Quality of Life and Its Correlates in People Serving Prison Sentences in Penitentiary Institutions

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to analyze the determinants of prison inmates’ quality of life (QoL). Methods: 390 men imprisoned in penitentiary institutions were assessed. Data were collected by means of the Sense of Quality of Life Questionnaire (SQLQ), general self-efficacy scale (GSES), resilience assessment scale (RAS-25), social support scale (SSS), intensity of religious attitude scale (IRA), SPI/TPI, and COPE Inventory, measures that have high validity and reliability. All models were specified in a path analysis using Mplus version 8.2. Results: The positive correlates of QoL are: self-efficacy, social support, intensity of religious attitude, trait and state depression, resilience, and the following coping strategies, which are at the same time mediators between the variables mentioned above and QoL: behavioral disengagement, turning to religion, planning, and seeking social support for instrumental reasons. Conclusions: In penitentiary practice, attention should be devoted to depressive individuals, and support should be provided to them in the first place because depressiveness is the strongest negative correlate of important aspects of prisoners’ QoL. All the remaining significant factors, namely: self-efficacy, social support, intensity of religious attitude, and the following coping strategies: turning to religion, planning, and seeking social support for instrumental reasons, should be taken into account in rehabilitation programs.

Psychophysical quality of life and its determinants in prisoners: the role of selected psychosocial factors

“…Previous research has confirmed associations between the psychosocial factors mentioned above and different dimensions of QoL in prisoners (Skowroński and Talik, 2020a, 2020b, 2021).…”

Understanding peripherality in a multidimensional geographical, socioeconomic, and institutional context: Evidence from Greece

“…Although a global definition of institutions is not commonly accepted (Hodgson, 2006, 2015), it is a consensus that is conceived in the context of governance and social capital structures. Within this framework, the available institutional variables aim to approximate as spherically as possible institutional aspects, such as disciplinary (Skowronski & Talik, 2021; Spierenburg, 2007), demographic (Basco, 2015; Bille & Schulze, 2006; Cohen, 2017), doctrine (Haynes, 2007), citizenship (Janowitz, 1976), political (Napoli, 2003; Schudson, 2002), cultural (Haynes, 2007), production (Xiaoming, 2006), and governance (Epikolopov & Zhuravskaya, 2007), which are also considered in the literature as relevant to regional growth and development.…”

Quality of life and prosocial or antisocial coping with resource deprivation: A cross-sectional study of people at risk of social exclusion

“…The study excluded people living in closed facilities, in particular detained in prisons. The previous research showed that the relationship between coping and quality of life of prisoners is shaped in a different way than that of people enjoying freedom due to the unique experience of staying in a correctional facility [ 50 , 51 ].…”