Meta-Analysis and Its Discontents

Abstract

Meta-analyses of the correctional treatment literature have become increasingly common in recent years. While these analyses have made significant contributions to our understanding of“what works” with offenders, they have been the subject of considerable scholarly criticism. This article discusses these critiques by revisiting Gottfredson's (1979) discussion of“treatment destruction techniques,” and argues that much of the attacks leveled against the meta-analyses of the correctional rehabilitation literature are not as damaging as critics often contend. The implications for future meta-analyses of the“what works” literature are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.