What Are the Risk Factors of Recidivism Among Justice-Involved Women? a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Women are one of the fastest-growing correctional populations in the U.S., with rates of incarceration that have risen over 700% in the past 40 years. Although most incarcerated women eventually return to their communities, approximately two-thirds recidivate within the three years following their release. In order to reduce these rates, it is essential to learn more about the factors placing women at risk for continued criminal offending. Research has identified a set of eight gender-neutral risk factors that have been found to predict reoffending among men and women. However, a growing body of research suggests that women also experience unique risk factors (i.e. gender-responsive risk factors) that drive their criminal behavior. In order to understand which risk factors are most relevant to women’s recidivism, a systematic review and meta-analysis was used to explore the relationship between gender-neutral and gender-responsive risk factors and criminal recidivism among adult women in the U.S. criminal justice system.

Methods: The methodology for the present review was based on guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Systematic, computerized literature searches were developed with a reference librarian and conducted in five databases. Title and abstract screening, full-text reviews, and data extraction were performed, and methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data from included studies were tabled and analyzed, and two researchers coded risk factors into 19 separate risk domains. Separate meta-analyses were conducted for all 19 risk domains using two and three-level random effects models to account for effect size dependencies. Subgroup analyses were then performed to explore potential sources of variability among risk domains.

Findings: 7,251 manuscripts were identified for title/abstract review and 372 manuscripts were selected for full-text review. Sixty-four unique studies met eligibility criteria, yielding 784 effect size estimates from a total sample of 77,519 justice-involved women. Thirteen of the 19 risk domains were found to be significant, with the strongest effect sizes observed for the domains of antisocial personality pattern, antisocial associates, substance misuse, and financial needs. Subgroup analyses suggested that effect sizes differed with respect to whether manuscripts were published, whether effect sizes were bivariate or multivariate, and the racial composition of study samples.

Discussion: Our results provide support for the relevance of both gender-neutral and gender-responsive risk factors for women’s recidivism. These findings suggest that while gender-neutral risk factors play a central role in women’s recidivism, justice-involved women also have risk factors extending beyond those identified in the gender-neutral research, which should be addressed in correctional services delivered to this population. Future research is urgently needed to improve our understanding of how recidivism risk factors can be most effectively targeted by interventions that aim to reduce women’s recidivism, as well as to understand how risk factors interact with and influence one another.