Of Pigeons and Prisoners

Image by vintagedept via Flickr

How do you stop criminals from re-offending? Hawaii’s trying to answer that question with a reform of its parole system, emphasizing more certain and swift punishment over infrequent and harsh punishment:

After a generation of draconian crime policy, America’s crime rates are still among the highest in the Western world. Instead of one costly problem, we now have two: crime and mass incarceration.

Judge Steven Alm of Hawaii thinks he’s found a way to alleviate both problems: changing probation so that it changes criminals. Across the United States, most probation violations go unpunished. A judge might see an offender only after he has slipped up dozens of times, at which point the judge will have a choice: let the violator off with another warning or revoke his probation, sending him to prison for years.

…

[i]n the new program, called HOPE (Hawaii’s Opportunity Probation with Enforcement), probationers were tested randomly, about once a week. Participants who tested positive for drugs were arrested on the spot, tried within 72 hours, and usually sentenced to jail for two to five days.

After just six months, HOPE probationers were 93 percent less likely to miss an appointment with an officer or to fail drug tests, according to data collected by Hawaii’s Department of the Attorney General. And since most HOPE participants were able to quit drugs and hold down steady jobs, many stopped resorting to crime. Compared to other probationers, HOPE participants were less than half as likely to be rearrested for a new offense. Though HOPE cost $1,400 more per probationer than the old system, it saved the state $6,000 per probationer in reduced incarceration costs, according to the attorney general’s report.

…

Swiftness and certainty have been fundamental principles of criminology for centuries. Cesare Beccaria, an Italian philosopher and arguably the first criminologist, wrote in 1764, “The certainty of a small punishment will make a greater impression than the fear of one more severe.” Several generations of experts reached the same conclusion: Punishments are more effective when they follow closely after crimes, and when they are levied consistently. Rather than spend resources on spectacular sanctions, the state should make the threat of punishment more credible.

Behavioral psychologists in the 20th century came to the same conclusion. Randomized experiments with children, for instance, confirmed that a slap on the wrist every time a child’s hand wanders to the cookie jar is far more effective than a sock to the jaw delivered sporadically. “There’s overwhelming evidence, whether you’re looking at pigeons or people, that we are motivated more by things that are promptly connected to our behavior,” says Dr. Keith Humphreys, senior policy adviser at the Office of National Drug Control Policy in Washington.

What’s good for the pigeon is good for the criminal.