institutional aggression

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • institutional aggression
    • Within groups – PRISONS
      • Recorded assault rose by 61% 2000-2009 (Howard League for Penal Reform).
        • Stats estimated as much as 70,000 inmates are victims of sexual violence behind bars (Beck and Harrison).
      • Importation model
        • Interpersonal factors
          • Arwin and Creasey - argue that prisoners are not blank states when they enter
            • They bring in social histories and personal traits so many of the normative systems developed in the outside world are imported into prison
        • Gang membership
          • Several studies – Allender and Marcel – gang members engage disproportionately in acts of violence
            • Pre-prison gang membership imp determinant of prison misconduct
              • Members of street gangs offend at higher levels than non gang member counterparts
                • Account for disprop amount of serious and violent crime
                  • Gang members ten times more likely to murder and three times more likely to assault in public than non gang member of similar age/background.
          • DeLisi et al – inmates with prior street gang involvement no more likely to engage in prison violence
            • This could be explained by the fact that violent gang members isolated from general inmate population restricting opportunities for violence
              • Fisher – isolating known gang members reduced rates of serious assault by 50%.
        • Research supports individual factors e.g. age, education level, race
          • Harer and Steffenmeir – data from 58 prisons in US found that black inmates had higher rates of violent behaviour but lower rates of drug and alcohol related misconduct.
            • These patterns paralleled racial difs in US society therefore support imp model
      • deprivation model
        • situation factors
          • Prisoner/patient aggression is product of stressful and oppressive conditions of the institution itself – Paterline and Peterson
            • Hodgkinson et al – trainee nurses more likely to suffer violent assault than experienced ones
              • Davis and Burgess – prison settings, length of service also sig factor with more experienced officers less likely to experience assault
        • The pains of imprisonment
          • Sykes – specific deprivations inmates experience within prisons which might be linked to increase in violence
            • Include loss of liberty, loss of autonomy and loss of security
              • Potential threats to person’s security increases anxiety levels even if majority of prisoners pose no sig threat
                • Inmates cope with imprisonment in dif ways, some withdraw and others rebel
        • McCorkley – overcrowding, lack of privacy and lack of meaningful activity significantly influenced peer violence
          • Research inconsistent in findings
            • Nijman et al – increased personal space in psych institution failed to decrease levels of violent incidents amongst patients
      • Combining deprivational and importation models
        • Jiang and Fisher-Giorlando – found support for both models
          • Deprivation model better able to explain violence against prison staff
            • Importation model more able to explain violence against other inmates
              • Deprivation model challenged by research by Poole and Kegoli
                • Best indicator of violence amongst juveniles was pre-institutional factors regardless of other factors in institution
      • Real-world application
        • Wilson – changed the environment to make it less prison-like and pleasant
          • Changes virtually eradicated assault on staff and inmates
            • Political pressure and argued that ‘cannot give the best things to the worst prisoners’
              • Led to units changing regimes in dif direction
    • Between groups – GENOCIDE
      • Institution may refer to whole section of society defined by ethnicity, religion or some other specific feature
        • Violence could occur if one institution’s (INST) interaction with other is characterised by hostility
      • Staub’s model of genocide
        • 5Stages in process of genocide
          • 1. Difficult social conditions leading to
            • 2. Scape-goating of particular group
              • 3. Negative evaluation or dehumanisation of target group leading to
                • 4. Moral values and rules become inapplicable and killing begins
                  • 5. Passivity of others e.g. UN enhances the process
      • Dehumanisation
        • Human beings usually have moral inhibitions about killing other humans
          • This changes if target group dehumanised
            • Members seen as worthless animals not worthy of moral consideration
        • Social dominance orientation is personality variable which predicts social/political attitudes
          • Esses et al – individuals high in SDO had higher tendency to dehumanize out-group members in particular foreign refugees and asylum seekers
      • Obedience to authority
        • Milgram believed that the Holocaust primarily result of situational pressures that forced Nazi soldiers to obey their leader regardless of any personal moral repugnance
        • Mandel rejects Milgram’s claims
          • Argues that his account is mono-causal + doesn’t match historical records




Wow...this is a huge mind map! Very handy, thank you :-)

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Aggression resources »