Age and Prison Violence

Mabli, Jerome; Holley, Charles Elmer; Patrick, J.; Walls, Justina

doi:10.1177/009385487900600206

Cited by 51 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beginning with early studies by Zink(1958), Wolfgang(l961), and Johnson (1966), the inmate's age at admission to the prison(or age during the study period) has been shown to be the best predictor of higher disciplinary involvement. This relationship has been confirmed in recent studies as well (Jaman et al, 1971;Brown andSpevacek, 1971: Ellis et al, 1974;Jensen, 1977; Myers and Levy, 1978;Mabli et al, 1979;Petersilia and Honig, 1980). The theoretical rationale for this consistent association between age and involvement in disciplinary infractions has been explicated by several researchers, and it has focused on conceptual linkages commonly employed in discussions of the larger age-criminality relationship (see Johnson, 1966: Ellis et al, 1974Jensen, 1977).…”

Section: Age and Institutional Misconductsupporting

confidence: 58%

Correlates of Institutional Misconduct Among State Prisoners

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A s with participation in illegitimate activities in the larger society, involvement in rule infractions within prisons is not normally distributed among prisoners. Rather, a small segment of the inmate population is disproportionately represented in official records of disciplinary activity. I n this research, factors associated with differential levels of involvement in prison disciplinary infractions were examined.The findings indicate that the inmate's age at commitment, history of drug use, current offense (particularly homicide/ nonhomicide categories), and the type of sentence that the inmate served were significantly related to high-rate infraction status. For one subgroup of the inmate population, race was also significantly related to infraction-rate status. However, these variables are not sufficiently predictive of institutional misconduct tojustify their use as classification factors. The implications of the findings for the study of social control mechanisms in prisons are discussed.The prisoner's conduct record within the institution has traditionally been viewed as an indicator of adjustment or maladjustment to the prison situation (Wolf, Frienek, and Schaffer, 1966). Moreover, the disciplinary infraction record has been identified by some observers as a predictor of postrelease recidivism risk.Both of these premises have been questioned in recent research (see O'Leary and Glaser, 1972;Lipton et al., 1975; Gottfredson and Adams, AUTHORS NOTE: Z would like to thank Michael Gottfredson, John L a d , and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on earlier drafts of this article.

show abstract

Section: Age and Institutional Misconductsupporting

confidence: 58%

Correlates of Institutional Misconduct Among State Prisoners

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, only custody level at the time of entry, which has been called for in several previous studies on inmate misconduct (e.g., Bench & Allen, 2003;Berk et al, 2003;S. D. Camp & Gaes, 2005;Flanagan, 1980;Mabli et al, 1979;Worrall & Morris, 2009), was available in the provided data. Custody level may often be affected by prior misconduct (Harer & Langan, 2001), although this may not be as much of a concern for recently admitted inmates and for analyses assessing time to misconduct from entry.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among demographics, age is one of the most consistent and robust correlates of inmate misconduct found in the literature. Specifically, younger inmates have a greater propensity for misconduct (e.g., Berk, Kriegler, & Baek, 2006;Gendreau, Goggin, & Law, 1997;Kuanliang, Sorensen, & Cunningham, 2008;Mabli, Holley, Patrick, & Walls, 1979;Sorensen & Wrinkle, 1996;Wooldredge, 1991Wooldredge, , 1994Wooldredge, Griffin, & Pratt, 2001). Researchers have also paid much attention to determining whether conviction of a violent offense will lead to a violent disposition when in prison; such findings are mixed at best.…”

Section: Individual-level Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Misconduct and Differential Parole Eligibility Among Capital Inmates

Morris¹,

Longmire

Buffington-Vollum

et al. 2010

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managing career inmates (e.g., capital murderers) is a serious burden for prison administrators and taxpayers. Research findings are mixed as to whether such inmates will engage in increased levels of institutional misconduct. Using complete disciplinary histories from non-death-sentenced capital inmates in Texas whose offenses occurred between 1987 and 1994, the authors explored the need for increased security levels between capital murderers sentenced to markedly different parole eligibility policies (15 years vs. 35 to 40 years before becoming eligible for parole). They also explored whether career inmates represent greater management challenges because they have “nothing to lose,” compared with capital inmates with less time to parole eligibility. Findings suggest that capital inmates sentenced to longer mandatory prison terms are less likely to engage in serious and violent misconduct. Policy implications are discussed in terms of prison administration, fiscal practicability, and career inmate social development.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, there are those who argue that integration of older prisoners is a win-win situation. Older prisoners can serve as mediators and leaders to reduce prison tensions within the younger prison population (Aday & Krabill, 2006;Mabli, Holley, Patrick & Walls, 1979). Moreover, the segregation of the older prison population may allow for them to be discriminated against and excluded from various programs such as mental-health services, rehabilitation, employment, and education (Thivierge- Rikard & Thompson, 2007).…”

Section: Segregation or Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aging Prisoners: A Brief Report of Key Legal and Policy Dilemmas

Doron¹

2013

Int. J. Criminol. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The social phenomenon of the aging of the prison population has raised various legal and policy challenges.Objective: The goal of this brief report is to describe the current key legal-policy dilemmas in this field.Methods: A computerized search for legal documents, articles and studies using relevant key words was conducted in computerized databases. Results: Five key dilemmas were found: (1) Early and compassionate release of older prisoners; (2) Segregation or integration of older prisoners; (3) Heaven or hell? The meaning of imprisonment in old age; (4) Fixed v. tailored sentences to older offenders; and (5) Is prison the right place to send older offenders?Conclusion: Evidence regarding the unique socio-medical needs of older prisoners does not provide easy or simple answers to the legal-policy dilemmas in this field. Hence, as of today, the scholarly discussions in this field seem to be more normative (what "should" be the solution) rather than empirical (what "is" the evidence-based solution). Therefore, more empirical evidence is needed in order to design old-age based legal-policies towards older prisoners.

show abstract

Age and Prison Violence

Cited by 51 publications

References 1 publication

Correlates of Institutional Misconduct Among State Prisoners

Correlates of Institutional Misconduct Among State Prisoners

Institutional Misconduct and Differential Parole Eligibility Among Capital Inmates

Aging Prisoners: A Brief Report of Key Legal and Policy Dilemmas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About