theories (e.g., relational approaches, constructivist approaches, social learning theory) can be applied for this population. Therefore, this article demonstrates how SCCT can be used with offenders but leaves room for how other vocational theories might also be applied in the future. The following section, therefore, will detail how SCCT can be combined with RNR for an integrative approach in working with offenders. RNR and SCCT: An Integrative Approach The introduction article (see Varghese & Cummings, 2012) delineates several concepts of SCCT applicable to offenders. Further, SCCT constructs and mechanisms have great relevance in understanding the career development process and creating interventions that enhance vocational outcomes (Chartrand and Rose, 1996; Lent et al., 1994). Similarly, the RNR principles have great relevance in understanding important criminal characteristics and creating interventions that decrease recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Thus, combining both approaches may offer a promising way to develop effective vocational interventions for criminal justice populations that increase vocational outcomes and decrease recidivism. Therefore, I propose an integrative model that combines SCCT s theoretical framework with the RNR approach. Such an integrative model would go beyond what is currently offered in vocational interventions for offenders because it would inform counselors of the important constructs to target for positive change, provide information on the relations between these constructs, and reveal appropriate methods in imparting interventions effectively to criminal justice populations. Assessing for Risk Such an integrative approach, as summarized in Figure 1, would place importance on the RNR principle of risk by asserting that each offender be first assessed on his or her level of risk for recidivism before delivering the intervention (see Figure 1, first box to the left). In this risk assessment, all central eight risk factors would be assessed: criminal associates, substance use, employment and education, criminal history, antisocial attitudes, antisocial personality, poor family relationships, and lack of pro-social recreational activities (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). An initial assessment of risk factors for recidivism would inform counselors on what risk factors the offender endorses so that changeable risk factors, known as criminogenic needs, can be targeted in the intervention. In addition, by applying the risk principle

14 Figure 1. Integration of RNR and SCCT for Vocational Interventions with Offenders. 1023

15 1024 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) first, counselors would be directed to tailor intervention intensity to match the risk level of the individual offender. Notably, the RNR model encourages that assessment guide interventions (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Therefore, further assessment of criminogenic needs or career constructs can be done throughout the vocational program as appropriate. Considering that Gendreau et al. (1998) has asserted that current risk assessments do not address the values and beliefs of offenders regarding employment, asking additional questions regarding offender vocational beliefs and attitudes can begin to fill this significant gap in risk assessment. For example, further questions on SCCT constructs such as employment barriers, self-efficacy, and other employment constructs would be relevant and consistent with this approach. Integrating SCCT Concepts An integrative approach would also allow scholars and practitioners to apply the SCCT framework with vocational interventions to shed light on the constructs and mechanisms of career development with criminal justice populations (see Figure 1, second box). For example, the SCCT conceptualization of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goals, and actions can be applied to understand career behaviors of offenders and ex-offenders. Applying SCCT in this manner would be appropriate. Indeed, offenders have been conceptualized to engage in activities for which they have high amounts of self-efficacy and expect will be reinforcing; they avoid activities for which they have low amounts of self-efficacy and do not expect will reward their efforts (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Consistent with this, scholars have noted that providing incentives for offenders and ex-offenders is a good way for them to obtain and maintain employment (Holzer, Raphael, & Stoll, 2003). Furthermore, SCCT constructs of person inputs and contextual influences can also be applied appropriately for offenders. Offenders and ex-offenders face numerous personal and environmental barriers in their career pursuits, including societal barriers and biases in employment as a result of race and criminal history (e.g., Pager, 2003; Varghese, Hardin, & Bauer, 2009). At least one study has suggested that employment success for parolees is associated with having the self-efficacy to overcome employment obstacles (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009). Likewise, contextual influences, such as family support and prosocial friends, are protective factors associated with decreased return to criminal behavior (Andrews & Bonta, 2010) and improved employment outcomes. Andrews and Bonta (2010) reported that the social context and the community play an important role in influencing criminal behavior. Visher and Kachnowski (2007) found family and friends the most likely to

16 Varghese 1025 offer offenders employment upon release from prison. Therefore, applying SCCT s framework to offenders would offer a relevant way to shed light on the influential factors in their vocational pursuits. As mentioned in the introductory article (see Varghese & Cummings, 2012), relational approaches may also be relevant in understanding the influence of family and friends on employment. The advantage of SCCT is that SCCT offers a way to understand how contextual barriers and supports, including family, friends, employers, and perceived or objective influences, can affect the career interests, goals, and choices that ultimately impact performance attainments (Chartrand & Rose, 1996; Lent et al., 1994). Furthermore, SCCT offers a pertinent way to understand important relationships between employment constructs for offenders. For example, SCCT might help in understanding the findings of Bucklen and Zajac (2009), particularly on the probable mechanisms that may lead offenders who perceive greater career barriers to have lower job retention. Integrating Criminogenic Needs By integrating SCCT with RNR principle, SCCT could be used to address other critical variables important for effective offender interventions, specifically criminogenic needs (see Figure 1, second box and interior box). For example, the SCCT construct of distal and proximal supports and barriers could be extended to include antisocial associates. An antisocial associate is a criminogenic need and a Big Four criminal risk factor for recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Antisocial associates refers to offenders association with those who are likely to engage in crime and disassociation from those unlikely to engage in crime (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). For offenders and ex-offenders, not all social support is positive. As much as prosocial support assists in helping this population find a job, negative social support in the form of antisocial peers can decrease positive outcomes. For example, ex-offenders who engage with antisocial peers are likely to substantially increase criminal behavior, criminal attitudes, substance abuse (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), and illegal employment such as drug dealing (Fagan, 1989). Therefore, targeting antisocial associates as a factor for change would be relevant in offender vocational interventions. Similarly, to be distinctly appropriate to criminal justice populations, the construct of person variables could also be extended to include two additional criminogenic needs and Big Four factors in criminal risk: antisocial personality and antisocial attitudes (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Although some may believe that antisocial personalities cannot be changed, Andrews and Bonta

17 1026 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) (2010) asserted that this attitude is pessimistic and arguably behind some of the punitive and nonrehabilitative approaches taken toward offenders. In addition, studies have found that treatments are efficacious with this population (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010, and Gideon & Sung, 2011, for a review). To promote treatment effectiveness, Andrews and Bonta (2010) have encouraged the focus of treatment to be on the behavioral characteristics of antisocial personality, which can be altered. Antisocial personality is characterized by behavioral characteristics that include impulsivity, irresponsibility, deceitfulness, and hostility toward others (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Antisocial attitudes, also termed criminal thinking, are thoughts, feelings, and beliefs that are supportive of criminal conduct (Andrews & Bonta, 2010, p. 234). Offenders endorse a diverse array of styles of antisocial attitudes (Walters, 1990; Yochelson & Samenow, 1976). Although risk assessments such as the Level of Service Inventory Revised (Andrews & Bonta, 1995) and the Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised (Hare, 1990) can provide general information on antisocial attitudes (Andrews & Bonta, 2010), the specific types of antisocial attitudes can be further assessed with the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (Walters, 2001), and the Measure of Offender Thinking Styles Revised (Mandracchia & Morgan, 2011), and other assessments (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Notably, SCCT does not explicitly mention any antisocial constructs (Lent et al., 1994). Yet, similar to other person inputs such as race, gender, and disabilities, offenders who endorse antisocial characteristics have also been found to perceive greater employment barriers and negative employment outcomes (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009). In other words, antisocial characteristics can influence career attitudes and outcomes. Extending SCCT s construct of person inputs to include antisocial attitudes and personality is reasonable as SCCT does mention that person inputs can include internal characteristics such as predispositions, including affect and thought patterns (Lent et al., 1994, 2000, 2002). By extending the SCCT framework to include criminogenic needs, SCCT could be made more applicable for offenders and critical criminal variables could be addressed appropriately in vocational interventions. Applying Responsivity An integrative approach would also guide the process in which vocational interventions target the important treatment factors through the RNR principle of responsivity (see Figure 1, top box). The principle of responsivity emphasizes the importance of applying interventions for offenders that have

18 Varghese 1027 been found effective for this population (Andrews, 1989). Andrews and Bonta (2010) emphasized that among the various approaches evaluated, social-learning and cognitive-behavioral interventions have emerged as particularly effective for offenders. As stated earlier, whereas other approaches may also be relevantly applied, SCCT certainly does offer a social cognitive framework from which to understand and apply the responsivity principle of using cognitive behavioral and social learning approaches. For example, in SCCT, self-efficacy is an important factor in career development (Lent et al., 1994). One example of an effective employment intervention strategy that is consistent with the responsivity principle is teaching job search skills to increase self-efficacy. This intervention strategy is also consistent with the proposed integrative approach because self-efficacy is also a central SCCT construct that is influenced by learning experiences (e.g., teaching job-search skills; Lent et al., 1994). Examples of effective interventions that modify antisocial characteristics while staying consistent with the integrative approach include modeling prosocial behavior, developing problem solving skills, and teaching anger-management skills (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Sung & Gideon, 201l). Specifically, the proposed integrative approach would incorporate antisocial attitudes as a person variable within SCCT and, therefore, would provide a framework to see how this variable can directly and indirectly influence career factors such as learning experiences, self-efficacy, and outcome expectancies. Therefore, in this integration, antisocial attitudes would be targeted as a variable that can influence career-development attitudes and behavior. The integrative approach would then allow for the use of social-learning and cognitive behavioral approaches such as modeling and cognitive restructuring to overcome these thinking patterns (Sung & Gideon, 2011) and replacing the antisocial attitudes with prosocial attitudes (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). An integrative approach would further emphasize the responsivity principle by tailoring interventions to the individual differences of the offender, including race, gender, learning disability, and other background characteristics (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Studies have indicated that ethnic minorities are responsive to vocational interventions that influence job-search skills (Menon, Blakely, Dottie, & Snow, 1995). Culture, however, needs to be considered because ethnic minority offenders face barriers similar to those experienced by others of the same background in the general population (Menon et al., 1995). Pager, Western, and Sugie (2009) suggested that providing opportunities for African American offenders and ex-offenders to have personal contact and build rapport with potential employers may decrease at least some of the barriers as a result of race and criminal background.

19 1028 The Counseling Psychologist 41(7) Additionally, female offenders and ex-offenders have been found to benefit from programs that provide support, such as meeting their child-care needs (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Delveaux, Blanchette, & Wickett, 2005). The principle of responsivity emphasizes that services need to be provided in a way that enables the person to learn the skill being taught. Therefore, those with learning disabilities need to be matched with therapists who are conducive to their learning style (Gendreau, 1996). One study suggests that illustrative learning tools may benefit at least young offenders with learning disabilities (Mishna & Muskat, 2001), although more research is still needed for this population. Immigrants face significant barriers in the criminal justice system. Due to language limitations, they may not be enrolled in prison programming, may lack knowledge about opportunities and rights, and are likely to have little social networks in the community (United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, 2009). Therefore, programs that target these disadvantages may help these groups. Considering the dearth of vocational interventions created for ethnic minorities, women, immigrants, and those with learning disabilities, these offenders would also benefit from a social justice approach, which involves advocating for their needs and promoting just societal policies (see Umbreit & Armour, 2011; Varghese & Cummings, 2012). Outcomes Finally, an integrative approach to vocational interventions for criminal justice populations would broaden outcomes to include those relevant to criminal behavior and career achievements (see Figure 1, box farthest to the right). In SCCT, performance attainments is the outcome variable and refers to career outcomes, such as education and career achievements, and does not mention recidivism (see Lent et al., 1994). For vocational interventions to be particularly relevant to offenders, however, they need to include not only career outcomes but also recidivism, an important outcome in interventions for criminal justice populations (Petersilia, 2004). In the RNR approach, career achievements in employment and education are important because they are associated with lower risk of reoffending (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Notably, the construct of performance attainments in SCCT can be operationalized appropriately for criminal justice populations because it includes not only accomplishments in vocational pursuits but also behavioral persistence (Lent et al., 1994, p. 99). An often-discussed vocational accomplishment for this population is job obtainment; vocational programs that lead to job obtainment also show decreases in recidivism, although the relationship

20 Varghese 1029 between job obtainment and recidivism may not be entirely linear (see Redcross et al., 2009; Van Voorhis et al., 2004). Less discussed, but perhaps even more critical for offenders and ex-offenders, is the behavioral persistence piece of performance attainments, which for this population is best understood in terms of employment retention. Job retention is important, as many ex-offenders appear to have difficulty staying employed for longer than 3 months (see Redcross et al., 2009; Van Voorhis et al., 2004; Visher & Kachnowski, 2007). Yet greater length of time employed is associated with greater decreases in recidivism among offenders, even more so than job obtainment alone (Bucklen & Zajac, 2009; Lichtenberger, O Reilly, Miyazaki, & Kamulladeen, 2009). Although more research is needed on job retention with criminal justice populations, one approach that has been used to help this population maintain jobs is follow-up services after job obtainment (Finn, 1998). In the proposed integrative approach, after the relevant factors are targeted, they are shown to directly influence the outcomes of recidivism, job obtainment, job retention, and education (see Figure 1, box to the farthest right). Similar to SCCT, there is a feedback loop, but in this integrated approach the outcomes feedback into the risk component of the model. Positive outcomes are associated with lower risk for recidivism and negative outcomes are associated with higher risk. Level of risk will then inform scholars and practitioners on how intense the interventions must be and what factors should be targeted when the intervention is applied again. The integrative model combines both concepts from SCCT and RNR to better treat the offender and ex-offender. The RNR framework identifies what criminal factors need to be treated and how the treatment should be applied. The SCCT framework helps identify the career factors that need to be targeted and how to conceptualize the criminogenic needs of RNR to fit within a career theoretical framework. By using both approaches, outcomes such as employment, education, and recidivism can be examined as opposed to only examining career outcomes or only examining recidivism. Areas of Further Research Considering the significant void in the literature on effective vocational interventions for offenders that increase employment and decrease recidivism, there remains a need for additional research. Specifically, employment willingness, illegal employment, and the diverse characteristics of criminal history are understudied in vocational theory yet important for the career development of criminal justice populations. The proposed integrative