The Mentally Retarded Inmate: Prison Adjustment and Implications for Treatment

Smith, Craig A.; Schmid, Rex E.; Clark, Lee R.; Crews, W. Bee; Nunnery, Marianna

doi:10.1002/j.2164-4934.1988.tb00062.x

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the multivariate analysis suggests that IQ does not have a significant effect on the nonviolent incident rate, although it does have a significant influence on the violent incident rate. The finding that the mentally retarded engage in significantly more violent incidents than their non-retarded peers, and that this is statistically significant even after controlling for the effect of other independent variables, concurs with past research findings (Boslow & Kandell, 1965;Smith et al, 1988). However, the findings regarding the influence of mental retardation on the non-violent incident rate were unexpected.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Prison misconduct among mentally retarded inmates

Finn

1992

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines prison misconduct of inmates who tested as mentally retarded, borderline intellectual functioning, and intellectually normal. The sample is drawn from a cohort of inmates released from the New York State correctional system. Misconduct is measured by examining official documents and is divided into two types: non‐violent and violent incidents. Analysis of variance suggests that the mentally retarded had significantly higher reported mean annual rates of involvement in both non‐violent and violent incidents. However, results of multiple regression analysis indicate that, when controlling for the effects of several social and criminal history factors, IQ score has a significant effect on the violent, but not the non‐violent, incident rate. Age and employment status at time of arrest have the strongest influence on an inmate’s disciplinary incident rate, while IQ score has the smallest influence of the variables examined in this study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%