Disciplinary Infractions Behind Bars

Abstract

Using data from one Midwestern state, this article investigates whether or not characteristics of importation and deprivation serve as predictors of receipt of institutional disciplinary infractions. The results of the logistic regression analyses indicate that both importation and deprivation factors were significant indicators of having received disciplinary infractions. Specifically, among 585 adult male inmates, data reveal that two importation measures and two deprivation measures were significant predictors of receipt of any disciplinary infractions. An inmate's gang membership status and conviction for a sex offense are also found to have been significant indicators of having or not having received at least one serious disciplinary infraction. Policy implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

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.

“…Beyond these issues related directly to inmates, correctional institutions largely devoid of inmate misconduct may also feature more efficient management. 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). Moreover, fewer incidents of inmate misconduct may lead to reduced costs associated with the negative repercussions of such behavior, such as inmate and staff member injury and destruction of prison property and infrastructure (Tewksburry et al, 2014). Finally, penitentiary treatment resort less to punitive strategies that a considerable amount of research has shown to be associated with increased recidivism (Andrews & Bonta, 2010a, 2010bBonta & Wormith, 2013;Bonta et al, 2011;McGuire, 2011McGuire, , 2013.…”

“…Nonetheless, it may still have a negative impact on inmate's mental health and well-being (Dante, 2012;Marcum, Hillinski-Rosick, & Freiburger, 2014). Taking into account these data, as well as the empirical evidence on the positive association between prison misconduct and recidivism (Dhami, Ayton, & Loewenstein, 2007;Duwe & Clark, 2011), identifying variables that contribute to disciplinary infractions seems of utmost importance (Tewksburry et al, 2014).…”

DSM-5 antisocial personality disorder: Predictive validity in a prison sample.

“…Although not the focus of this particular study, another important domain widely known to influence rates of prison violence is the role of the situational and environmental factors, which almost surely constrains the rates of physical aggression behind bars (Gadon, Johnstone, & Cooke, 2006;Sorensen, Cunningham, Vigen, & Woods, 2011;Tewksbury, Connor, & Denney, 2014). Forensic practitioners working in this area might consider the PRISM model (promoting risk interventions by situational management; Cooke & Johnstone, 2010) as a means of moving beyond simple individual-level risk factors when they engage in the process of institutional risk assessment and management.…”

Examining Developmental Patterns of Prison Misconduct: An Integrated Model Approach

“…Studies of the determinants of prison misconduct have considered many theoretical formulations, most notably importation and deprivation models. The importation model holds that individuals bring their prior characteristics, values, and beliefs into prison, which in turn influence their adjustment/maladjustment to the prison setting (Berg & DeLisi, 2006;, while the deprivation model proposes that inmate maladjustment during incarceration is tied to the pains of imprisonment stemming from an unfavorable, severe, and brutal prison environment (Crewe, 2011;Morris, Longmire, Buffington-Vollum, & Vollum, 2010;Tewksbury, Connor, & Denney, 2014). However, as some advocates note, each model in seclusion may be insufficient in explaining prison misconduct (Steiner, Butler, & Ellison, 2014).…”