Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Empirical Evidence Supporting Dog Training Programs for Incarcerated People

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prison Dog Programs

Abstract

Carceral dog training programs continue to demonstrate their value for participants, other incarcerated people , facility staff, and the dogs and their recipients. The programs are based on the therapeutic effects of human-animal interactions . An empirical body of research findings regarding the positive impacts that result from participating in carceral dog training programs continues to grow. After reviewing why incarcerated people need programming and the history of dog training programs, the literature, which is increasingly comprised of studies that use sophisticated research methodologies, is presented. Given the criminogenic nature of the carceral environment, implementing reliable and effective treatment programs is crucial. Participation’s implications for desistance are also explored. The chapter ends with a consideration of the research we still need to conduct.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison, M., & Ramaswamy, M. (2016). Adapting animal-assisted therapy trials to prison-based animal programs. Public Health Nursing, 33(5), 472–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonio, M. E., Davis, R. G., & Shutt, S. (2017). Dog training programs in Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections: Perceived effectiveness for inmates and staff. Animals & Society, 25, 475–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arkow, P. (1998). Pet therapy: A study and resource guide for the use of companion animals in selected therapies (8th ed.). Stratford, NJ: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrigo, B., & Milovanovic, D. (2009). Revolution in penology: Rethinking the society of captives. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A., & Katcher, A. (1996). Between pets and people: The importance of animal companionship. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetz, A., Uvnas-Moberg, K., Julius, H., & Kotrschal, K. (2012). Psychosocial and psychophysiological effects of human–animal interactions: The possible role of oxytocin. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 234–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besemer, S., Ahmad, S. I., Hinshawa, S. P., & Farrington, D. P. (2017). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the intergenerational transmission of criminal behavior. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 37, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britton, D. M., & Button, A. (2005). Prison pups: Assessing the effects of dog training programs in correctional facilities. Journal of Family Social Work, 9(4), 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butts, J., & Schirladi V. (2018, March). Recidivism reconsidered: Preserving the community justice mission of community corrections. Boston, MA: Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, Harvard Kennedy School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T. R., & Frost, N. A. (2015). The punishment imperative: The rise and failure of mass incarceration in America. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmer, D. (1940). The prison community. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collica, K. (2010). Surviving incarceration: HIV prison-based peer programs build communities of support for female offenders. Deviant Behavior, 31(4), 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B., & Farrington, D. P. (2015). The effects of dog-training programs: Experiences of incarcerated females. Women & Criminal Justice, 25, 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). The effectiveness of dog-training programs in prison: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. The Prison Journal, 96(6), 854–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coren, S. (2015). Foreword. In A. H. Fine (Ed.). Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Foundations and guidelines for animal-assisted interventions (4th ed.) (pp. xix–xxii). Waltham, MA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F., Johnson, C., & Nagin, D. (2011). Prisons do not reduce recidivism: The high cost of ignoring science. The Prison Journal, 91(3), 48–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, C. (2005). Humanizing prisons with animals: A closer look at “Cell Dogs” and horse programs in correctional institutions. The Journal of Correctional Education, 56(1), 46–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickens, C. (1842/2004). American notes. London, England: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2017). The rehabilitative ideal versus the criminogenic reality: The consequences of warehousing prisoners. Corrections: Policy, Practice, and Research, 2(1), 41–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fournier, A. (2016). Pen pals: An examination of human-animal interaction as an outlet for healthy masculinity in prison. In C. Blazina & L. R. Kogan (Eds.), Men and their dogs (pp. 175–194). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fournier, A., Geller, E. S., & Fortney, E. (2007). Human-animal interaction in a prison setting: Impact on criminal behavior, treatment progress, and social skills. Behavior and Social Issues, 16, 89–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann, E., & Son, H. (2009). The human-companion animal bond: How humans benefit. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice, 39, 239–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2006). Prison-based animal programs: A national survey. The Prison Journal, 86, 407–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2007a). Prison-based animal programs: Self-reported effects of participation and implications for desistance. Prison Service Journal, 172, 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2007b). Without words to get in the way: Symbolic interaction in prison-based animal programs. Qualitative Sociology Review, 3, 96–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2011). Prison-based animal programs: A comprehensive assessment. Boulder, CO: FirstForum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2015). Prisoners, pups and PTSD: The grassroots response to veterans with PTSD. Contemporary Justice Review, 18, 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2016). Helping war veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder: Incarcerated individuals’ role in therapeutic animal programs. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 54, 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, B. (2000). Creature comfort: Animals that heal. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, B., Miranda, J., Daroowalla, A., & Siddique, J. (2005). Trauma exposure, mental health functioning, and program needs of women in jail. Crime & Delinquency, 51, 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grommon, E., Carson, D., & Kenney, L. (2018). An experimental trial of a dog-training program in a juvenile detention center. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamana, L., Hamana-Raz, Y., Dagan, K., Greenfeld, H., Rubinstein, C., & BenEzra, M. (2011). A preliminary study of group intervention along with basic canine training among traumatized teenagers: A 3-month longitudinal study. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1975–1980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C. (2006). Reforming punishment: Psychological limits to the pains of imprisonment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harbolt, T., & Ward, T. (2001). Teaming incarcerated youth with shelter dogs for a second chance. Society & Animals, 9(2), 177–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, L. (2000). Psychosocial benefits of animal companionship. In A. Fine (Ed.), Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Theoretical foundations and guidelines for practice (pp. 59–78). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, M. B., Morris, A., & Linden, F. (2006). Evaluation of the effects of a socialization program in a prison on the behavior and pituitary-adrenal hormone levels of shelter dogs. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 99(1–2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2018.1433564.

  • Hill, L. (2018). Becoming the person your dog thinks you are: An assessment of Florida prison-based dog training programs on postrelease recidivism. Corrections: Policy, Practice, and Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2018.1433564

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines, L. (1998). Overview of animals in correctional facilities. In Delta Society (Ed.), Animals in institutions. Renton, WA: Delta Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humby, L., & Barclay, E. (2018). Pawsitive solutions: An overview of prison dog programs in Australia. The Prison Journal, 98(5), 580–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, M. E., Beetz, A., Kinoshita, M., & Ross, S., Jr. (2015). Enhancing special education environments with animal-assisted interventions at Green Chimneys: Opportunities and practical considerations. In A. H. Fine (Ed.), Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Foundations and guidelines for animal-assisted interventions (4th ed., pp. 211–224). Waltham, MA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kupers, T. (2005). Toxic masculinity as a barrier to mental health treatment in prison. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61(6), 713–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, S., Mears, D., Dubin, G., & Travis, J. (2002, May). The practice and promise of prison programming. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonardi, R., Buchanan-Smith, H. M., McIver, G., & Vick, S. (2017). “You think you’re helping them, but they’re helping you too”: Experiences of Scottish male young offenders participating in a dog training program. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14, 945–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luciano, A., Belstock, J., Malmberg, P., McHugo, G., Drake, R., Xie, H., et al. (2014). What predicts incarceration among urban adults with co-occurring severe mental illness and substance use disorders? Psychiatric Services, 65(11), 1325–1331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D. L. (2006). What works in corrections: Reducing the criminal activities of offenders and delinquents. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marino, L. (2012). Construct validity of animal-assisted therapy and activities: How important is the animal in AAT? Anthrozoös, 25(Supplement 1), 139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S., & LeBel, T. (2010). The desistance paradigm in correctional practice: From programs to lives. In F. McNeill, P. Raynor, & C. Trotter (Eds.), Offender supervision: New directions in theory, research and practice (pp. 65–89). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S., LeBel, T. P., & Lanier, C. S. (2004). Generativity behind bars: Some “redemptive truth” about prison society. In E. De St. Aubin, D. P. McAdams, & T. C. Kim (Eds.), The Society (pp. 131–151). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maujean, A., Pepping, C. A., & Kendall, E. (2015). A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of animal-assisted therapy on psychosocial outcomes. Anthrozoös, 28(1), 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mears, D. P., Lawrence, S., Soloman, A. L., & Waul, M. (2002). Prison-based programming: Why it’s needed and what it can do. Journal of Mundane Behavior, 64(2), 66–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minton, C. A., Perez, P. R., & Miller, K. (2015). Voices from behind prison walls. Society & Animals, 23(5), 484–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneymaker, J., & Strimple, E. (1991). Animals and inmates: A sharing companionship behind bars. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 16, 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, M. L. (2007). Health benefits of animal-assisted interventions. Complementary Health Practice Review, 12(1), 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, C., & McLaughlin, D. (2013). Is the tail wagging the dog? A review of the evidence for prison animal programs. Australian Psychologist, 48(5), 370–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nightingale, F. (1860/1969). Notes on nursing. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nimer, J., & Lundahl, B. (2007). Animal-assisted therapy: A meta-analysis. Anthrozoös, 20(3), 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, K., Williams, R., Hong, X., Bright, D., & Kemp, R. (2018). Measuring offenders’ belief in the possibility of desistance. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(5), 1317–1330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, P. (2004). Paws for love. Exeter, NH: Townsend.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti, J., & King, C. (2010). Use of animal-assisted therapy with psychiatric patients: A literature review. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 48(11), 44–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabo, D., Kupers, T. A., & London, W. (2001). Gender and the politics of punishment. In D. Sabo, T. A. Kupers, & W. London (Eds.), Prison masculinities (pp. 3–18). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serpell, J. A. (2000). Creatures of the unconscious: Companion animals as mediators. In A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul, & J. A. Serpell (Eds.), Companion animals and us (pp. 108–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serpell, J. A. (2015). Animal-assisted interventions in historical perspective. In A. Fine (Ed.), Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Foundations and guidelines for animal-assisted interventions (4th ed., pp. 11–19). Amsterdam: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shubert, J. (2012, April-June) Dogs and human health/mental health: From the pleasure of their company to the benefits of their assistance. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souter, M. A., & Miller, M. D. (2007). Do animal-assisted activities effectively treat depression? A meta-analysis. Anthrozoös, 20(2), 167–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strimple, E. (2003). A history of prison inmate-animal interaction programs. The American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 70–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G. M. (1958). The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toch, H. (2000). Altruistic activity as correctional treatment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 270–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis, J., & Petersilia, J. (2001). Reentry reconsidered: A new look at an old question. Crime & Delinquency, 47(3), 291–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis, J., Western, B., & Redburn, F. S. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available from: https://www.nap.edu/download/18613.

  • Turner, W. G. (2007). The experiences of offenders in a prison canine program. Federal Probation, 71(1), 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Wormer, J., Kigerl, A., & Hamilton, Z. (2017). Digging deeper: Exploring the value of prison-based dog handler programs. The Prison Journal, 97(4), 520–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veysey, B. (2008, May/June). Rethinking reentry. The Criminologist, 33(1), 3–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, S., & Uggen, C. (2010). Incarceration and stratification. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 387–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, P., & Mertin, P. (1994). The training of pets as therapy dogs in a women’s prison: A Pilot study. Anthrozoös, 7(2), 124–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, G. D. (2016). From prison to the streets: Can importation work in reverse? Law and Human Behavior, 40(6), 660–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. L., & Metz, A. E. (2014). Examining the meaning of training animals: A photovoice study with at-risk youth. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 30(4), 337–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, N., & Shi, J. (2012). Childhood and adult trauma experiences of incarcerated persons and their relationship to adult behavioral health problems and treatment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9(5), 1908–1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, A., Niedra, R., Pendergast, L., & McCrindle, B. (2002). Acceptability and impact of pet visitation on a pediatric cardiology inpatient unit. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 17, 354–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yount, R., Ritchie, E. C., Laurent, M. S., Chumley, P., & Olmert, M. D. (2013). The role of service dog training in the treatment of combat-related PTSD. Psychiatric Annals, 43(6), 292–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. William Patterson University of New Jersey, Wayne, NJ, USA

    Gennifer Furst

Authors
  1. Gennifer Furst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gennifer Furst .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Emerita, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA, USA

    Mary Renck Jalongo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Furst, G. (2019). The Empirical Evidence Supporting Dog Training Programs for Incarcerated People. In: Jalongo, M. (eds) Prison Dog Programs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25617-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25618-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation