An Examination of the Dyadic Relationship of Offender Community Supervision

Given the emphasis on the relationship between probation officers (POs) and probationers in community supervision (Bourgon, Bonta, Rugge, Scott, & Yessine, 2009), the present study provided a more comprehensive examination of this working alliance and the individuals involved. Research objectives included an examination of PO care and control supervisory orientations, the relationship between individual PO and probationer characteristics and the alliance, a comparison between PO and probationer assessments of the alliance, the impact of interactions between PO and probationer characteristics on the alliance, and the relationship between the alliance and recidivism outcome. Participants included 100 probationers and 27 POs who completed a variety of measures including the Dual-role Relationship Inventory, Revised (DRI-R) and the Working Alliance Inventory – Short, Revised. Additionally, probationer recidivism data were collected after an 8- to 11-month follow-up period. Correlational analyses indicated that PO care and control orientations were not inversely related as suggested in the literature. Probationer criminal attitudes were negatively related to PO- and probationer-rated alliance measures. Probationer self-reported psychopathy scores negatively related to probationer alliance ratings, while probationer’s motivation to change was positively related to PO alliance ratings. With respect to between-rater agreement, PO and probationer ratings were positively correlated after accounting for PO response biases. Results from hierarchical linear modelling analyses indicated the alliance was largely dyadic in nature. A number of significant interactions were found between PO and probationer variables. In terms of outcome, the DRI-R and WAI-SR were not significantly related to probationer recidivism during follow-up. Results are discussed in the context of a model of specific responsivity. Findings suggest that the reciprocal influence of each individual should be considered with respect to the development of a positive working alliance and that supervision approaches should be tailored to the individual probationer