The Prison Environment - Term Paper Example

Situational Theory in prisons The situational theory of criminal behavior draws its roots from Bandura’s Social learning Theory, by which criminal behavior is attributed to be the response of the individual to factors in his environment and the application of his/her pattern of learned response. This study examines the situational approach to crime and how valid it may be as a rationale for criminal behavior and recidivism, particularly within a captive environment. The prison environment itself may be a factor contributing to changed and escalated patterns of offending behavior in certain prisoners. The development of the LSI-R assessment tool for recidivism, which incorporates the situational approach, has been found to be a consistent predictor of recidivism of male offenders, however its results have been disputed in female offenders. On an overall basis, the situational theory appears to offer some valid insight into the reasons for criminal behavior, however research on its specific application may need to be supplemented by additional studies. The situational Theory of criminal behavior: The situational perspective in psychology is based upon a dynamic view of human action and is based upon the premise that it is not so much the criminal disposition of the offender as the environment of the potential crime scene that could lead an individual into criminal behavior. One of the proponents of this theory is Clarke (1997) who states that people behave the way they do because of who they are, so that when they see an opportunity for a criminal act in the environment, they seize it. Therefore, the means to control such behavior is viewed as lying in reducing such opportunities for crime and by making criminal behavior an unattractive option. (Cornish and Clarke, 1986). In other instances, criminal behavior may occur as a result of unrelated factors such as stress, which could trigger a criminal reaction the individual would not normally display (Wortley ). Wortley (2002) argues that the same principles used in situational management to prevent crime may also be used within the prison setting to reduce the incidence of criminal and offending behavior. Since it is the factors in the environment that are likely to generate certain types of behavior, the control of those factors is likely to elicit better patterns of behavior. Behavioral theories were put forward by Pavlov and clinical psychology manages behavior through the use of stimuli and operant conditioning. On this basis, behavior in the prison environment will be influenced by the immediate cues in the environment. The social learning theory proposed by Bandura (1976) attributes individuals with the capacity for conceptual thought, as a result, responses to external stimuli such as those mentioned above are subject to an intermediary cognitive process. However, according to Bandura, an individual’s responses will be conditioned not only by the stimuli in the environment but also by the manner in which his cognitive system processes those stimuli and the extent to which the individual models his behavioral pattern according to the social context within which he/she moves. This is closely linked with the situational theory of criminal behavior, which attributes criminal behavior as arising out of certain situational factors in the environment, to which an individual may respond with offending behavior, based upon the kind of social learning experiences the individual has had before and which he/she has learnt to generalize to other life situations (Horney, 2006). There are both formal and informal social controls that exist within the environment an individual moves in, which may serve as deterrents to crime when the individual exercises a rational choice not to violate those social rules by offending behavior. The social learning theory, which is derived from the behavioral theories, has formed the basis for the development of an LSI-R (Level of Supervision Inventory – Revised) assessment tool that is used to classify offenders in prison and other correctional facilities. It is frequently administered in prisons in order to assess recidivism risks among offenders, so that supervision strategies and program interventions may be planned accordingly. The theoretical model upon which the LSI-R assessment is based is the PICR Perspective, or the “Personal, Interpersonal and Community-Reinforcement” perspective, which is a derivative of the social learning behavioral theory. The basis of this approach is that offending behavior results from the various incentives to or disincentives from criminal behavior that arise from a variety of sources, particularly from family members and peers (Andrew and Bonata, 2003: 165-68). This model has found wide acceptance in the explanation of offending behavior and in predicting recidivism, so that prison treatment programs can be modified accordingly. The LSI-R test which is based upon this model consists of 54 items that are used to identify two kinds of risks – static risks, or those risks inherent in an individual’s life which are not likely to change over time and dynamic risks, such as those arising from peer interactions or factors in the prison environment that are sensitive to changes over time. On this basis, offenders are classified into low, medium or high risk and intervention programs are planned accordingly (Jones et al, 1999:8). Limitations of the situational approach: The LSI-R has also been found to generate a high degree of accuracy in the case of male offenders. Gendreau, Little and Goggin conducted a meta-analysis, which revealed that the LSI-R was a good predictor of recidivism.(Gendreau et al, 1996:585-587). However, these authors also included a cautionary note in their analysis which stated that their data was “virtually silent on the prediction of recidivism among female offenders.”(Gendreau et al, 1996:587). Moreover, female critics have challenged the basis of the learning theories being used in criminology. They argue that such theories are essentially male centered and have been developed by males on the basis of their own assumptions about social life. Daly points out that the learning theories fail to take into account some elements that play an important role in female criminality, such as the greater of likelihood of abuse in their homes, as well as domestic abuse.(Daly, 1992:62), Moreover, poverty may play a significant role since most women offenders rely on public assistance to survive and may also be drug or alcohol dependent.(Covington, 2001:85). While these factors also play a role in male offending, the patterns of male and female offending may differ. For example, men are more likely than women to use a weapon on their victims and women are more likely to commit a criminal offence with a person they know while a lower percentage of males know their victims (BJS, 1999:3) Application of the situational theory in prisons: Wortley points out that the situational theory approach is essentially reductionist in nature, for example, if prisoners in a particular wing of the prison are apt to be more troublesome than others, then an investigation must be undertaken in that particular area to determine the causes for this.(Wortley 2002:4-5). However, he has also pointed out that traditional approaches to prison security are restricted in their approach by the belief that prisoners are “inherently unpredictable and dangerous” (Wortley 2002:6) Moreover, measures developed to deal with prisoners is based upon the attempt to explain behavior as being exclusively individual centered rather than resulting out of an interaction between the individual and the environment. As a result, offender programs are devised based on prisoner traits, which may be limited in accuracy (Carbonnel et al, 1985) and may result in prisoners being subjected to measures that are more restrictive than they need to be. Wortley (2002 :8) therefore argues that the atmosphere in the prison may be co-relational with prisoner offending behavior, since deviant behavior could arise in the prison due to the need to adapt to the abnormal environment of the prison where there are unnecessary restraints and harsh measures that may make an individual feel less like a human being subject to the social controls of society. The context of the prison environment is an all important factor that may affect the degree to which an individual can be restituted. As Seudfeld and Steel (2000) point out, a prison is like a capsule environment, where there are several noxious elements and where there is a congregation of angry, anti social elements. Therefore the struggle for individual survival becomes one that is conditional upon small material satisfactions and the need to maintain an upper hand in order to avoid being crushed by more violent elements. Therefore, the prison environment itself becomes one where the power of provocation is at its highest and where the dangers of learning socially unacceptable behavior are at their highest. It may also be harder to escape social pressure in prison situations, where individuals are forced into unavoidable close proximity with each other for long periods, thereby increasing the scope for provocation and aggressive acts. This could also be a factor explaining the high rates of recidivism in prisons. How well is the situational theory likely to work within a prison situation? Leibling et al (1999) found that the use of the carrot and stick technique – rewards and punishments was effective in controlling behavior in prison and in preventing suicides. For instance, the promise of an early parole is a significant factor that induces good behavior, while the threat of punishment such as being placed in isolation serves as a deterrent to unacceptable behavior. In a similar way, Vagg (1994:220-7) discovered that sanctions were used in prison, such as confinement in cells, denial of the right to purchase goods, letter writing and reading material and these functioned as punishments for unacceptable behavior rather than being used to reinforce acceptable conduct. Prisoners engaging in behavior that was construed to be violative of prison standards were denied these privileges, which were even more important to the individuals under prison conditions. Therefore, they served as punishment for offensive acts and served to prevent them through the punitive threat associated with them. Conclusions: The situational theory appears to offer a good perspective to explain the occurrence of criminal behavior. Within the prison environment in particular, there is some justification in its application, since environmental cures in the capsule environment of prisons may trigger additional aggression and incite recidivism. The LSI-R construct assesses both factors in the individual’s background as well as environment, however it may need refining to lend itself as accurately to the assessment of recidivism in women. This is one of the limitations of the situational theory. Another limitation may be the fact that the theory may not adequately assess the inherent characteristics within the individual which may be conducive to criminal behavior. However, the situational theory offers valuable feedback into possible corrections and improvements that may be made within a prison environment. For instance, the theory suggests that the prevailing notion that all criminals are dangerous, unpredictable individuals may not be justified, since some crimes may be triggered in a situational context. Therefore, subjecting all prisoners to high walls, barred cells, etc may be unjustified and unnecessary and may be likely to provoke anti social behavior, as the individual feels caged in and sub human. Moreover, interaction with and forced proximity to criminal elements may be another factor in recidivism. Therefore, the situational theory offers food for thought for refinement of prison practices in order to bring about reduction in recidivism. This may involve the proper classification of prisoners into low, medium and high risk categories of individuals, including an adequate system to classify female offenders as well. The grouping of prisoners and the kinds of treatment that they receive can then be effective in achieving improvements in behavior. Therefore, despite its limitations, the situational theory has good potential, which explains why it is being used widely, especially in preventing crimes such as burglaries and other thefts, through the introduction of preventive steps, i.e, by removing the opportunity that may exist for committing the crime. Through the modification of the environment and removal of the environmental stimuli to crime, it appears likely that good steps may be taken towards prevention of criminal acts. Reference: * Andrews, D.A. and Bonata, J. “The Psychology of criminal conduct.” (3rd edn) Ohio: Anderson., 2003. * Bureau of Justice Statistics. “Women offenders”. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 1999.. * Clarke, Ronald, V, “Situational Crime Prevention: Successful case studies” (2nd edn) New York: Harrow and Heston, 1997 * Cornish, Derek B and Clarke, Ronald, V. “The Reasoning Criminal.” New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986. * Covington, S. S. “Creating gender-responsive programs: The next step for womens services”. Corrections Today, 61: 85-87., 2001. * Daly, K. “Womens pathways to felony court: Feminist theories of lawbreaking and problems of representation.” Southern California Review of Law and Womens Studies, 2 :11-52, 1992.. * Gendreau, P., Little, T., and Goggin, C. “A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works!” Criminology, 34, 575-607., 1996. * Horney, Julie. “An alternative Psychology of criminal behavior: The American Society of Criminology 2005 Presidential Address.” Criminology, 44(1): 1-16, 2006. * Jones, D. A., Johnson, S., Latessa, E. and Travis, L. F. “Case classification in community corrections: Preliminary findings from a national survey”. IN “Topics in community corrections.” Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections (at pp 4 to 10). 1999. * Liebling, Alison. "Prison Suicide and Prisoner Coping." IN “Prisons”, Michael Tonry and Joan Petersilia(edn) Volume 26 of “Crime and Justice—A Review of Research”, Michael Tonry(edn). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.. * Vagg, J. “Prison systems: A comparative study of accountability in England, France, Germany and the Netherlands.” Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.. * Wortley, Richrad. “Reconsidering the role of opportunity in situational crime prevention.” IN Newman, G, Clarke, R.V. and Shohan, S.G.(edn) “Rational choice and Situational Crime Prevention” Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1997. * Wortley, Richard, “Situational prison Control: Crime prevention in correctional institutions” Cambridge University Press, 2002. Read More