Abracen, J., Gallow, A., Looman, J., & Goodwill, A. (2015). Individual community-based treatment of offenders with mental illness: Relationship to recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 1842–1858. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25731931/

Andrews, D. A. (2007). Principles of effective correctional programs. In L. L. Motiuk & R. C. Serin (Eds.), Compendium 2000 on effective correctional programming. Correctional Service Canada.

Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369–401. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264637995_Does_Correctional_Treatment_Work_A_Clinically_Relevant_and_Psychologically_Informed_Meta-Analysis

Baber, L. M., & Johnson, J. L. (2013). Early termination of supervision: No compromise to community safety. Federal Probation, 77(2). https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/77_2_2_0.pdf

Bechtel, K. (2016). Adherence to the risk, need, and fidelity principles: Examining the impact of dosage in correctional programming (Doctoral dissertation). University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_olink/r/1501/10?clear=10&p10_accession_num=ucin1470044131

Bonta, J., Bourgon, G., Rugge, T., Scott, T.-L., Yessine, A. K., & Gutierrez, L. (2011). An experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based community supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 1127–1148. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0093854811420678?journalCode=cjbb

Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Scott, T.-L., Bourgon, G., & Yessine, A. K. (2008). Exploring the black box of community supervision. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47, 248–270. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10509670802134085

Bourgon, G., & Armstrong, B. (2005). Transferring the principles of effective treatment into a "real world" prison setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 3–25. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=208464

Bourgon, G., & Gutierrez, L. (2012). The general responsivity principle in community supervision: The importance of probation officers using cognitive intervention techniques and its influence on recidivism. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35, 149–166. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233213033_The_general_responsivity_principle_in_community_supervision_The_importance_of_probation_officers_using_cognitive_intervention_techniques_and_its_influence_on_recidivism

Bourgon, G., Gutierrez, L., & Ashton, J. (2011). The evolution of community supervision practice: The transformation from case manager to change agent. Irish Probation Journal, 8, 28–48. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/76_2_6_0.pdf

Campbell, M. A., French, S., & Gendreau, P. (2009). The prediction of violence in adult offenders: A meta-analytic comparison of instruments and methods of assessment. Criminal Justice, 36, 567–590. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242132227_The_Prediction_of_Violence_in_Adult_OffendersA_Meta-Analytic_Comparison_of_Instruments_and_Methods_of_Assessment

Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. Criminal Justice, 3, 109–175. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Assessing-Correctional-Rehabilitation-%3A-Policy-%2C-%2C-Cullen-Gendreau/d232863893171b4022e0bf69076e83a70e01a524?p2df

Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (2004). The importance of staff practice in delivering effective correctional treatment: A meta-analytic review of core correctional practice. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 203–214. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0306624X03257765

Drake, E. K., Aos, S., & Miller, M. G. (2009). Evidence-based public policy options to reduce crime and criminal justice costs: Implications in Washington State. Victims and Offenders, 4, 170–196. http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1033/Wsipp_Evidence-Based-Public-Policy-Options-to-Reduce-Crime-and-Criminal-Justice-Costs-Implications-in-Washington-State_Full-Report.pdf

Gendreau, P., French, S., & Taylor, A. (2002). What works (what doesn’t) revised 2002: The principles of effective correctional treatment. Unpublished manuscript, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, Canada. https://www.co.hancock.oh.us/docs/commonpleasprovider/university-of-cincinnati-reports/presentation/gendreau-french-gionet-2004-what-works-and-what-doesnt.pdf?sfvrsn=17b026c4_2

Gendreau, P., & Goggin, C. (1996). Principles of effective programming with offenders. Forum on Corrections Research, 8(3), 38–40.

Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., Cullen, F. T., & Andrews, D. A. (2000). The effects of community sanctions and incarceration on recidivism. Forum on Corrections Research, 12(2), 10–13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237744305_The_effects_of_community_sanctions_and_incarceration_on_recidivism

Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (1999). The forgotten issue in effective correctional treatment: Program implementation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43, 180–187. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0306624X99432005?journalCode=ijoe

Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 575–608.

Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19–30. http://zaldlab.psy.vanderbilt.edu/resources/wmg00pa.pdf

Jalbert, S. K., Rhodes, W., Kane, M., Clawson, E., Bogue, B., Flygare, C., Kling, R., & Guevara, M. (2011). A multi-site evaluation of reduced probation caseload size in an evidence-based program setting. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Kennealy, P. J., Skeem, J. L., Manchak, S. M., & Eno Louden, J. (2012). Offender-officer relationships matter: Firm, fair and caring officer-offender relationships protect against supervision failure. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 496–505.

Kroner, D. G., & Takahashi, M. (2012). Every session counts: The differential impact on previous programmes and current programme dosage on offender recidivism. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 17, 136–150. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-02622-010

Lipsey, M. W. (1999). Can intervention rehabilitate serious delinquents? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564, 142–166. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000271629956400109?journalCode=anna

Lipsey, M. W., Landenberger, N. A., & Wilson, S. J. (2007). Effects of cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 6, 1–27.

Lowenkamp, C. T., Flores, A. W., Holsinger, A. M., Makarios, M. D., & Latessa, E. J. (2010). Intensive supervision programs: Does program philosophy and the principles of effective intervention matter? Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 368–375. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-15519-006

Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A., Robinson, C. R., & Alexander, M. (2012). Diminishing or durable treatment effects of STARR? A research note on 24-month re-arrest rates. Journal of Crime and Justice. doi: 10.1080/0735648X.2012.753849 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0735648X.2012.753849

Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. (2006). The risk principle in action: What have we learned from 13,676 cases and 97 correctional programs? Crime & Delinquency, 52, 77–93. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0011128705281747

Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 575–594. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00388.x

Lowenkamp, C. T., Pealer, J., Smith, P., & Latessa, E. J. (2006). Adhering to the risk and need principles: Does it matter for supervision-based programs? Federal Probation, 70, 3–8. https://www.uscourts.gov/federal-probation-journal/2006/12/adhering-risk-and-need-principles-does-it-matter-supervision-based

Luong, D., & Wormith, J. S. (2011). Applying risk/need assessment to probation practice and its impact on the recidivism of young offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 1177–1199. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0093854811421596

Makarios, M., Sperber, K. G., & Latessa, E. J. (2014). Treatment dosage and the risk principle: A refinement and extension. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53, 334–350. https://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/ccjr/docs/articles/Treatment%20Dosage%20and%20Risk%20Principle_A%20Refinement%20and%20Extension%20-%20JOR%20article.pdf

Paparozzi, M. A., & Gendreau, P. (2005). An intensive supervision program that worked: Service delivery, professional orientation, and organizational supportiveness. The Prison Journal, 85, 445–466. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/AN-INTENSIVE-SUPERVISION-PROGRAM-THAT-WORKED%3A-AND-Paparozzi-Gendreau/f0f2e13181c029b65a1543c9eb722771364160f4

Robinson, C. R., Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., VanBenschoten, S., Alexander, M., & Oleson, J. C. (2012). A random study of staff training aimed at reducing re-arrest (STARR): Using core correctional practices in probation interactions. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35, 167–188. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0735648X.2012.674823

Skeem, J. L., Eno Louden, J., Polaschek, D., & Camp, D. (2007). Assessing relationship quality in mandated community treatment: Blending care with control. Psychological Assessment, 19, 397–410. https://content.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F1040-3590.19.4.397

Smith, P., Schweitzer, M., Labreque, R. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2012). Improving probation officers' supervision skills: An evaluation of the EPICS model. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35, 189–199. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232994722_Improving_probation_officers'_supervision_skills_an_evaluation_of_the_EPICS_model

Sperber, K. G., Latessa, E. J., & Makarios, M. D. (2013a). Establishing a risk-dosage research agenda: Implications for policy and practice. Justice Research and Policy, 15(1), 123–142. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3818/JRP.15.1.2013.123

Sperber, K. G., Latessa, E. J., & Makarios, M. D. (2013b). Examining the interaction between level of risk and dosage of treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 338–348. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258129271_Examining_the_Interaction_between_Level_of_Risk_and_Dosage_of_Treatment

Sperber, K. G., & Lowenkamp, C. T. (2017). Dosage is more than just counting program hours: The importance of role-playing in treatment outcomes. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 56, 433–451. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10509674.2017.1359222?journalCode=wjor20

Taxman, F. S., Yancey, C., & Bilanin, J. E. (2006). Proactive community supervision in Maryland: Changing offender outcomes. College Park, MD: University of Maryland, Bureau of Governmental Research. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241222778_Proactive_Community_Supervision_in_Maryland_Changing_Offender_Outcomes

Travers, R., Mann, R. E., & Hollin, C. R. (2014). Who benefits from cognitive skills programs?: Differential impact by risk and offense type. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41, 1103–1129. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/crmjusbhv41&div=65&id=&page=