Scholars frequently characterize incarceration as a possible turning point in criminal activity. This implies a two‐stage process: 1) change in life‐course mechanisms around confinement and reentry result in 2) subsequent change in criminal activity relative to preconfinement. Following this model, we examine change in criminal activity, criminal identity, and social/structural challenges using data from the Prison Project, a cohort of adult males with short‐term confinement in the Netherlands in 2010–2011. Results of a novel test for within‐individual change in arrests from preconfinement to post‐reentry show that most individuals are stable—yet there is a substantial group who go down meaningfully and a much smaller group who go up. Even though changes in criminal identity from the intervening period do not predict these change groups, increases in social/structural challenges predict those who go up in criminal activity. We build from prior work on desistance and reentry, contrasting our findings and highlighting the unique insight gained from, as well as challenges of, measuring individual change within our two‐stage turning point model. Although life‐course mechanisms often correspond with changes in criminal activity concurrently, identifying individual changes that are predictors of subsequent shifts in criminal offending remains elusive.

中文翻译：

---

禁闭是两个阶段的转折点：身份或社会结构的变化是否可以预测犯罪活动的后续变化？*

学者经常将监禁定为犯罪活动的可能转折点。这意味着一个分为两个阶段的过程：1）围绕禁闭和再入的生活历程机制的变化导致2）相对于拘禁前犯罪活动的后续变化。遵循该模型，我们使用监狱项目的数据研究了犯罪活动，犯罪身份和社会/结构挑战的变化，该项目是2010-2011年在荷兰进行短期监禁的成年男性队列。从拘捕前到再入狱的个体内部变化的新颖测试结果表明，大多数人都是稳定的，但仍有相当一部分人有意义地下降，而少数人则上升。即使从干预期开始的犯罪身份变化并不能预测这些变化群体，社会/结构挑战的增加预示着犯罪活动的增加。我们基于先前关于停顿和折返的研究工作，对比了我们的发现，并强调了在两阶段转折模型中衡量个人变化所获得的独特见解以及面临的挑战。尽管生命过程机制通常同时与犯罪活动的变化相对应，但要确定可预测犯罪行为随后发生变化的个体变化仍然难以捉摸。