{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01556420233463035, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0048638132295719845, 'mean_word_length': 5.7254901960784315, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Participation and Recidivism : A Test of the Normalization Hypothesis May 1995

I argue that prison education programs are representative of a larger number of what I call normalizing prison programs and operations found in many contemporary prisons that serve to increase prison safety and decrease recidivism. Normalizing programs and operations achieve these goals, I argue, by reducing prisonization and by nurturing prosocial norms. Using data for a cohort of Federal prison releasees, I test the hypothesis that inmates who actively participate in education programs have lower likelihoods of recidivating, defined as a rearrest or parole revocation within 3 years after release, controlling for several background and post-release measures, including post-release employment. Results show that inmates who actively participate in education programs have significantly lower likelihoods of recidivating. Because this effect is independent of post-release employment, I argue that results support the normalization concept.