Psychoeducational programs for reducing prison violence: A systematic review

Abstract

Institutional violence presents significant challenges to the accomplishment of legitimate social order in prison. This systematic review examines the effect of psychoeducational programs on violent behaviour in prison. Comprehensive searches of the empirical research literature were conducted to identify randomized and non-randomized studies carried out in the last two decades (1996-2016) that compared psychoeducational programs with treatment as usual (TAU). The content of programs was analysed and classified. The design of the studies was subject to a risk of bias analysis and quality assessment. Violent behaviour in prison was measured by institutional reports, inmate self-reports, observer ratings, or using psychometrically-valid scales. We Identified 21 separate studies with considerable variations in program quality and evaluation methodology. The majority of programs adopted a cognitive behavioural or social learning approach. There was limited evidence for the efficacy of these programs, although highly-structured programs showed the most promise. Programs that aimed to integrate their treatment ethos into the institutional regime and target specific criminogenic risks also produced evidence of effectiveness in reducing institutional violence. The current evidence base does not provide a clear answer to the 'what works' question in reducing institutional violence. However, there is evidence that some approaches are more successful than others and this should guide future program design and evaluation.

Promoting emotion and behavior regulation in male prison inmates: A secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of the growing pro-social program.

“…Staff members may be less burdened with detection, documentation, and resolution of inmate disciplinary infractions, which may allow them to become more productive by devoting more time to additional responsibilities (Tewksburry et al, 2014). This may contribute to reducing costs associated with employing large numbers of correctional officers and may offset the negative impact of high staff member turnover rates (Auty et al, 2017;Memory et al, 1999). Safer correctional institutions are also likely to be more attractive workplaces to both current and future prison employees (Marcum et al, 2014).…”

“…As noted by several authors (e.g., McGuire, 2011McGuire, , 2013, the ultimate goal of an intervention program should be changing actual behavior, and this outcome should be directly observable and quantifiable. This issue seems to be especially relevant taking into account that disciplinary infractions inside prisons are highly prevalent, which reduce order, threaten the strength of security and custody, and introduce significant costs to the entire correctional systems (Auty, Cope, & Liebling, 2017;Lahm, 2008;Memory, Guo, Parker, & Sutton, 1999;Toman, Cochran, Cochran, & Bales, 2015;Tewksburry, Connor, & Denny, 2014).…”

Do Overcrowding and Turnover Cause Violence in Prison?

“…Meanwhile, adequate prevention measures to reduce violence in overcrowded prisons are needed. It should include adequate occupational activities as well as screening and treatment for psychiatric disorders targeting specific needs; as well as enhancement of social skills, social relationships, and social support using relevant psychosocial programs (13,15). Such need for adjustments in prison policy is regularly emphasized in the legal literature as well (16,17).…”

The Effect of Dietary Supplementation on Aggressive Behaviour in Australian Adult Male Prisoners: A Feasibility and Pilot Study for a Randomised, Double Blind Placebo Controlled Trial

“…Institutional records of misconduct (IRM) are the most widespread measure of violent and aggressive behaviour used within prisons [21,22]. However, variability across jurisdictions suggests that IRM may not be a reliable and/or sensitive measure of aggression in prisons, despite their widespread use.…”