This study compares two statistical techniques-multiple regression and configural analysis—used in developing parole pre diction tables, according to their ability to (1) differentiate be tween offenders who violate parole and those who do not, (2) predict violators from among a new group of parolees, and (3) assist administrators and researchers. First, experience tables had to be developed and tested for prediction ability. Once their accuracy in predicting had been demonstrated, they could be used as base expectancies because they had the quality of being “expected.” As such, they could be used as a yardstick to evaluate correctional programs' ability to reduce these “expected” violation rates. The two methods were applied to the same body of data and the results were compared. The data consist of Wisconsin adult male offenders paroled in 1954–57 and in 1958–59. All were followed up for two years while they were on parole. The first group was used to develop the experience tables; the second group was used to test prediction ability. The tables were compared for accuracy in predicting through use of the Dc index and for accuracy in differentiating by the J index, measures developed by H. Richard John using Daniel Glaser's data gathered for federal parolees. © 1968, Sage Publications. All rights reserved.
