Authors publishing articles in Criminal Justice and Behavior (CJB) now include practitioner summaries to bridge the gap between research and practice in forensic and correctional psychology fields across international jurisdictions. Below, we highlight some of the most practitioner-relevant summaries which have been approved for publication in CJB, and may have already appeared in OnLine First or in a printed journal or may be scheduled for publication. In this issue of the IACFP Bulletin, included articles address a wide variety of topics, including victimization of incarcerated persons, considerations for community supervision, unique perspectives for justice-involved youth, and psychometric evaluation of an aggression questionnaire.
Aranda-Hughes et al. (2026). The Victim-Offender Overlap in Prison Interpersonal Harm: Comparing Incarcerated-Person and Staff-Related Events. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261478301
- “This study found that prison victimization and offending are often interconnected, with some incarcerated people experiencing both roles. Using administrative records from a large state correctional system, we found that individuals with mental illness were consistently more likely to be both victims and offenders in incidents involving other incarcerated people and correctional staff. Individuals housed primarily in maximum custody also had greater involvement in the victim-offender overlap. For correctional systems, the findings underscore the importance of identifying individuals who may be at heightened risk of both experiencing and engaging in interpersonal harm. Mental health screening and appropriate treatment may help address this risk. Staff training that improves recognition of mental health-related behaviors may also help prevent escalation. More broadly, correctional systems should consider how housing and supervision practices may contribute to interpersonal conflict when developing strategies to improve institutional safety.”
Caravaca-Sánchez et al. (2026). Psychometric Evaluation of the Spanish Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire–Short Form (BPAQ-SF) Among Incarcerated Males and Females in Spain. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261479981
- “The Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ) was developed to assess four related dimensions of aggression: Physical Aggression, Verbal Aggression, Anger, and Hostility (Buss & Perry, 1992). Research generally supports the four-factor framework, but several studies have found the factors to be highly correlated and not always clearly distinguishable, particularly in correctional and cross-cultural samples. This study examines the factor-structure and psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire–Short Form (BPAQ-SF) in a sample of 1,325 incarcerated males and females across six prisons in Spain. The traditional four-factor structure showed important psychometric limitations, particularly for Verbal Aggression and Hostility, while a three-factor model, combining Verbal Aggression and Anger, improved model fit but still failed to achieve acceptable psychometric fit. Caution should be used when relying on robust indices of the BPAQ-SF. The scale functioned largely equivalently across males and females. Overall, aggression measures should not be assumed to perform equally well across populations, languages, or institutions. Practitioners should interpret BPAQ-SF subscale scores cautiously, use the measure as part of a broader assessment process, and consider repeated assessment to support treatment decisions, violence prevention, and monitoring of change over time incarcerated.”
Costaris et al. (2026). Examining Relationships Between Treatment Motivation, Service Engagement and Recidivism in Canadian Adolescent Justice System-Involved Boys. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261473808
- “Adult research shows that treatment motivation drives engagement in rehabilitative interventions for adults in the criminal justice system; in turn, engagement is related to reoffending. Because motivation is amenable to change (e.g., through Motivational Interviewing), it is an important target at the outset of services to promote engagement and successful completion. However, there is almost no research examining these relationships with justice system-involved youth. In this study of Canadian justice system-involved adolescent boys, scores on a treatment motivation questionnaire developed for adults (the CVTRQ) did not predict engagement in probation services but two motivation items from the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory did. Youths’ engagement in services predicted reoffending, even when controlling for risk. Findings suggest that supporting youth’s motivation to engage in rehabilitative services is a worthwhile effort. Developing a valid motivation measure for youth may aid service providers in accurately assessing youth’s readiness to engage in services.”
Phillips et al. (2026). Pandemic-Driven Adaptations in Community Supervision: Resilience or Fragility in Experiences for Clients and Staff. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261473807
- “This study examines how probation and parole agencies adapted supervision during COVID-19 and what those changes mean for post-pandemic practice. Drawing on interviews with clients, officers, supervisors, and support staff in Missouri and Tennessee, the study shows that virtual contact and flexible scheduling reduced transportation and work-related burdens for many clients while helping staff maintain continuity during crisis conditions. However, the same adaptations also created risks when clients lacked digital access, needed more structure, experienced treatment disruptions, or became less visible to officers, thereby heightening officer workload and stress. The findings suggest that hybrid supervision should not be treated as universally beneficial or harmful. Instead, agencies should match contact strategies to client needs, preserve periodic in-person visibility for higher-need clients, provide digital access support, strengthen treatment coordination, and invest in staff technology, training, and wellness infrastructure.”
Sanders (2026). Reentry on the Move: An Exploration of Black People on Parole’s Experiences Using Technology for Rideshare Services and Other Transportation Needs. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261478638
- “The current study used qualitative data from 73 Black people on parole to explore their experiences using technology for rideshares and other transportation needs. The findings revealed that participants appreciated the utility of rideshares but found them to be costly. Digital illiteracy and phone access were also barriers to rideshare use. Additionally, participants recognized that technology helped and hindered their ability to meet other transportation needs. Some were able to use their devices to learn how to conduct car repairs, but others had challenges using GPS apps. To address these digital inequities, practitioners need to connect people exiting prison with resources providing free or low-cost technology devices and provide reentry-focused digital literacy programming.”
Zhang et al. (2026). Family Structure and Bullying Perpetration Among Adolescents: Direct and Indirect Pathways. http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548261478300
- “This study examines how family structure is associated with bullying perpetration among Chinese adolescents, focusing on the roles of social bonds and bullying peer associations. Findings show that adolescents in nontraditional family arrangements tend to report weaker social bonds, and weaker social bonds are associated with higher bullying perpetration. However, family structure itself does not operate as a simple direct risk factor. Instead, the results suggest that bullying prevention should focus less on labeling youth by family arrangement and more on strengthening protective social connections. For practitioners in juvenile justice, schools, and community-based prevention, the findings highlight the importance of supporting caregiver-child attachment, school commitment, structured involvement, and respect for school rules. Peer-focused interventions remain important because association with bullying peers strongly predicts bullying behavior. Overall, effective prevention should address both family-related support and school-based peer contexts.”
