Disentangling the relationship between serious disorder problems and the use of supermax prisons

Author:

Anderson Claudia N.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Sociology Boston University Boston Massachusetts USA

Abstract

AbstractResearch SummarySupermax prisons exist, according to the policy's driving logic, to address serious disorder problems by isolating people who cause serious disorder. Criticisms of supermax, however, suggest that its use is driven by factors aside from serious disorder problems and that transfers to supermax have a degree of arbitrariness. The current paper uses 10 years of data on one state prison system to disentangle the relationship between “disorder” and supermax utilization by examining (1) the association between a facility's level of serious disorder and supermax transfers (prison‐level analysis), (2) the association between a person's level of serious rule breaking and oppositely, “nuisance” behaviors, and the odds of a supermax transfer (individual‐level analysis), and (3) whether the influence of a person's behavioral record on the odds of supermax depends upon contextual factors (prison‐by‐individual interaction). The results suggest that a facility's level of serious disorder does strongly correspond with its reliance on supermax and that indicators of serious rule breaking, and not minor forms of it, are strongly associated with a person's odds of experiencing a supermax transfer. However, a person's misconduct record has a weaker association with the odds of a supermax transfer in facilities that are more disorderly.Policy ImplicationsThe findings highlight the importance of prison context for dictating who experiences supermax and raises questions about whether prison systems have a uniform “bar” for supermax transfers. This in turn suggests a need for prison systems to reevaluate individual pathways to supermax and consider whether there are consistent metrics used for supermax placements. More broadly, the finding that context shapes who is transferred to supermax raises questions about the fundamental policy logic and suggests a need to investigate other solutions to disorder problems.

Funder

National Science Foundation

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Law,Public Administration

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3