Institutional Aggression in Prisons situational model

Question 1

The deprivation model

Answer 1

• Clemmer’s (1958) deprivation model places the causes of institutional aggression within the prison environment itself, i.e. a situational explanation.
• Harsh prison conditions are stressful for inmates, who cope by resorting to aggressive and violent behaviour.
• These harsh conditions include psychological factors (e.g. deprived of freedom and sexual intimacy) and physical factors (e.g. deprived of goods and services).
• Deprivation of material goods is closely linked to aggression because it increases competition amongst inmates.
• Aggression is also influenced by the nature of the prison regime.
• If it is unpredictable and regularly uses ‘lock-ups’ to control behaviour, then this creates frustration, reduces stimulation by barring other more interesting activities and reduces even further access to ‘goods’ (such as television).
• This is a recipe for violence, which becomes an adaptive solution to the problem of deprivation.

Question 2

Prison-level factors linked to outcomes

Answer 2

• Steiner (2009) investigated factors predicting aggression in 512 US prisons. Inmate-on-inmate violence was more common in prisons where there was a higher proportion of staff who were women, overcrowding and more inmates in protective custody.
• These are prison-level factors because they are independent of individual characteristics of prisoners. They reliably predicted aggressive behaviour in line with the deprivation model.

Question 3

Evaluation
Research support

Answer 3

• Cunningham et al. (2010) analysed 35 inmate homicides in Texas prisons between 2000 and 2008.
• They found that the perpetrators’ motivations for their violent behaviours were linked to some of the deprivations identified in Clemmer’s model.
• Many of the homicides followed arguments between cell-sharing inmates, where ‘boundaries’ were judged to have been crossed.
• Particularly important were arguments over drugs, sexual activity, and personal possessions.
• These factors are identified by the deprivation model, supporting the model’s validity.

Question 4

Contradictory research

Answer 4

• The model predicts that a lack of heterosexual contact should lead to high levels of aggressive behaviour in prisons.
• However, Hensley et al. (2002) studied 256 male and female inmates of two prisons in Mississippi, a state of the US which allows conjugal visits (that is, visits from partners specifically to have sex).
• There was no link between involvement in these visits and reduced aggressive behaviour.
• This suggests that situational factors do not substantially affect prison violence.

Question 5

Importation versus deprivation

Answer 5

• The importation model of prison aggression is supported by well-controlled experimental evidence.
• For example, DeLisi et al’s (2011) natural experiment used a control group. Camp and Gaes’ (2005) experiment used random allocation.
• However, the deprivation model is supported by evidence that has other strengths.
• For example, Steiner (2009) looked at aggression in a wide range of 512 US prisons and Cunningham et al. (2010) studied all the prisons in Texas over nine years.