The Influence of Incarceration Length and Protection Status on Perceptions of Prison Social Climate

Abstract

Using a 2 (incarceration length) × 2 (custody type) between-groups design, the present study assessed whether inmates’ perceptions of the prison social climate were influenced by their security classification and length of time they had been incarcerated. Analyses of data collected from 76 male prisoners who completed a 15-item measure of prison social climate revealed an interaction effect between length of incarceration and protective prisoner status. Those housed in protective custody who had been incarcerated for longer than 6 months rated the social climate significantly more positively than both protective custody prisoners incarcerated for less than 6 months and those not in protective custody. This interaction was strongest on those social climate dimensions relating to therapeutic hold and social cohesion. A univariate effect was also observed whereby protective custody prisoners, irrespective of incarceration length, reported that they experienced the environment as less safe than their mainstream (non-protective custody) counterparts.

¿Qué importa en primer grado? Evaluación de la calidad de vida en régimen cerrado

“…Para CASEY et al (2016) uno de los principales motivos para interesarse por el estudio del clima social de una prisión es la influencia que tiene éste sobre el proceso terapéutico de los internos y cómo, un clima social positivo dentro de prisión podría favorecer un cambio de comportamiento en el interno hacia actitudes más receptivas con el tratamiento y esto, como bien apuntan los autores, en instituciones con escasez de recursos económicos, "es una forma de enriquecer la cultura institucional de manera económica y práctica" (p. 286). Además de la variedad se debe tener en cuenta el potencial de transformación que tiene el clima de prisión, sea este positivo o negativo sus efectos traspasarán los "muros de prisión" (WILLIAMS et al, 2019).…”

Exploring forensic environments: how do environmental factors influence individual outcomes for residents and staff? A systematic review

“…The quantitative studies took place in a variety of therapeutic and rehabilitative focussed establishments. These included establishments focussed on the needs of violent offenders (Casey, Day, & Reynolds, 2016;Day, Casey, Vess, & Huisy, 2012) sexual and violent offenders (Woessner & Schwedler, 2014) and offenders with substance abuse treatment needs (Kubiak, 2009). The mixed method study took place in an establishment focussed on the treatment of sexual offenders (Blagden, Winder, & Hames, 2016).…”

“…The quantitative studies were more internationally focussed, with studies occurring in Australia (Casey et al, 2016;Day et al, 2012), Germany (Woessner & Schwedler, 2014), and the US (Kubiak, 2009). The focus of the studies was on factors that could influence the quality of environments (e.g.…”

“…The way in which social climates are assessed within the studies in this review presents some points for discussion. Of the quantitative studies, three (Day et al, 2012;Blagden et al, 2016;Day et al, 2016) utilised the EssenCES, with one study (Kubiak, 2009) using the Correctional Institution Environment Scale (CIES, Moos, 1987) and one utilising an adapted measure (Woessner, & Schwedler, 2014) from the work of Ortmann (1987). The concepts assessed by these measures are similar but differ in some areas, and this can make meaningful comparisons of outcomes in a review of this nature challenging.…”

“…This theme is perhaps the least understood within the literature given the challenges associated with distinguishing what is underlying the factors identified. For example,Casey et al (2016)…”