Some Correlates of Staff Ideology in the Prison

Abstract

In 1962, a group of U.C.L.A. sociologists conducted a survey of staff members of the California Department of Corrections. Data were gathered on staff attitudes in relation to job and insti tutional variation. Factor analytic reduction of 28 items measur ing authoritarian orientation, preference on severity of penalties, optimism or pessimism regarding treatment outcome, and pre ferred social distance vis-à-vis parolees, resulted in measures of authoritarianism, pessimism, social distance, and recommenda tions regarding treatment programs when security is affected. Cross tabulations of the factoral measures with the respondent's job and education were consistent with the hypothesis that cus todial jobs were more traditional in outlook than treatment positions. It was expected that differences in institutional setting would have an influence on staff views of management of inmates and probable outcome of treatment. To test this assumption, eight prisons were ranked on selected characteristics of their inmate populations according to age, criminal history, and prison be havior. Four types of prisons were delineated based on various combinations of these characteristics. It was hypothesized that staffs from institutions housing a rela tively large proportion of inmates involved in serious prison in cidents would be more authoritarian, pessimistic and distant to ward inmates than staffs at institutions with less volatile inmates. Also, the staffs at institutions holding older inmates with histories of prior commitments and parole violations would be more tra ditional in outlook than staffs at other institutions. Mean values of scores, combining all jobs, were averaged for each pair of prisons representing the four types of prisons. The results only partially confirm the hypothesis. All four scores showed significant differences by institution when tabulated sep arately. Pessimism is highest in prisons housing younger inmates with little prior confinement and few incidents. Readiness to withhold treatment is highest among prisons for younger (not older) men with incident rates. However, authoritarianism and social distance scores varied as predicted. Within prisons, jobs continue to differ significantly in expressed attitudes. The finding that pessimism is characteristic of prisons with young offenders and few incidents indicates a need for further study of institutional contexts, beyond the scope of this survey.

The impact of job stress, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment on correctional staff support for rehabilitation and punishment

“…Interestingly, Farkas (1999) reported that female jail officers were more likely to hold a punitive orientation in comparison to male officers. Findings from other studies suggest that there is no relationship between gender and support for treatment and/or punishment (Arthur, 1994;Burton, Ju, Dunaway, & Wolfe, 1991;Cullen, Lutze, Link, & Wolfe, 1989;Jurik & Halemba, 1984;Kasselbaum, Ward, & Wilner, 1964;Leiber, 2000;Leiber & Woodrick, 1997;Robinson et al, 1993;Van Voorhis, Cullen, Link, & Wolfe, 1991;Whitehead & Lindquist, 1989;Whitehead, Lindquist, & Klofas, 1987).…”

“…Education has been linked with greater support for rehabilitation, a more positive view of inmates, and inversely linked with support for punishment (Arthur, 1994;Burton et al, 1991;Jurik, Halemba, Musheno, & Boyle, 1987;Kasselbaum et al, 1964;Poole & Regoli, 1980;Robinson et al, 1993;Teske & Williamson, 1979). Other research findings, however, suggest that there is no relationship Crouch & Alpert, 1982;Cullen et al, 1989Cullen et al, , 1993Farkas, 1999;Gordon, 1999;Gordon, 2006;Jurik, 1985;Leiber & Woodrick, 1997;Paboojian & Teske, 1997;Shamir & Drory, 1981;Sundt & Cullen, 2002;Van Voorhis et al, 1991;Walters, 1995;Whitehead & Lindquist, 1989).…”

Role Conflict in Correctional Institutions

“…This dual emphasis o n custody and treatment often results in two clearly delineated, mutually antagonistic staff groupings (Clemmer, 1940;Wheeler, 1961). Conflicts between custody and treatment staff arise from their different roles (Weber, 1957), the priorities they assign to organizational goals (Piliavin and Vadum, 1968;Ohlin, 1956; Kassebaum et al, 1964), and the differing views which emanate from role expectations (Hedblom, 1963;Brown et al, 1971; Williams and Thomas, 1976).…”

Professional Orientation and Pluralistic Ignorance Among Jail Correctional Officers

“…A historical image of the correctional officer is that of an uncaring, punitive, and security-oriented individual (Duffee, 1974;Kassebaum, Ward, & Wilner, 1964;Poole & Regoli, 1980). Yet scholarship conducted in prisons argues that these images are not based on reality, as correctional officers embrace treatment as well as custody as a goal of corrections, and often are professionally oriented Whitehead, Linquist, & Klofas, 1987).…”