{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015718562874251496, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.752525252525253, '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}}
Presentence Investigation Reports: A Relevant Justice Model Tool or a Medical Model Relic?

As the clinically driven paradigm associated with the earlier era of criminal justice policy making known as the medical model has been replaced more recently by the legislatively defined prescriptions of the justice model, accompanying changes have occurred throughout the system. From the discretion of judges to the crowding of correctional institutions, few criminal justice operational practices have escaped the influence of changing public policy ideologies as the political pendulum has swung over time; presentence investigation (PSI) reports are no exception. Once the back-bone of a microoriented emphasis on the individual offender's potential for change, the nature, role, and impact of PSIs have been transformed as the system has shifted to policy-based sentencing practices that place higher value on personal accountability and procedural uniformity. Social forces that have shaped these alterations over time are explored in this article, along with how they have progressively affected and altered the basic functions of PSIs. Practical staff-related consequences of these developments are discussed, along with implications for future PSI utility and alternative research methodologies for exploring its potential influence.