Robert Martinson's nothing
works, has become the mantra of those opposed to rehabilitation or rehabilitative ideal and had influenced some in moving
the public away from liberal programs of rehabilitation and towards retribution or deterrence as justifications for punishment.
In 1974 authors D. Lipton, Robert
Martinson and J. Wilks, using meta-analysis,
assessed all the evaluations of criminal rehabilitation programs between 1945 and 1967.
They reached the following conclusion: With few and isolated exceptions, the
rehabilitative efforts that have been reported so far have had no appreciable effect on criminal recidivism. The results of this
assessment convinced them that nothing works really and one program did not seem more
effective than another.
Robert Martinson made this
conclusion available much more widely when he published a short piece in the Public
Interest, (a liberal magazine begun in New York in 1965) asserting that nothing works and
the phrase has been associated with his name since.
From Nothing Works to What
Works: Changing Professional Ideology in the 21st Century
Francis T. Cullen, Univ. of Cincinnati, Paul Gendreau, Univ. of New Brunswick at Saint
The authors explore changes over time in criminologists' "professional
ideology", a core set of underlying beliefs that focuses academic thinking along
certain lines but not others. Until the late 1960s, criminologists believed that the
scientific study of the causes of crime would form the basis of individualized treatments
that would reduce offender recidivism. By the mid-1970s, this view had collapsed and had
been replaced by a professional ideology emphasizing that nothing works in corrections,
that the causes of criminality are structural, and that crime can only be reduced through
social justice. Although not without its merits, the authors suggest that this
professional ideology has had the unfortunate consequence of legitimating "knowledge
destruction" (showing what does not work) as the core intellectual project of
criminology and thus of undermining efforts at "knowledge construction" (showing
what does work). A "what works" movement within corrections, however, is
advancing an alternative professional ideology that, once again, endorses the use of
science to solve crime-related problems. The authors believe that this vision will improve
criminology as a discipline and contribute more than "nothing works" scholarship
to the commonweal of both offenders and the public order.
Fall of the 'Platonic
Guardians': Liberalism, Criminology
and Political Responses to Crime in England and Wales - IAN LOADER, University of
Oxford - Faculty of Law - British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp.
Abstract: This paper offers a critical reconstruction and reinterpretation of the
disposition towards the governance of crime that was ascendant in England and Wales during
the middle decades of the twentieth century - namely, liberal elitism, or what I term
Platonic guardianship. Drawing upon documentary sources, and extended oral
history/biographical interviews with retired Home Office officials, penal reformers and
criminologists, I examine the express and implied values and beliefs that constitute this
take on political responsibility towards crime and the public passions it arouses, and
consider the senses in which it may be plausibly described, ideologically, as liberal. I
then explore three moments of contention during which the legitimacy of liberal elitism
was called into question over the last several decades - the nothing works assault on
rehabilitation in the 1970s, the rise of law and order politics in the 1980s, and the
populist and punitive turn taken by penal politics since 1993.
'Something from nothing': Shifting credibility in community
correctional programmes in Australia - Mark Israel, John Dawes, Flinders
University, Adelaide, Australia
Growth in the number and size of community corrections programmes in Australia has
occurred despite concerns about the value of those programmes. In this article, we examine
the debate that took place among researchers and practitioners about the credibility of
community corrections following Martinson's apparent assertion in 1974 that nothing works
and investigate what little is known about the confidence that various groups in Australia
are prepared to place in such programmes.
Evaluation - A Way Out of
Rhetoric (From Correctional Counseling and Treatment) - S Adams
Abstract: The 'Nothing Works' doctrine, which purports to use empirical evidence as the basis for arguing that
rehabilitation programs in general are a waste of time and money, is empty rhetoric that
is useless for rational correctional planning. Adherents of the Nothing Works doctrine
have not adopted a scientific, critical approach to the evaluation research used to suport
their rhetoric, and they have ignored the ambiguous, ambivalent results of such research.
One of the consequences of the current flocking to the Nothing Works banner by many
impressionable administrators and politicians has been the attachment of new importance to
the prison as a symbol of deterrence and incapacitation.
A Meta-Analysis of Juvenile Correctional Treatment, JOHN T. WHITEHEAD,
STEVEN P. LAB
Debate over the effectiveness of correctional treatment has been raging for over a decade.
The view that Nothing Works dominates in the mind of the public and relies on many early
reviews of the literature for support. The most contemporary approach to analyzing the
state of the evidence on correctional treatment is the use of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis
is a technique that reanalyzes data found in original research reports and arrives at a
common measure for all of the studies. The present analysis of research reports published
from 1975 to 1984 does not provide encouraging results. The results show that
interventions have little positive impact on recidivism and many appear to exacerbate the
problem. Indeed, the analysis in this article could be considered overly lenient in its
interpretation of the results. It appears that the earlier evaluations that claim that
Nothing Works are close to the conclusion to be drawn from more recent evaluations of
Beyond Positivism: Learning from Contextual
Integrated Strategies, JOHN BRAITHWAITE
Good criminologists are interpretively flexible, searching to read situations from the
different angles illuminated by multiple theories. Plural understandings of a crime
problem stimulate a disparate range of action possibilities that can be integrated into a
hedged, mutually reinforcing package of preventive policies. Positivist criminology has
its uses in informing the kind of research-policy interface advanced. Its limitation is
that it focuses on short-term, decontextualized policies that are intentionally
disentangled from integrated policy packages. This when it is long-term, dynamically
responsive, and contextualized, integrated assaults that are more likely to bear fruit.
Some suggestions are made on how to reform criminology so that its creative and evaluative
focus is more directed at what Bateson in 1972 called "systemic wisdom." The
alternative is to settle for a positivism that almost inevitably leads to a policy
analysis of despair about the intractability of the crime problem. That Nothing Works is
not an empirically established fact, but an artifact of the epistemology
of a science with a particular structure. This structure can be reformed.
Correctional Treatment and Social
Intervention Theory: Bringing Sociology and Criminology Back in - Don C.
Gibbons, Department of Sociology, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland,
Oregon 97207, U.S.A.
This essay begins by noting the close ties between sociology and criminology, on the one
hand, and correctional treatment, on the other, that existed for the first half of the
20th century in America. That period was followed by the Nothing Works era of the 1960s
and 1970s. A considerable share of the analysis in this paper centers on the author's
primer on correctional treatment, Changing the Lawbreaker. Many of the weaknesses and
strengths of sociologically-based treatment theory in corrections are pointed up in that
examination. Two major conclusions are warranted: diagnostic typologies have failed to
reflect the diversity of offender behavior, and correctional theorizing by sociological
criminologists has been unduly optimistic. At the same time, the Nothing Works or punitive
approach to lawbreakers is also flawed.
Once Upon a Time Served: Therapeutic Application of Fairy Tales within a
Correctional Environment - C. Lewis Holton, Criminal Justice Department,
Tri-County Technical College, Post Office Box 587, Pendleton, South Carolina 29670,
During this century, correctional policy has swung dramatically from stark punitive
control to rehabilitative ideal or rehabilitative "cure." We have sought a just
model for corrections, and we have seen "experts" go on record that Nothing
Works. In our search to find the approach that best facilitates adjustment by offenders
that engenders internalization of mainstream societal values we seem to have overlooked a
medium that has proven itself over centuries of use: fairy tales. In Future Shock, Toffler
asserted that "Education's prime objective must be to increase the individual's