An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Extratherapeutic Factors Leading Criminal Offenders to Successful Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As systems shift from punitive to rehabilitative measures, correctional departments aim to reduce recidivism; however, an overlooked consideration is the quality of systems and interactions to which the person returns to live. In this qualitative study, we examined if extratherapeutic factors were essential for recidivism reduction. We analyzed two interviews conducted with former offenders to examine their lived experiences surrounding incarceration, rehabilitation, and reintegration. Five themes (Loyalty, Situational Stressors, Community, Work/Livelihood, Support System) and one subtheme (Hope) emerged after analyzing the transcribed interviews. Although each participant's experience was vastly different, shared meanings emerged leading to common themes between participants ‘ lived experiences. Interestingly enough, hope emerged as essential for one participant. Results indicated factors influencing change can occur, promoting successful community reentry with assistance from personal support systems. Limitations are covered along with ideas for future research, as well as implications for clinical practice in psychology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".