
Anger management programs (other) (during incarceration)
Adult Criminal JusticeBenefit-cost methods last updated December 2024. Literature review updated August 2024.
Examples of programs in the analysis include Violence Reduction Treatment, Skill Training for Aggression Control (STAC), and Violence Prevention Program.
On average, participants in anger management are moderate- to high-risk and currently serving a term of incarceration for a violent or person-based offense. These participants receive between 24 to 180 hours of programming over three to seven months. All participants in the included studies were male.
Evaluations of the Serious Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI), treatment for perpetrators of domestic violence, treatment for individuals convicted of sex offenses, Beyond Violence, Thinking 4 a Change, dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT), treatment for individuals with substance use disorder, or adult boot camps are excluded from this analysis and analyzed separately.
ALL |
META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
| Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benefits to: | ||||||
| Taxpayers | $7,458 | Benefits minus costs | $23,832 | |||
| Participants | $0 | Benefit to cost ratio | $25.75 | |||
| Others | $14,089 | Chance the program will produce | ||||
| Indirect | $3,247 | benefits greater than the costs | 100% | |||
| Total benefits | $24,795 | |||||
| Net program cost | ($963) | |||||
| Benefits minus cost | $23,832 | |||||
| Meta-Analysis of Program Effects | ||||||||||||
| Outcomes measured | Treatment age | No. of effect sizes | Treatment N | Effect sizes (ES) and standard errors (SE) used in the benefit-cost analysis | Unadjusted effect size (random effects model) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First time ES is estimated | Second time ES is estimated | |||||||||||
| ES | SE | Age | ES | SE | Age | ES | p-value | |||||
Crime Involvement in the criminal justice system (e.g., arrests, charges, convictions, incarceration) measured through administrative records (e.g. court records, arrests) or self-report. |
30 | 3 | 496 | -0.265 | 0.088 | 31 | -0.265 | 0.088 | 39 | -0.264 | 0.003 | |
Violent offenses^ Criminal recidivism for a subsequent violent offense for a population of individuals convicted of violent offenses. |
30 | 2 | 415 | -0.260 | 0.106 | 31 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.259 | 0.014 | |
Technical violations^^ Violations of the conditions of an individual’s terms of probation, parole, or supervision. |
30 | 1 | 305 | -0.327 | 0.109 | 31 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.327 | 0.003 | |
Prison misconduct^ Criminal or deviant behavior during incarceration. Misconduct is often associated with violating policy within a prison or secure facility. |
30 | 1 | 36 | -0.423 | 0.361 | 31 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.423 | 0.241 | |
Anger or aggression^ Self-reported anger or aggression measured on a validated scale. |
30 | 1 | 36 | -0.814 | 0.374 | 30 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.814 | 0.029 | |
| Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | ||||||
| Affected outcome: | Resulting benefits:1 | Benefits accrue to: | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
||
| Crime | Criminal justice system | $7,458 | $0 | $14,089 | $3,729 | $25,276 |
| Program cost | Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($482) | ($481) |
| Totals | $7,458 | $0 | $14,089 | $3,247 | $24,795 | |
| Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
| Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Program costs | $963 | 2023 | Present value of net program costs (in 2023 dollars) | ($963) |
| Comparison costs | $0 | 2023 | Cost range (+ or -) | 40% |
Benefits Minus Costs |
Benefits by Perspective |
Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value |
| Benefits Minus Costs Over Time (Cumulative Discounted Dollars) |
| The graph above illustrates the estimated cumulative net benefits per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. We present these cash flows in discounted dollars. If the dollars are negative (bars below $0 line), the cumulative benefits do not outweigh the cost of the program up to that point in time. The program breaks even when the dollars reach $0. At this point, the total benefits to participants, taxpayers, and others, are equal to the cost of the program. If the dollars are above $0, the benefits of the program exceed the initial investment. |
Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis
Cortoni, F., Latendresse, M., & Nunes, K.L. (2006). An examination of the effectiveness of the Violence Prevention Program (Research report R-178). Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service of Canada.
Gaertner‚G.P. (1983). A component analysis of stress inoculation training for the development of anger management skills in adult male offenders. Doctoral dissertation Pennsylvania State University, 1983: UMI No. 8327490 Dissertation Abstracts International‚ 44‚ 2359.
Mercer, G., Ziersch, E., Sowerbutts, S., Day, A., & Pharo, H. (2022). The violence prevention program in South Australia: A recidivism and cost benefit analysis pilot study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 49(1), 20-36.
Polaschek, D.L.L. (2011). High-intensity rehabilitation for violent offenders in New Zealand: Reconviction outcomes for high- and medium-risk prisoners. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(4), 664-682.