University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A Typological Study Of Juvenile Correctional Organizations

(USC Thesis Other)

A Typological Study Of Juvenile Correctional Organizations

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content }
i
i
l
( 70-16,889
SHICHOR, David, 1933-
A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OF JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1970
Sociology, criminology
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
© COPYRIGHT BY
DAVID SHICHOR
1970
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED
A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OP JUVENILE
CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
by
D avid S h ic h o r
A D is s e r t a t i o n P re s e n te d to th e
FACULTY OP THE GRAD U ATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OP SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In P a r t i a l F u lf illm e n t o f th e
R eq u irem en ts f o r th e D egree
DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY
(S o c io lo g y )
Ja n u a ry 1970
UNIVERSITY O F SO U TH ER N CALIFORNIA
TH E GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 8 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
David Shichor
under the direction of h..xs.. Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Gradu
ate School, in partial fulfillment of require
ments of the degree of
D O C T O R OF P H IL O S O P H Y
Dean
Date.. January.. .19 70.
PBEFACE
Beview o f th e l i t e r a t u r e in d ic a te d th e la c k o f any
s
com prehensive "typology o f o r g a n iz a tio n s i n th e f i e l d o f
ju v e n ile c o r r e c tio n s . T h is stu d y re p r e s e n te d an a tte m p t
to d e v elo p such a ty p o lo g y h ased on c o r r e c tio n a l and
o r g a n iz a tio n a l p r i n c i p l e s . The ty p o lo g y in c o rp o r a te d th r e e
m ain d im e n sio n s: c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t, to ta l- m e d ia to r y , and
p e r e m p to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y .
An e m p iric a l in q u iry was c o n d u cted i n to th e u s e f u l
n e s s o f th e ty p o lo g y , in v o lv in g th r e e o f th e e ig h t ty p e s
su g g e ste d by th e ty p o lo g y . The p e rc e p tio n s o f th e s t a f f
members and th e o ffe n d e rs re g a rd in g th e s o c i a l system o f
th e s e o r g a n iz a tio n s were c o lle c te d and a n a ly z e d . The f i n d
in g s in d ic a te d t h a t th e ty p o lo g y h a s m e r it i n s u g g e s tin g
d if f e r e n c e s re g a rd in g th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e s o c ia l system
among th e p a r t i c i p a n t s o f d i f f e r e n t c o r r e c tio n a l o rg a n iz a
t i o n s . I f f u r t h e r s tu d ie s v a li d a t e and r e f i n e th e ty p o lo g y ,
i t c o u ld advance th e developm ent o f c o r r e c t i o n a l th e o ry and
p r a c t i c e .
i i
A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S
T h is stu d y w ould n e v e r have been com pleted w ith o u t
th e g u id a n c e , c r i t i c i s m , encouragem ent and e d i t o r i a l work
o f th e chairm an o f my d i s s e r t a t i o n c o m m ittee,
D r. LaMar T. Empey. W ith rem ark ab le p e rs e v e ra n c e and
p a tie n c e he c a r r i e d o u t h i s ta s k a s chairm an o f my com
m itte e w ith c o n s id e ra b le demand upon h i s tim e i n my b e h a lf .
In s h o r t , he h e lp e d to com plete t h i s w ork beyond th e c a l l
o f d u ty , and i n s p ir e d me to deepen my i n t e r e s t and
know ledge i n th e s u b j e c t . I am d e e p ly g r a t e f u l to h im .
The o th e r two members o f th e d i s s e r t a t i o n com
m i t t e e , D r. Malcolm W. K le in , and D r. E . Kim N elson have
a ls o been v e ry h e lp f u l i n a d v is in g and c r i t i c i z i n g t h i s
stu d y i n i t s d i f f e r e n t p h a se s and i n i t s e n tir e ty * T h e ir
comments and a d v ic e c o n tr ib u te d a g r e a t d e a l to th e q u a lity
o f t h i s w o rk . I w ant to ta k e t h i s o p p o rtu n ity to th a n k
them f o r t h e i r p a tie n c e and h e lp .
M y c o lle a g u e s Solomon K obrin and S tev en G. L ubeck,
a lth o u g h n o t fo rm a lly c o n n e c te d w ith t h i s s tu d y , have
r e v e a le d an i n t e r e s t i n i t s p ro g re s s and p ro v id e d h e lp f u l
rem arks and a d v ic e . S te v en G. Lubeck w rote th e com puter
program f o r th e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s .
i i i
C e r ta in ly , a l l t h e i r h e lp and a d v ic e added g r e a t l y
to t h i s s tu d y , how ever, th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t weaknesses
l i e s o le ly w ith me.
L a s t, b u t n o t l e a s t , I w ant to e x p re s s my th a n k s
to my im m ediate f a m ily , to my p a re n ts f o r te a c h in g me to
a p p r e c ia te le a r n in g and s c h o la r s h ip , and to my w if e , E n in a ,
and my s o n , Nadav, who p ro v id e d me w ith a p le a s a n t and
jo y f u l home— an o a s is to r e t u r n a f t e r th e d a ily w an d erin g
i n th e w ild e rn e s s o f h a rd w ork.
- - D .S .
iv
TABLE O P C O N TENTS
PREFACE
Page
i i
A CK N O W LED G M EN TS i i i
INTRODUCTION 1
C h ap ter
I . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
G en eral A pproaches to O rg a n iz a tio n a l Theory
and A n a ly sis
The R a tio n a l Model
The N a tu ra l Model
An I n te g r a te d Approach
C ircu m sc rib e d A pproaches to C om parative
O rg a n iz a tio n a l A n a ly sis
Goal A tta in m e n t
O rg a n iz a tio n a l B e n e fic ia ry
Power and Com pliance
O rg a n iz a tio n a l Technology
Management System
C o rre c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s
J u v e n ile C o rr e c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s
S ta f f -O f f e n d e r R e la tio n s
P a r t ic ip a t o r y O rg a n iz a tio n s
Summary
I I . A TYPOLOGY OP CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS . . . 32
B a sic E lem ents o f a Typology
A Typology o f C o rre c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s
The S u g g ested Typology
v
Chapter
D e s c rip tio n o f th e E ig h t Types
An A n a ly tic a l E v a lu a tio n o f th e S u g g ested
Typology
I I I . DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE
ORGANIZATIONS UNDER STUDY ......................................
The C o rr e c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s u n d e r
Study
The D e s c r ip tio n o f th e O rg a n iz a tio n s
Boys* R ep u b lic I
T h e o r e tic a l A ssum ptions
Change A ssum ptions
The C o rre c tio n a l Program S tr a te g y
The S ilv e r la k e E xperim ent
T h e o r e tic a l A ssum ptions
Change A ssum ptions
Program S tr a te g y
B oys' R e p u b lic I I
T h e o r e tic a l A ssum ptions
Change A ssum ptions
Program S tr a te g y
IV . CLASSIFICATION OF THE ORGANIZATIONS ...................
V. THE INSTRUMENT AND THE DATA COLLECTION. . . .
Goal O r ie n ta tio n
O rg a n iz a tio n a l Norms
S a n c tio n s
System o f S t r a t i f i c a t i o n
A d m in is tra tio n o f th e Q u e s tio n n a ire
V I. THE ANALYSIS OF THE DATA...............................................
The F in d in g s
P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e Em phasis upon
T reatm en t V ersus C u s to d ia l G oals
Page
72
75
81
v i
Chapter Page
P e rc e p tio n s o f th e Degree to Which th e
O rg a n iz a tio n a l Norms Are S up p o rted
P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e System o f
S a n c tio n s
P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e E x te n t o f
D iv isio n o f O ffe n d ers and S t a f f in to
S e p a ra te Subsystem s
P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e E x te n t o f
P a r t i c i p a t i o n in th e D ecision-M aking
P ro c e ss
The Degree to Which T here I s a Consen
su s betw een th e P e rc e p tio n s o f S ta f f
and O ffe n d e rs in th e R e sp e c tiv e
O rg a n iz a tio n s
V II. CONCLUSIONS A ND IMPLICATIONS...........................................129
I m p lic a tio n s
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................. 1^9
APEENDIX 160
LIST O F TABLES
T able Page
1 . The P o p u la tio n o f th e S t u d y .................................................80
2 a . C u s to d ia l v s . T reatm ent O r ie n ta tio n (G e n e ra l)
S c a le S c o re s ................................................................................85
2 b . C u s to d ia l v s . T reatm en t O r ie n ta tio n (G e n e ra l)
S t a t i s t i c a l M easu res.............................................................86
3 a . C u s to d ia l O r ie n ta tio n — S cale S c o r e s ...................... 89
3 b . C u s to d ia l O r ie n ta tio n — S t a t i s t i c a l M easures . . 90
^ a . T reatm en t O r ie n ta tio n — S cale S c o r e s ...................... 92
^ b . T reatm en t O r ie n ta tio n — S t a t i s t i c a l M easures . . 93
5 a . P e rc e p tio n s o f O rg a n iz a tio n a l Norms— S cale
S c o re s ..............................................................................................97
5b. P e rc e p tio n s o f O rg a n iz a tio n a l Norms—
S t a t i s t i c a l M easu res............................................................. 98
6 a . The P e rc e p tio n s o f th e P r e s tig e System in th e
O rg a n iz a tio n s — P e rc e n ta g e s ............................................. 101
6 b . The P e rc e p tio n s o f th e P r e s tig e System i n th e
O r g a n iz a t i o n s - - S ta ti s ti c a l M easures ................... 102
7 a . P e rc e p tio n s R eg ard in g th e E x te n t o f P a r t i c i p a
t i o n by th e O ffe n d e rs i n th e S a n c tio n in g —
P e r c e n t a g e s .............................................. 105
7b . P e rc e p tio n s R eg ard in g th e E x te n t o f P a r t ic ip a
t i o n by th e O ffe n d ers i n th e S a n c tio n in g —
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures .................................................... 106
8 a . P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e N atu re o f th e
S a n c tio n in g System — S cale S c o r e s ............................... 109
8 b . P e rc e p tio n s R eg ard in g th e N ature o f th e
S a n c tio n in g System — S t a t i s t i c a l M easures. . . 110
v i i i
Table Page
9 . In d ex o f "Punishm ent O r i e n t a t i o n " ................................ 112
1 0 a . P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e E x is te n c e o f
S e p a ra te Subsystem s— S cale S co res ........................ 116
10b. P e rc e p tio n s R eg ard in g th e E x is te n c e o f
S e p a ra te S ubsystem s— S t a t i s t i c a l M easure
m ents ........................................................................................... 117
1 1 a . P e rc e p tio n s o f th e E x te n t o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n th e D ecision-M aking P ro c e s s — S cale
S c o re s and P e rc e n ta g e s ...................................................... 121
l i b . P e rc e p tio n s o f th e E x te n t o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n th e D ecision-M aking P ro c e s s —
S t a t i s t i c a l M easurem ents................................ 122
1 2 . C onsensus betw een th e P e rc e p tio n s —
S t a f f / O f f e n d e r s .................................................................... 127
1 3 . D is tr ib u tio n o f th e S t a t i s t i c a l T e s ts .................... 138
i x
LIST O P FIGURES
F ig u re Page
1 . The S u g g ested Types o f C o rre c tio n a l
O r g a n i z a t i o n s ........................... 39
x
INTRODUCTION
In r e c e n t y e a rs th e re h a s been a grow ing s c i e n t i f i c
i n t e r e s t i n th e stu d y o f o r g a n iz a tio n s . T his i n t e r e s t i s
due m ain ly to th e e v e r - in c r e a s in g num ber o f o rg a n iz a tio n s
i n m odem s o c ie ty ? and to t h e i r im p act on a lm o st e v e ry
f a c e t o f s o c i a l and in d iv id u a l l i f e . As B lau and S c o tt
(1 9 6 2 :1 ) have p o in te d o u t, "Modem man i s man in o rg a n iz a
t i o n s ," o r a s s e v e r a l r e c e n t t i t l e s i n d i c a t e — The O rg an iza
t i o n a l S o c ie ty o r The O rg a n iz a tio n Man— o r g a n iz a tio n a l
in f lu e n c e s a re u b iq u ito u s .
T h is p a r t i c u l a r stu d y i s c o n cern ed w ith o rg a n iz a
t io n s o f a s p e c if ic k in d , nam ely, c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
tio n s f o r ju v e n ile o f f e n d e r s . I t r e f l e c t s th e grow ing
a t t e n t i o n t h a t i s b e in g p a id to th e problem s o f tre a tm e n t
and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , and to th e problem s in h e r e n t i n m aking
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s more e f f e c t i v e .
S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s stu d y a tte m p ts to do two th in g s :
(1 ) to c o n s tr u c t an o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p o lo g y w hich w ould
d i f f e r e n t i a t e among c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s a c c o rd in g to
s e v e r a l d im ensions and w hich m ight have t h e o r e t i c a l im p o rt
f o r th e stu d y o f th o se o rg a n iz a tio n s ; and (2 ) to i n v e s t i
g a te e m p ir ic a lly th e p e rc e p tio n s o f s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs in
1
th r e e d i f f e r e n t ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s a s a
m ethod o f d e te rm in in g th e g e n e ra l f i t o f th e -typology to
a c t u a l c o n d itio n s .
The P la n o f th e J U s s e r ta tio n
The rev iew o f r e l e v a n t l i t e r a t u r e i s d is c u s s e d i n
C h ap ter I . I t d e a ls f i r s t w ith g e n e r a l ap p ro ach es to
o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a l y s i s , l a t e r w ith d i f f e r e n t w orks w hich
a re co n ce rn e d w ith th e c o m p arativ e a n a ly s is o f o rg a n iz a
t i o n s . C h ap ter I I i s d e v o te d to th e developm ent o f th e
-typology, b ased on th r e e d i f f e r e n t d im en sio n s w hich have
em erged from th e rev ie w o f l i t e r a t u r e , n am ely , th e g o a ls
o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n s ( tr e a tm e n t v s . c u sto d y o r i e n t a t i o n ) ,
th e scope o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n ( t o t a l v s . m e d ia to ry ), and
th e d e c isio n -m a k in g s t r u c tu r e (p erem p to ry v s . p a r t i c i p a t o r y
s y s te m ). C h ap ter I I I d e s c r ib e s th e t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s
and th e program m atic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f th e th r e e c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s t h a t were s u b je c te d to th e e m p iric a l
s tu d y . I n C h ap ter IV th e o rg a n iz a tio n s a re d e s c rib e d and
c l a s s i f i e d i n term s o f th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y . Then th e
m ajo r a r e a s o f c o n ce rn i n w hich th e s e o r g a n iz a tio n s w i l l be
com pared a re p re s e n te d a s fo llo w s ; (1 ) to w hat e x te n t do
s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs i n th e th r e e o r g a n iz a tio n s p e rc e iv e an
em phasis upon tre a tm e n t v e rs u s c u s t o d ia l g o a ls ? (2 ) to
w hat d e g re e i s th e r e th e su p p o rt f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l norm s?
(3 ) to w hat e x te n t i s th e system o f s a n c tio n s i n e ac h o f
th e o r g a n iz a tio n s p e rc e iv e d a s rew ard o r punishm ent
o r ie n te d ? ( ^ ) to w hat e x te n t do s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs p e r
c e iv e th e m se lv e s a s b e in g d iv id e d i n to s e p a ra te su b sy stem s?
(5 ) to w hat e x te n t a re o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e d a s p a r t i c i p a t i n g
i n th e b a s ic d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s ? (6 ) to w hat d eg ree
i s th e r e a co n sen su s betw een o ffe n d e rs and s t a f f on b a s ic
g o a ls , n o rm s, s a n c tio n s , s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , and th e d e c is io n
m aking p ro c e s s i n th e d i f f e r e n t o r g a n iz a tio n s ? C h a p te r V
g iv e s an a cc o u n t o f th e p ro c e d u re s o f d a ta c o lle c tio n *
C h a p te r VI i s d e v o te d to th e p r e s e n ta tio n and th e a n a ly s is
o f th e f i n d in g s . F i n a l l y , C h ap ter V II p r e s e n ts th e g e n e ra l
c o n c lu s io n s re g a rd in g th e c o n n e c tio n s betw een th e o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e and th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e s o c ia l sy ste m ,
and e v a lu a te s th e e f f e c tiv e n e s s o f th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y .
C H APTER I
REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE
The fo llo w in g fo rm a t i s u se d i n t h i s rev ie w o f
l i t e r a t u r e : f i r s t , th e g e n e ra l a p p ro a ch e s to o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l th e o ry and a n a ly s is w hich have b een u se d i n th e p a s t
a re p re s e n te d ; se co n d , th e l i t e r a t u r e on th e co m p arativ e
s tu d y o f o rg a n iz a tio n s i s rev iew ed ; a n d , t h i r d , th e a v a i l
a b le l i t e r a t u r e on c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s p e r s e , i s
re v ie w e d .
G eneral A pproaches to O rg a n iz a tio n a l
Theory and A n a ly s is
A ccording to G ouldner (1 9 6 5 :1 «-01), two d i s t i n c t
a p p ro a ch e s to th e stu d y o f o rg a n iz a tio n s have em erged in
s o c io lo g y . The f i r s t em phasizes th e r a t i o n a l and b u rea u
c r a t i c c h a r a c te r o f o r g a n iz a tio n s . The second t r e a t s
o r g a n iz a tio n s a s " n a tu r a l- s y s te m s ."
The R a tio n a l Model
The r a t i o n a l m odel was d e riv e d from W eber's work on
th e b u r e a u c r a tic c h a r a c te r o f m odem o r g a n iz a tio n s . Weber
su g g e ste d t h a t th e y a re com prised e s s e n t i a l l y o f :
(1 ) f i x e d and o f f i c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n a l a r e a s , o rd e re d by
a d m in is tr a tiv e r e g u la tio n s ; (2 ) an o f f ic e h ie ra rc h y and
l e v e l s o f g rad ed a u t h o r i t y , in c lu d in g a firm ly o rd e re d
system o f s u p e r- and s u b o rd in a tio n ; (3 ) management b a sed
upon w r i t te n docum ents; (*0 management w hich p re su p p o se s
e x p e r t t r a i n in g ; (5 ) o f f i c i a l a c t i v i t y w hich demands th e
f u l l w orking c a p a c ity o f th e o f f i c i a l s ; and (6 ) g e n e ra l
r u l e s , w hich a re s t a b l e , e x h a u s tiv e , and can be le a rn e d
(G e rth and M ills , 1 9 6 7 :1 9 6 -1 9 8 ).
E tz io n i (1 9 6 ^ :2 0 -3 1 ) su g g e ste d t h a t th e r a t i o n a l
model (he c a l l s i t — th e " C la s s ic a l Theory o f A d m in istra
t io n " ) h a s dev elo p ed from management t h e o r i e s . A ccording
to him , t h i s th e o ry em phasizes t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n s a re b u i l t
on a s o l i d l y r a t i o n a l b a s i s , c h a r a c te r iz e d by a c l e a r
d iv is io n o f l a b o r , h ig h s p e c i a l i z a t i o n , d i s t i n c t h ie r a r c h y
o f a u th o r ity * and an econom ic rew ard sy ste m . T h is th e o ry
s tr o n g ly em phasizes th e fo rm al a s w e ll a s th e r a t i o n a l
c h a r a c te r o f o r g a n iz a tio n s .
The c h ie f m e r it o f th e r a tio n a l- m o d e l, a t l e a s t
t h e o r e t i c a l l y , i s i t s em phasis upon te c h n ic a l e f f i c i e n c y .
C o n se q u e n tly , i t im p lie s th e com plete e lim in a tio n o f per
s o n a liz e d r e l a ti o n s h i p s and n o n r a tio n a l c o n s id e r a tio n s
(M erton, 1 9 5 7 :1 9 6 ). The m ain c r i t i c i s m o f th e r a t i o n a l
m odel h a s been t h a t i t fo c u s e s o n ly on th e fo rm al s t r u c tu r e
o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n w ith o u t ta k in g i n t o c o n s id e r a tio n i t s
s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , in fo rm a l g ro u p s, n o n r a tio n a l f a c t o r s ,
6
in n e r c o n f l i c t s , e t c e t e r a . In r e f e r r i n g to t h i s a s p e c t o f
th e r a t i o n a l m odel, G ouldner n o te d :
Weher was s i l e n t on s e v e r a l o th e r q u e s tio n s : P i r s t ,
to whom th e r u l e s have to be u s e f u l , i f b u reau
c r a t i c a u th o r ity was to be e f f e c t i v e ? S eco n d ly , i n
term s o f whose g o a ls were th e r u l e s a r a t i o n a l
d e v ic e ? . . . Weber ten d e d to assume t h a t th e ends
o f d i f f e r e n t s t r a t a w ith in a b u re a u c ra c y were id e n
t i c a l , o r a t l e a s t h ig h ly s i m i l a r , and hence was
n o t com pelled to d i s t in g u i s h them from each o t h e r .
(1967*20)
The N a tu ra l Model
The n a tu r a l m odel approach re g a r d s th e o rg a n iz a tio n
as a " n a tu r a l w h o le ," o r system (a sy stem b e in g a s e t o f
e le m e n ts and th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s among th e m ). T h is ap p ro ach
was su g g e ste d o r i g i n a l l y by Comte and th e m ost n o te d con
tem porary r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f i t i s P a rs o n s . P a rso n s (1961:
*fl) c la im e d t h a t an o rg a n iz a tio n can be view ed a s a system
i n e q u ilib r iu m , more o r l e s s h o m o e sta tic i n c h a r a c t e r , w ith
i n t e r a c t i o n and m utual in te rd e p e n d e n c e betw een i t s p a r t s .
The "sy stem " n o tio n im p lie s t h a t " th e w hole i s more th a n
th e sum o f i t s p a r t s , " and th e em phasis i s n o t on th e
n u m e ric a l a d d itio n o f th e p a r t s , b u t on t h e i r u n o rg a n iz e d
a g g re g a tio n (B u ck ley , 1 9 6 7 :^ 2 ). T h is ap p ro ach a ls o sug
g e s t s t h a t any change o c c u rrin g i n any o f th e p a r t s o f th e
o rg a n iz a tio n h a s to have some ra m ify in g consequences on th e
w hole o r g a n iz a tio n a l system (G o u ld n er, 1 9 6 5 :^ 0 6 ).
E tz io n i (1 9 6 ^ :2 0 ), in c o n tin u in g h i s a n a ly s is on
th e b a s i s o f management t h e o r i e s , d e s c rib e d th e r i s e o f th e
"Human R e la tio n s " ap p ro ach (w hich i s com parable to th e
n a tu r a l m o d e l). A ccording to him , t h i s approach fo c u s e s on
th e e m o tio n a l, u n p la n n e d , n o n r a tio n a l e le m e n ts i n o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l b e h a v io r. I t em phasizes th e s ig n if ic a n c e o f th e
in fo rm a l a s w e ll a s fo rm a l g ro u p in g s i n an o r g a n iz a tio n ,
th e im p o rtan c e o f le a d e r s h ip p a t t e r n s , and com m unication
and p a r t i c i p a t i o n p a t t e r n s . I'rom t h i s ap p ro ach th e c o n c e p t
o f in fo rm a l o rg a n iz a tio n h a s d e v e lo p e d . The m e rit o f th e
n a tu r a l model i s t h a t i t p o in ts o u t t h a t even i n modern and
w e ll-p la n n e d o r g a n iz a tio n s , th e r e a re c e r t a i n n o n r a tio n a l
b e h a v io r p a tt e r n s w hich sh o u ld be u n d e rs to o d . The m ain
draw back o f t h i s ap p ro ach i s t h a t i t o f te n te n d s to n e g le c t
th e r a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f th e m odem o r g a n iz a tio n .
An I n te g r a te d A pproach
I t seems to be a g re e d upon t h a t th e m ost f r u i t f u l
ap p ro ach to o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a ly s is would be one w hich
in c o r p o r a te s th e r a t i o n a l and th e n a t u r a l m odels in to one
( E tz io n i , 1964-; G o u ld n er, 1 9 6 5 ). E tz io n i ( ^ S ^ s ^ l ) h a s
c la im e d , how ever, t h a t t h i s s y n th e s iz e d approach h as
a lre a d y been d e v e lo p e d , and can be r e f e r r e d to a s th e
" s t r u c t u r a l " a p p ro a c h . A ccording to him (^1-^-9), th e
s t r u c t u r a l ap p ro ach h a s th e m e rits o f : (a ) stu d y in g b o th
th e fo rm al and th e in fo rm a l ele m e n ts i n th e o r g a n iz a tio n
and t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s ; (b ) re c o g n iz in g th e o rg a n iz a tio n a l
dilemma o f i n e v ita b le s t r a i n betw een fo rm al and in fo rm a l
r e l a t i o n s ; (e ) e n la r g in g th e scope o f o r g a n iz a tio n s
s tu d ie d , i . e . , i n c o n tr a s t to th e two fo rm er a p p ro a c h e s,
th e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s s tu d y n o t o n ly i n d u s t r i a l o r b u s in e s s
o r g a n iz a tio n s , b u t a l l k in d s o f e x i s t i n g o rg a n iz a tio n s
(c h u rc h , arm y, w e lf a r e , s c h o o l, p r i s o n , e t c e t e r a ) ;
(d ) b e in g aware o f th e e x te r n a l en v iro n m en t w ith in w hich
ev ery o rg a n iz a tio n f u n c tio n s .
T h is developm ent tow ard s y n th e s is betw een th e
r a t i o n a l and n a tu r a l m odels i s se en i n th e works o f s e v e r a l
s o c ia l s c i e n t i s t s . T here i s a g e n e r a l aw areness o f th e
e x is te n c e o f fo rm al and in fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , and o f th e
i n t e r a c t i o n and i n t e r r e l a t i o n s betw een them (B lau and
S c o t t, 1962; S e lz n ic k , 19^3; Homans, 1950; L i t t e r e r , 1 9 6 5 ).
In e v ery fo rm al o r g a n iz a tio n th e r e a r i s e in fo rm a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s . . . . The r o o ts o f th e s e in fo rm a l
sy stem s a re embedded i n th e fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n
i t s e l f and n u rtu re d by th e v e ry f o r m a lity o f i t s
a rra n g e m e n ts . (B lau and S c o tt, 1 9 6 2 :6 )
The in fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n seems to d ev elo p i n re sp o n se to
th e o p p o r tu n itie s and problem s c r e a te d by th e fo rm al o rg an
i z a t i o n . The g o a ls and th e f u n c tio n in g o f th e fo rm al
o r g a n iz a tio n a re m o d ifie d by th e in fo rm a l p ro c e s s e s w ith in
i t ( S e lz n ic k , 1 9 ^ 3 :^ 7 -^ 8 ).
T h is m utual in f lu e n c e can be c h a r a c te r iz e d by th e
fo llo w in g :
. . • th e i n t e r n a l system i s c o n tin u a lly em erging
o u t o f th e e x te r n a l and c o n tin u a lly fe e d in g back
to m odify th e e x te r n a l system o r , r a t h e r , to b u ild
up th e s o c ia l system a s a whole in to som ething
more th a n th e e x te r n a l system we s t a r t e d w ith .
(Homans, 1950:153)
9
The b a s ic in g r e d ie n ts o f t h i s in te g r a te d ap p ro ach
a re a s f o llo w s : ( a ) th e p a r t s o f th e system and t h e i r
in te rd e p e n d e n c y ; (b ) th e lin k in g p ro c e s s e s betw een th e
p a r t s o f th e system ; and ( c ) th e g o a ls o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n
( L i t t e r e r , 1 9 6 5 :2 1 ). The a n a ly s is o f a l l th e s e in g r e d ie n ts
i s a n e c e s s a ry c o n d itio n f o r th e u n d e rs ta n d in g o f any
o r g a n iz a tio n .
T h is b r i e f rev ie w o f g e n e ra l ap p ro ach es to th e
stu d y o f o r g a n iz a tio n s seems to s u g g e s t t h a t in any
d e s c r ip tiv e - e m p ir ic a l a n a ly s is o f o r g a n iz a tio n s , an o r g a n i
z a t io n a l m odel sh o u ld be a p p lie d w hich c o v e rs a l l m ajo r
f a c e t s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . T h is sh o u ld in c lu d e th e fo rm al
and in fo rm a l s t r u c t u r e s , a stu d y o f th e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s
betw een them , and a ls o an e x am in a tio n o f th e i n t e r a c t i o n
among th e d i f f e r e n t segm ents o f th e in fo rm a l s t r u c tu r e
i t s e l f .
C ircu m sc rib e d A pproaches to Com parative
O rg a n iz a tio n a l A n a ly s is
B u ild in g upon th e n o tio n t h a t a l l m ajo r f a c e t s o f
an o r g a n iz a tio n sh o u ld be s tu d ie d , s e v e r a l s tu d ie s o f
s p e c i f i c k in d s o f o r g a n iz a tio n s have been s tu d ie d , a sk in g
su ch q u e s tio n s a s th e fo llo w in g :
1 . What i s th e s o c ia l f u n c tio n o f th e o rg a n iz a
tio n s ? T h is ap p ro ach h a s been p u rsu e d by th e
f u n c t i o n a l i s t s , m ain ly by P a rso n s (1 9 6 1 ).
10
2 . W ho i s th e p rim a ry b e n e f ic ia r y o f th e o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s ? Used by B lau and S c o tt
(1962).
3* What i s th e com pliance o r c o n tr o l s t r u c tu r e o f
th e o r g a n iz a tio n ? S u g g ested by E tz io n i (1 9 6 1 ).
b, What i s th e te c h n o lo g y , o r th e work done on raw
m a t e r i a l s , by th e o r g a n iz a tio n ? Used by Perrow
(1 9 6 7 ).
5 . What i s th e management system o f th e o rg a n iz a
tio n ? P ro p o sed by l i k e r t (1 9 6 1 ).
These ap p ro a ch e s em phasize a k in d o f m iddle ran g e
ap p ro ach i n th e se n se t h a t th e y a re s p e c i f i c and a p p lic a b le
o n ly to l im ite d ra n g e s o f d a ta . They a ls o te n d to s t r e s s
th e im p o rtan ce o f th e in fo rm a l a s w e ll a s th e fo rm a l s t r u c
t u r e s o f o r g a n iz a tio n s , and th e y m ig h t be lin k e d s u c c e s s
f u l l y w ith th e i n te g r a t e d ap p ro ach o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a ly
s i s . L e t u s c o n s id e r e ac h o f th e s u b je c t a r e a s i n d e t a i l .
Goal A tta in m e n t
Those who c o n c e n tr a te upon th e stu d y o f o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l g o a ls s u g g e st t h a t o rg a n iz a tio n s a re r a t i o n a l l y
o rd e re d in s tru m e n ts f o r th e achievem ent o f s t a t e d g o a ls
( S e lz n ic k , 19*4-8). C o n se q u e n tly , th e g o a l a tta in m e n t fu n c
t i o n i s th e b a s ic c h a r a c te r iz in g f a c t o r f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l
a n a l y s i s .
. . . prim acy o f o r i e n t a t i o n to th e a tta in m e n t o f
a s p e c i f i c g o a l i s u s e d a s th e d e fin in g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
11
o f an o r g a n iz a tio n w hich d is tin g u is h e s i t from
o th e r ty p e s o f s o c i a l sy ste m s.
T h is im p lie s :
. . . th e prim acy o f g o a l- a tta in m e n t among th e
f u n c tio n s o f a s o c i a l system g iv e s p r i o r i t y to
th o s e p ro c e s s e s m ost d i r e c t l y in v o lv e d w ith th e
su c c e s s o r f a i l u r e o f g o a l o r ie n te d e n d e a v o rs.
(P a rs o n s , 1 9 6 l:1 +3)
The fu n c tio n s o f g o a ls i n an o r g a n iz a tio n a l c o n te x t
were p o in te d o u t by E tz io n i (1 9 6 ^ :5 ): ( a ) p ro v id in g o r ie n
t a t i o n f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l a c t i v i t y , (b ) s e rv in g a s a s ta n
d a rd by w hich th e s u c c e s s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n can be
a s s e s s e d . The a n a ly s is o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls , how ever,
h a s to be made c a r e f u l l y . C e rta in ty p e s o f o rg a n iz a tio n s
have m u ltip le g o a ls , e . g . , many c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s
have c o n f l i c t i n g c u s to d ia l and r e h a b i l i t a t i v e g o a ls , r e q u i r
in g some e f f o r t to d e term in e g o a l p r i o r i t i e s , i f th e y e x is t.
A ls o , i t h a s b een p o in te d o u t t h a t in fo rm a l norm s
o f te n a r i s e sp o n ta n e o u sly w ith in th e o r g a n iz a tio n . Conse
q u e n tly , th e re may be an a tte m p t on b e h a lf o f th e fo rm a l
o r g a n iz a tio n to i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e th e g o a l d e v ia tio n s from
th e fo rm a l g o a ls "so t h a t 'u n w r itte n la w s ' and in fo rm a l
a s s o c ia tio n s a re e s t a b l i s h e d ." ( S e lz n ic k , 1 9 ^ 8 :2 2 ) These
in fo rm a l norm s m ight have d e le te r io u s consequences f o r th e
fo rm a l g o a l s , o r th e y m ig h t c o n tr ib u te t o , r a t h e r th a n
h in d e r , th e o b je c tiv e s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n .
O rg a n iz a tio n a l B e n e fic ia ry
The p e o p le who a re in v o lv e d w ith th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l
12
a c t i v i t i e s a re th e fo c u s o f t h i s ap p ro ach o f a n a l y s i s .
B lau and S c o tt (1962) have c o n s id e re d a s th e b a s ic p e rs p e c
t iv e o f t h i s a p p ro a c h , th e e v a lu a tio n o f answ ers to th e
q u e s tio n o f " c u i hono?"—who i s th e prim e b e n e f ic ia r y o f
th e a c t i v i t i e s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n .
On th e b a s is o f t h i s p r i n c i p l e , th e y d is tin g u is h e d
f o u r ty p e s o f o rg a n iz a tio n s ! (1 ) m u tu a l-b e n e fit a s s o c ia
t io n s w here th e m em bership i s th e prim e b e n e f ic ia r y , e . g . ,
p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s , u n io n s , c lu b s , p r o f e s s io n a l a s s o c ia
t i o n s , e t c e te ra * (2 ) s e r v ic e o rg a n iz a tio n s —where th e
c l i e n t group i s th e prim e b e n e f ic ia r y , e . g . , s o c i a l work
a g e n c ie s , h o s p i t a l s , s c h o o ls , e t c e te r a ; (3 ) b u s in e s s con
c e rn s —w here th e ow ners a re th e prim e b e n e f ic ia r y ; and
(1+) commonweal o r g a n iz a tio n s —where th e prim e b e n e f ic ia r y
i s th e p u b lic a t l a r g e , e . g . , governm ent o f f i c e s , p o lic e
and f i r e d e p a rtm e n ts , r e s e a r c h i h s t i t u t i o n s , e t c e t e r a
(B lau and S c o t t, 1 9 62j1 f3“l<-8).
Power and Compliance
The b a s is o f t h i s ap p ro ach to o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a ly
s i s i s th e n a tu re o f th e power and com pliance system i n
th e o r g a n iz a tio n . E tz io n i (1961 :*0 fo llo w in g P a rs o n s ,
d e fin e d power a s : " . • . a n a c t o r ’ s a b i l i t y to in d u c e o r
in f lu e n c e a n o th e r a c t o r to c a r r y o u t h i s d i r e c t i v e s ." Com
p lia n c e was d e fin e d a s th e fo llo w in g ; "Com pliance r e f e r s
b o th to a r e l a t i o n i n w hich an a c t o r behaves i n acco rd an ce
13
w ith a d i r e c t i v e s u p p o rte d by a n o th e r a c t o r 's pow er, and to
th e o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e su b o rd in a te d a c t o r to th e power
a p p lie d " ( E tz io n i , 1 9 6 1 :3 ).
The ty p e s o f pow er were d i f f e r e n t i a t e d a c c o rd in g to
th e means u se d to make th e s u b je c ts com ply. The m ain ty p e s
o f power a r e : c o e rc iv e power—w hich r e s t s on p h y s ic a l
m eans; re m u n e ra tiv e power— w hich r e s t s on m a te r ia l m eans;
a n d , n o rm a tiv e power—w h ic h .r e s ts on n o rm ativ e m eans. On
th e b a s is o f such an a p p ro a c h , o r g a n iz a tio n s can be c l a s s i
f i e d a s fo llo w s :
1 . p re d o m in a n tly c o e rc iv e o r g a n iz a tio n s , e . g . ,
c o n c e n tr a tio n cam ps, p r i s o n s , m en tal i n s t i t u t i o n s ; 2 . p re
d o m in an tly u t i l i t a r i a n o r g a n iz a tio n s , e . g . , i n d u s t r i a l and
b u s in e s s o rg a n iz a tio n s ; 3* p red o m in an tly n o rm ativ e o r g a n i
z a t i o n s , e . g . , r e l i g i o u s o r g a n iz a tio n s , u n i v e r s i t i e s ;
d u a l s t r u c tu r e o r g a n iz a tio n s : a . n o rm a tiv e -c o e rc iv e ,
e . g . , com bat u n i t s , b . u t i l i t a r i a n —n o rm a tiv e , e . g . , la b o r
u n io n s , c . u t i l i t a r i a n - c o e r c i v e , e . g . , some e a r ly in d u s
t r i a l o rg a n iz a tio n s ( E tz io n i , 1 9 6 1 :6 6 -6 7 ).
O rg a n iz a tio n a l T echnology
T h is p e rs p e c tiv e o f co m p arativ e a n a ly s is o f o rg a n i
z a tio n s c o n s id e rs th e te c h n o lo g y , o r th e work done in th e
o r g a n iz a tio n , a s th e d e fin in g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c (P erro w , 1967:
19*+“ 2 0 8 ). In t h i s p e rs p e c tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n s a re seen p r i
m a rily a s system s f o r g e tt i n g work d o n e, f o r a p p ly in g
te c h n iq u e s to th e problem o f a l t e r i n g new m a t e r i a ls ,
w h e th er th e s e m a te r ia ls a re p e o p le , sy m b o ls, o r th in g s .
The in d e p e n d e n t v a r ia b le i s th e te c h n o lo g y , and th e
d ep en d en t one i s th e s t r u c tu r e o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . The
g o a ls o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n a re c o n s id e re d to be a p a r t o f
th e in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e .
Perrow a p p lie d t h i s ap p ro ach to th e stu d y o f
"p e o p le -c h a n g in g " o r g a n iz a tio n s . A ccording to him , p eo p le
a re th e raw m a te r ia l i n such o r g a n iz a tio n s and th e d i s t i n
g u is h in g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c among th e o r g a n iz a tio n s i s th e
m ethods a p p lie d to a c h ie v e ch an g e. T hus, Perrow su g g e ste d :
A ll com plex o r g a n iz a tio n s u se p e o p le to p u rsu e
t h e i r t a s k s , b u t p e o p le -c h a n g in g o rg a n iz a tio n s
work n o t o n ly w ith o r th ro u g h p e o p le b u t a ls o on
them . P eople c o n s t i t u t e th e r a is o n d 'e t r e o f
th e s e o r g a n iz a tio n s , a n d , . . . th e d e s ire d
p ro d u c t i s a new o r a l t e r e d p e rs o n . ( S t r e e t ,
V i n t e r , and P erro w , 1 9 6 6 :3 )
T h is approach was fo llo w e d by S t r e e t , V in te r , and
Perrow (1966) in t h e i r co m p arativ e stu d y o f ju v e n ile c o r
r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . S im ila r ly , W heeler ( 1 9 6 6 ) ad o p ted
th e same p e rs p e c tiv e i n h i s r e s e a r c h i n to th e o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l c o n te x t o f s o c i a l i z a t i o n . As a m a tte r o f f a c t ,
Goffman*s (1961) t h e s i s on " t o t a l o rg a n iz a tio n s " fo llo w s
th e same a p p ro a c h , w here he s t a t e s t h a t i n t o t a l i n s t i t u
t io n s p e o p le a re th e " m a te r ia l to work u p o n ."
Management System
The system o f management in any o rg a n iz a tio n and
th e amount o f c o n tr o l i t e x e r c i s e s , can he a p p lie d a s a
d is t in g u i s h in g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c among o r g a n iz a tio n s ( L i k e r t ,
1 9 6 1 :2 2 2 ). T h is dim ension p ro v id e s a b a s is f o r a ty p o lo g y
o f management sy ste m s, L ik e r t (1961) h a s c o n s tru c te d t h i s
ty p o lo g y f o r i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , b u t i t h as re le v a n c e
f o r o th e r k in d s o f o r g a n iz a tio n s a l s o , e . g . , f o r p e o p le -
ch an g in g o r g a n iz a tio n s . He su g g e ste d th e u se o f th e
a u t h o r i t a t i v e - p a r t i c i p a t i v e dim ension o f management m ethods
a s th e b a s is f o r co m p arativ e a n a ly s is among o r g a n iz a tio n s .
P our management system s a re d is tin g u is h e d on t h i s dimen
s io n : (1 ) e x p lo i t i v e - a u t h o r i t a t i v e ; (2 ) b e n e v o le n t-
a u t h o r i t a t i v e ; (3 ) c o n s u lta tiv e ; and (*+) p a r t i c i p a t i v e .
A lo n g l i s t o f " o p e ra tin g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " a re sug
g e s te d a s r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f th e s e d i f f e r e n t k in d s o f man
agem ent sy ste m s. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e p r e s e n t c o n tin u
ance a lo n g s e v e r a l d im e n sio n s, e . g . , w h e th er d e c is io n s a re
made o n ly a t th e to p i n Type 1; w h e th er th e i n t e r e s t o f
p eo p le a t th e lo w er l e v e l s a re ta k e n i n to a cc o u n t i n Type 2;
w h e th e r m ajo r d e c is io n s a re made a t th e to p b u t le a v in g
some s p e c i f i c d e c is io n s a t th e lo w er l e v e ls a s i n Type 3>
o r w h e th e r th e d e c is io n m aking i s w id e ly e x e rc is e d th ro u g h
o u t th e o r g a n iz a tio n a s in Type if.
The re le v a n c e o f t h i s ap p ro ach to th e stu d y o f
management system s to th e f i e l d o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
t io n s can be se en i n th e c o n c lu d in g s ta te m e n t o f L ik e r t
(1961:236):
16
E ach system te n d s to mold p eo p le i n i t s own im ag e.
A u th o r ita r ia n o r g a n iz a tio n s te n d to develop
d ep en d en t p eo p le and few l e a d e r s . P a r t i c i p a t i v e
o rg a n iz a tio n s te n d to d ev elo p e m o tio n a lly and
s o c i a l l y m ature p e rs o n s c a p a b le o f e f f e c t i v e
i n t e r a c t i o n , i n i t i a t i v e , and l e a d e r s h ip .
The n e x t s te p i n th e rev iew o f l i t e r a t u r e i s to
in d ic a t e and sum m arize m ajo r f in d in g s and is s u e s i n th e
stu d y o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
C o r r e c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s
Among th e d i f f e r e n t ap p ro ach es to th e stu d y o f
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , th e t r a c e s o f th e th r e e g e n e ra l
m odels o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a l y s i s , n am ely , th e r a t i o n a l ,
th e n a t u r a l , and th e in te g r a t e d m o d els, can be fo u n d .
T r a d i t i o n a l l y , th e m ain c o n ce rn o f c o r r e c t i o n a l
a d m in is tr a to r s and o th e r o f f i c i a l s h a s been w ith th e fo rm al
c h a r a c t e r and s t r u c tu r e o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . O f f i c i a l pub
l i c a t i o n s e n u n c ia te th e v a rio u s r u l e s , s ta n d a r d s , d i r e c
t i v e s , d e t a i l e d o r g a n iz a tio n a l p ro g ram s, ta b le s o f o r g a n i
z a t i o n , and so o n , o n ly i n term s o f th e o f f i c i a l s t r u c t u r e .
Empey i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s ap p ro ach r e f e r r i n g to a r e c e n t m ovie
th e "Sand P e b b le s ," th e s to r y o f an A m erican g u n b o at in
C hina d u rin g th e 1 9 2 0 's :
The crew o f th e Sand P e b b le s ( t h e i r name f o r th e
San P a b lo ) had w orked o u t an i n t e r e s t i n g in fo rm a l
arra n g em e n t by w hich th e y g o t t h e i r work do n e.
V i r t u a l ly ev ery member o f th e crew had a C hinese
c o o lie who was h i s c o u n te r p a r t on th e d e ck , i n th e
g a l l e y , o r i n th e e n g in e room . I t was t h i s in fo rm a l
c re w , . . . who k e p t th e s h ip ru n n in g by do in g m ost
o f th e w ork. Y e t, i n s o f a r a s th e U. S . Navy was
17
o f f i c i a l l y c o n c e rn e d , th e C hinese members o f th e
crew d id n o t even e x i s t . I f you lo o k ed a t th e
T able o f O rg a n iz a tio n s f o r th e s h i p , you c o u ld n o t
s e e one o f t h e i r nam es. (Empey, 1 9 o 8 a :5 )
T h is exam ple i l l u s t r a t e s th e p a r a l l e l in v o lv em en t
o f p u rs u a n ts o f t h i s ap p ro ach o n ly w ith th e fo rm al s t r u c
tu r e o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s w ith o u t in q u ir in g
d e e p ly w hat i s g o in g on beyond t h i s s t r u c t u r e . P ro b a b ly ,
th e l a t e s t , m ost d e li b e r a t e and c o n c is e a tte m p ts to a n a ly z e
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s a c c o rd in g to t h e i r fo rm al s t r u c
t u r e w ere made by C ressey (I9 6 0 ; 1 9 6 5 ). Iu th e s e s t u d i e s
C ressey a n a ly z e d a lm o st a l l f a c e t s o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n from th e p o in t o f view o f a fo rm al o rg a n iz a
t i o n . He a n a ly z e d s y s te m a tic a lly th e f a c e t s o f : g o a l
o r i e n t a t i o n , r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e o r g a n iz a tio n and
s o c i e t y , ty p e s o f p u n ish m e n ts, p a tt e r n s o f th e fo rm al
o r g a n iz a tio n , p a tt e r n s o f a u th o r ity s t r u c t u r e , p a tt e r n s o f
com m unication and d e c is io n m aking, p a tt e r n s o f th e sa n c
tio n in g sy ste m , problem s o f a d ju s tm e n t, e t c e t e r a .
The n a tu r a l m odel a p p ro a c h , how ever, h a s a ls o been
a p p lie d to th e stu d y o f c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . Most
o f th e s e s tu d ie s c o n c e n tra te d on th e in fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n
o f m axim um -security a d u lt m ale p r i s o n s , and th e p i c t u r e
d e s c rib e d by m ost o f them was v e ry s i m i l a r . G iallom bardo
(1 9 6 6 :5 ) h a s p o in te d o u t, f o r exam ple, t h a t th e r e i s a
g e n e r a l agreem ent among s c h o la r s t h a t th e r e i s an in f o r m a l,
inm ate c u ltu r e in v i r t u a l l y e v ery p r i s o n , th e m ost im por
t a n t f e a t u r e s o f w hich em p h asize: (1 ) lo y a l t y and m u tu al
a id to f e llo w p r i s o n e r s , and o p p o s itio n to th e "enemy"
i . e . , s t a f f ; (2 ) a s u b c u ltu re w hich i s n o ta b le f o r v io le n c e ,
p h y s ic a l c o e r c io n , s tr u g g le f o r pow er, and in v o lv em en t i n
i l l i c i t a c t i v i t i e s ; (3 ) a s e t o f s o c i a l r o l e s t h a t a re
r e l a t e d b o th to th e in m ate n o rm ativ e system and to i t s
h i e r a r c h i a l s t r u c t u r e .
v a i l i n g v a lu e system o f th e "inm ate c u lt u r e " i s o p p o si
t i o n a l to t h a t o f th e o u ts id e s o c i e t y , and to i t s r e p r e
s e n t a t i v e s — th e members o f th e s t a f f . The m ain f u n c tio n
o f t h i s "inm ate c u ltu r e " i s to se rv e a s a m echanism th ro u g h
w hich th e in m a te s a d a p t th em se lv e s to th e punish m en ts and
th e d e p r iv a tio n s o f i n c a r c e r a t i o n , and r e a c t to th e r e j e c
t i o n e x p re s s e d tow ard them by th e o u ts id e community (S ykes
and M e ssin g e r, I 9 6 0 ) . T h is l a t e s t p o in t h a s been e la b o
r a t e d on i n th e fo llo w in g :
O b se rv a tio n s u g g e s ts t h a t th e m a jo r problem s w ith
w hich th e inm ate s o c i a l system a tte m p ts to cope
c e n t e r a b o u t th e them e o f s o c i a l r e j e c t i o n . In
many w ays, th e in m ate s o c ia l system may be view ed
a s p ro v id in g a way o f l i f e w hich e n a b le s th e
in m ate to av o id th e d e v a s ta tin g p s y c h o lo g ic a l
e f f e c t s o f i n t e r n a l i z i n g and c o n v e rtin g s o c ia l
r e j e c t i o n . In e f f e c t , i t p e rm its th e in m a tes to
'e c t h i s r e j e c t o r s . (McCorkle and K orn, 199+:
i n th e u s e o f an i n te g r a t e d ap p ro ach i n m ost s tu d ie s o f
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n . T h is means t h a t th e y d e a l w ith
th e w hole system o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n , i . e . , w ith b o th
S im ila r ly , Cloward (I9 6 0 ) h a s n o te d t h a t th e p r e -
The e x is te n c e o f th e inm ate c u lt u r e h a s r e s u l t e d
19
fo rm a l and in fo rm a l s t r u c t u r e s and th e i n t e r a c t i o n betw een
them . T h is em phasis i n c o r r e c t i o n a l s tu d ie s h a s p a r a l l e l e d
developm ents i n th e f i e l d o f g e n e ra l o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a ly
s i s . The h e a v ie s t c o n c e rn , how ever, h a s been w ith th e
c h a r a c te r and im p o rt o f th e fo rm al o r g a n iz a tio n , w ith l e s s
a t t e n t i o n b e in g p a id to th e p r e c is e c h a r a c te r o f th e
in fo rm a l system (Clem m er, 1965; S y k e s, 1968; McCorkle and
K orn, 195^; Goffman, 1 9 6 1 ).
The fo rm al sy stem o f a t r a d i t i o n a l c u s to d y -o rie n te d
p r is o n i s h ig h ly r e g u la te d by d e ta il e d a d m in is tr a tiv e r u l e s
w hich p r e s c r ib e w hat may and w hat may n o t be done. The
c e n t r a l theme o f th e s e r e g u la tio n s " i s th e m aintenance o f
o rd e r and th e s e t t i n g o f a s ta n d a rd f o r co n d u ct o f th e
p r is o n e r s and f o r th e c le a n lin e s s o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n . "
(Clem m er, 1 965:73) These r u l e s and r e g u la tio n s a re
e n fo rc e d by a " r ig id " s a n c tio n in g sy ste m . The rew ard s f o r
com pliance a re th e w eekly l e t t e r , th e p o r tio n o f to b a c c o ,
and th e prom ise o f d e c re a s in g th e le n g th o f p u n ish m en t.
The p u nishm ents f o r v i o l a t i o n s c o n s i s t o f : s o l i t a r y con
fin e m e n t, lo s s o f p r i v i l e g e s , and " lo s s o f good tim e ."
T h is system o f r u l e s and r e g u la tio n s i s d e v is e d
and e n fo rc e d by a fo rm a l a d m in is tr a tiv e s t r u c t u r e . S t a f f
members a re a s s ig n e d to a s e r i e s o f b u r e a u c r a tic a lly
a rra n g e d p o s itio n s w ith th e w arden a t th e to p , and th e
fo rm a l flo w o f power d i r e c te d downward from h i s p o s i t i o n .
T h is s t r u c t u r e c o rre sp o n d s to W eber's i d e a l type o f
20
b u re a u c ra c y — by th e s p e c i f i c r u l e s , s p e c i f i c a re a o f
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , im p e rso n a l s ta n d a rd s o f p e rfo rm an c e , w e ll-
d e fin e d h ie r a r c h y , e t c e t e r a . The c u s to d ia l o r i e n t a t i o n o f
t h i s ty p e o f o r g a n iz a tio n i s in d ic a te d by th e f a c t t h a t
more th a n tw o -th ir d s o f th e em ployees a re d i r e c t l y in v o lv e d
w ith th e s u p e rv is io n o f in m a te s. M oreover, s in c e th e power
o f c u s to d ia n s i s la r g e ly a u t h o r i t a r i a n , i t does n o t d ev elo p
a sen se o f o b lig a tio n among in m a te s. I n s te a d , in m a tes obey
because o f th e c o e rc iv e power p o ss e s se d by th e s t a f f . What
i s m ore, th e tre a tm e n t s t a f f i n th e c u s to d y - o rie n te d p r i s
ons i s i n a seco n d ary p o s i t io n w ith v e ry l i t t l e a u t h o r i t y .
The o th e r m ain theme found i n o r g a n iz a tio n a l
s tu d ie s o f th e p r is o n i s th e v e ry h ig h e x te n t o f re g im e n ta
t i o n . T h is phenomenon i s an outcome o f th e encom passing
p r o p e r tie s o f fo rm al o r g a n iz a tio n s . The d eg ree o f t h i s
"encom passm ent"— o f an in d iv id u a l by an o rg a n iz a tio n — i s
" in v e r s e ly r e l a t e d to th e d eg ree t h a t he p a r t i c i p a t e s in
o th e r c o l l e c t i v i t i e s w hich c o n s t it u t e th e s o c ia l e n v iro n
m ent o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n ." ( E tz io n i, 1961:160) T h is
encom passm ent was c a l l e d th e "scope" by E tz io n i . "O rgani
z a tio n s whose p a r t i c i p a n t s sh a re many a c t i v i t i e s a re b ro ad
i n s c o p e ." "Narrow o rg a n iz a tio n s a re th o se i n w hich p a r
t i c i p a n t s sh a re few a c t i v i t i e s . " ( E tz io n i , 1961:160-161)
O rg a n iz a tio n s w ith th e b ro a d e s t scope a re th e
" t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n s " —
. . • th e encom passing o r t o t a l c h a r a c te r i s
21
sy m b o lized by th e b a r r i e r to s o c i a l in te r c o u r s e
w ith th e o u ts id e t h a t i s o f te n b u i l t r i g h t in to
th e p h y s ic a l p l a n t ) such a s lo c k e d d o o rs , h ig h
w a l l s , barb ed w ir e , c l i f f s , w a te r , f o r e s t s , o r
m oors. (G offm an, 19 6 1 :1 6 )
The t r a d i t i o n a l p r is o n i s a t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n . The h ig h
e x te n t o f re g im e n ta tio n i s a " b u i l t - i n " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f
t h i s ty p e o f o r g a n iz a tio n .
R e f le c tin g t h i s p o in t o f v iew , Goffman (1 9 6 1 :1 7 )
d e s c rib e d th e m ain f e a t u r e s o f th e t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n a s
fo llo w s : (1 ) a l l a s p e c ts o f l i f e a re co n d u cted i n th e same
p la c e and u n d e r th e same s in g le a u th o r ity ; (2 ) each p h ase
o f th e member’ s a c t i v i t y i s c a r r i e d on i n th e im m ediate
company o f a la r g e num ber o f o th e rs ; (3 ) a l l p h a ses o f th e
d a y ’ s a c t i v i t i e s a re h ig h ly sc h e d u le d ; C 1 *) th e c o n te n ts o f
th e v a rio u s a c t i v i t i e s com prise an o v e r a ll r a t i o n a l p la n
p u rp o rte d ly d e sig n ed to f u l f i l l th e o f f i c i a l aim s o f th e
i n s t i t u t i o n .
T here i s a g e n e r a l agreem ent among th e s tu d e n ts o f
t r a d i t i o n a l p ris o n s t h a t th e fo rm al s t r u c t u r e , th e n a tu r e
o f th e r u l e s and t h e i r e n fo rc e m e n t, and th e re g im e n ta tio n
c au se a h ig h e x te n t o f d e p riv a tio n f o r th e p r is o n e r s and
t h a t th e inm ate s o c ia l system d e v e lo p s a s a resp o n se to
th e s e f r u s t r a t i o n s .
These d e p riv a tio n s o r " p a in s o f co n fin em en t"
in c lu d e : th e d e p riv a tio n o f l i b e r t y , r e j e c t i o n by th e
o u ts id e com m unity, d e p r iv a tio n o f m a te r ia l goods and s e r
v i c e s , c o n s ta n t s u r v e illa n c e by th e g u a rd s , d e p riv a tio n s o f
22
h e te r o s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , d e p riv a tio n s o f a u t h o r i t y ,
d e p r iv a tio n s o f p e rs o n a l s e c u r ity from v i o le n t and a g g re s
s iv e in m a te s , a m ilie u o f f a i l u r e c r e a te d by th e " d e g re d a -
t i o n c erem o n ies^" and a s tro n g f e e l in g t h a t th e tim e sp e n t
i n th e i n s t i t u t i o n i s t o t a l l y w asted (" d o in g tim e " ) (S y k e s,
1 9 6 8 :6 3 -8 3 ; Goffm an, 1 9 6 l:6 2 -6 lf ) .
As a re sp o n se to th e s e d e p r iv a tio n s , th e id e o lo g y
o f th e inm ate s o c ia l system i n th e t r a d i t i o n a l p r is o n te n d s
to be h o s t i l e to th e o f f i c i a l s and th e g u a rd s who a re th e
sym bols o f a r e j e c t i n g s o c ie ty and th e a d m in is tr a to r s o f
th e d e p r iv a tio n s . One o f th e prim ary n o tio n s o f th e
"inm ate code" i s t h a t
. • • in m ates a re to r e f r a i n from h e lp in g p r is o n
o r governm ent o f f i c i a l s i n m a tte rs o f d i s c i p l i n e ,
and sh o u ld n e v e r g iv e them in fo rm a tio n o f any
k in d , and e s p e c ia lly th e k in d w hich may work harm
to a fe llo w p r i s o n e r . (Clemmer, 196 5 :1 5 2 )
In summary, th e m ain f e a tu r e s o f th e inm ate c u ltu r e
a re i t s " o p p o s itio n a l" v a lu e system to t h a t o f th e fo rm a l
o r g a n iz a tio n and th e s t a f f , and th e developm ent o f a norm a
t i v e system w hich i s C onducive to th e re d u c tio n o f th e
f r u s t r a t i o n s and d e p r iv a tio n s o f th e l i f e i n p r is o n .
J u v e n ile C o rre c tio n a l
O rg a n iz a tio n s
In a d d itio n to s t u d i e s o f a d u lt p r is o n s th e r e a re a
few s t u d i e s w hich a tte m p t to a s s e s s th e n a tu r e o f th e
fo rm a l and in fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n s and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n in
ju v e n ile c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
23
T here a re good re a s o n s f o r d is tin g u is h in g betw een
a d u lt and ju v e n ile o r g a n iz a tio n s . I t i s q u e s tio n a b le
w h eth er su ch d e s c r ip tio n s o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l im p act a s
G o ffm an 's, w hich have fo cu sed on a d u lt maximum s e c u r i t y
p r i s o n s , sh o u ld be a p p lie d d i r e c t l y to ju v e n ile c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s ( S t r e e t , V in te r , and P erro w , 1966;
Sim pson, 1 9 6 1 ).
In t h e i r w id e -s c a le stu d y o f ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s , s e v e r a l i n v e s ti g a t o r s a t th e U n iv e rs ity o f
M ichigan (V in te r and J a n o w itz , 1959; G rusky, 1959; Z a ld ,
I9 6 0 ; S t r e e t , 1965; B e rk , 1966; S t r e e t , V in te r , and P erro w ,
1966) a tte m p te d to p la c e th e s e o r g a n iz a tio n s on a c u sto d y -
tr e a tm e n t continuum , and to d eterm in e th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f
o r g a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls to in fo rm a l s t r u c t u r e s .
In a l l , th e y s tu d ie d s i x d i f f e r e n t c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich w ere su b d iv id e d i n to th r e e ty p e s on th e
b a s is o f g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n and c o r r e c t i o n a l p o lic y . These
o r g a n iz a tio n s were d e s c rib e d a s fo llo w s ; ( a ) o b e d ie n c e -
c o n fo rm ity o r g a n iz a tio n s — th e m ethod o f changing d e lin q u e n ts
i s c o n d itio n in g , rew ard s a re s c a r c e , s a n c tio n s a re h a r s h ,
c o l l e c t i v e a c tio n from in m ates i s n o t t o l e r a t e d ; (b ) re e d u -
c a tio n -d e v e lo p m e n t o r g a n iz a tio n s — th e m ethod o f change i s
t r a i n i n g . rew ard s a re more num erous, s a n c tio n s a re s t e r n
b u t n o t b r u t a l , th e r e i s a lim ite d freedom f o r inm ate group
a c t i v i t i e s ; ( c ) tr e a tm e n t o rg a n iz a tio n s — th e m ethod o f
ch an g in g d e lin q u e n ts i s r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , n e g a tiv e s a n c tio n s
2*f
a re m in o r, p o s itiv e s a n c tio n s a re h ig h , in c lu d in g r e l e a s e
( S t r e e t , V in te r , and P erro w , 1 9 6 6 :2 1 ).
The g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
tio n s and t h e i r c o r r e c t i o n a l p o l i c i e s seemed to have an
im p act on th e s o c ia l o rg a n iz a tio n o f th e r e s p e c tiv e o rg a n i
z a t io n s . T here seemed to be a g e n e ra l agreem ent among th e
i n v e s t i g a t o r s t h a t th e s o c i a l o r g a n iz a tio n o f th e o f fe n d e rs
d i f f e r e d a c c o rd in g to th e fo rm al g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e
o r g a n iz a tio n .
G e n e ra lly , th e o ffe n d e rs* s o c i a l o r g a n iz a tio n in
th e more c u s to d y - o rie n te d o r g a n iz a tio n s : ( a ) te n d e d to
e x p re s s a r a t h e r n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e to w ard th e fo rm al
o r g a n iz a tio n , th e s t a f f , th e n o rm ativ e sy ste m , and th e
c o r r e c t i o n a l program ; (b ) th e p rim ary r e l a t i o n s and s o l i
d a r i t y among o ffe n d e rs ten d e d n o t to be h ig h ly d e v e lo p e d ,
and seemed to be b a sed r a t h e r on c o e rc io n and v io le n c e th a n
on i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and c o o p e ra tio n ; ( c ) th e a n t i - s o c i a l
v a lu e system o f th e " s u b c u ltu r a l d e lin q u e n ts " te n d e d to
p r e v a i l and th ro u g h i s o l a t i o n from th e in f lu e n c e s o f th e
c o n v e n tio n a l n o rm ativ e system to be r e in f o r c e d i n th e
o r g a n iz a tio n ; (d ) th e le a d e r s h ip s t r u c t u r e te n d e d to be
c e n t r a l i z e d , a u t h o r i t a r i a n , n e g a tiv e tow ard th e fo rm a l
o r g a n iz a tio n , and n o t v e ry w e ll l ik e d by th e o ffe n d e r
g ro u p .
O ffe n d ers i n th e more tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d
o r g a n iz a tio n s : ( a ) te n d e d to e x p re s s more p o s itiv e a t t i
tu d e s tow ard th e fo rm a l o r g a n iz a tio n , th e s t a f f , th e norm s,
and th e program ; (b ) th e p rim aiy r e l a t i o n s ten d ed to be
more d e v e lo p e d , and a h ig h e r e x te n t o f s o l i d a r i t y seem ed to
p r e v a i l; ( c ) th e s e o r g a n iz a tio n s te n d e d to produce i n t h e i r
members an o r i e n t a t i o n c o n s is te n t w ith th e g o a l o f a c h ie v
in g change i n t h e i r v a lu e s , a t t i t u d e s , and b e h a v io r; (d ) the
in fo rm a l le a d e r s h ip seemed to be l e s s a u th o r i ta r i a n and
more w e l l- l ik e d th a n i n th e c u s to d y - o rie n te d o r g a n iz a tio n s ;
f u rth e r m o r e , th e l e a d e r s th em selv es te n d e d to have more
p o s i t iv e a t t i t u d e s tow ard th e fo rm al o r g a n iz a tio n and th e
s t a f f th a n th e ra n k and f i l e members.
S ta f f -O f f e n d e r R e la tio n s
The r e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs in
ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s te n d e d to d i f f e r a c c o rd
in g to th e g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n s .
G e n e ra lly , s t a f f - o f f e n d e r r e l a ti o n s h i p s i n th e more
c u s to d y - o rie n te d o rg a n iz a tio n s ten d e d to re v e a l vexy l i t t l e
c o o p e ra tio n and to be b a sed on d i s s i m i l a r g o a ls , i . e . , th e
s t a f f were i n t e r e s t e d i n m a in ta in in g o r d e r , th e o ffe n d e rs
w ere i n t e r e s t e d in "d o in g t h e i r tim e ." R e la tio n s a ls o
te n d e d to be r e s t r i c t i v e and fo rm a l, c l e a r l y " ru le
o r i e n t e d ." F i n a l l y , th e r e was a h ig h d eg ree o f s o c i a l
d is ta n c e betw een th e two g ro u p s. T h is s o c i a l d is ta n c e
o f te n d e te r io r a te d in to a s i t u a t i o n o f sh a rp c le a v a g e w hich
26
was b a se d on a d o m in a tio n -su b m issio n r e l a ti o n s h i p ( V in te r
and J a n o w itz , 1959sl23"12lO * In a s i m il a r m anner to th e
t r a d i t i o n a l a d u lt p r i s o n , th e o ffe n d e r group had a h o s t i l e
and " o p p o s itio n a l" a t t i t u d e tow ard th e s t a f f .
On th e o th e r h a n d , th e s t a f f - o f f e n d e r r e l a t i o n s h i p
i n th e more tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d o r g a n iz a tio n s ten d ed to be
c o o p e r a tiv e , b ased on a more e q u a l b a s i s th a n i n th e
c u s to d y -o rie n te d o r g a n iz a tio n s . L ik e w ise , s o c ia l d is ta n c e
betw een th e two gro u p s was much more l im i te d .
In summary, c u s to d y - o rie n te d c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
t io n s seemed to f a c i l i t a t e th e developm ent o f h o s t i l e and
u n c o o p e ra tiv e o ffe n d e r g ro u p s whose m ain co n cern was w ith
"doing tim e ." T re a tm e n t-o rie n te d o rg a n iz a tio n s by c o n t r a s t
te n d e d to f a c i l i t a t e o ffe n d e r o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich w ere more
c o o p e ra tiv e b o th w ith c o r r e c tio n a l p o l i c i e s and s t a f f .
F u rth e rm o re , th e y te n d e d to c r e a te an atm osphere more con
d u civ e to r e h a b i l i t a t i o n .
A lthough t h i s c o n c lu s io n seems to be q u ite p ro m is
in g , i t sh o u ld be t r e a t e d w ith c a u tio n . The main problem
seems to be t h a t o f f i c i a l g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s n o t alw ays
c o n so n an t w ith th e problem s d e lin q u e n ts fa c e ( S t r e e t ,
V in te r , and P errow , 1 9 6 6 :1 8 1 -1 8 8 ). F o r exam ple, c l i n i c a l
s t a f f te n d e d to view o ffe n d e rs a s e m o tio n a lly d is tu r b e d
boys and t r i e d to d ev elo p tw o -p erso n th e ra p y r e l a t i o n s a t
th e ex p en se o f e f f o r t s by o th e r s t a f f members to c r e a te a
" th e r a p e u tic m il i e u ."
27
R e la tiv e to t h i s problem , P o lsk y (1927) exam ined
th e im p act o f th e r a p e u t i c a ll y - o r ie n t e d p r a c t ic e s upon
in fo rm a l inm ate s t r u c tu r e and found t h a t consequences were
n o t alw ays d e s i r a b l e . The d e c la re d aim o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n
w hich P o lsk y s tu d ie d was to p ro v id e " m ilie u th e ra p y ." How
e v e r , a s o f te n happens i n tre a tm e n t o rg a n iz a tio n s "th e
p r o f e s s io n a l s t a f f h a s d ev o ted more c o n s is te n t a t t e n t i o n
to th e tre a tm e n t o f th e in d iv id u a l th a n to c r e a tin g p o s i
t i v e c o n d itio n s d e sig n e d to prom ote h i s s o c ia l and c u l t u r a l
l i f e . " ( P o ls iy , 1967 :*0
P olsky a tte m p te d to d eterm in e th e e f f e c t s o f t h i s
s t a t e o f a f f a i r s upon th e c o tta g e l i f e o f d e lin q u e n ts . The
c o tta g e he s tu d ie d was th e " to u g h e s t" i n th e o r g a n iz a tio n .
I t had a h ig h ly s tr u c tu r e d a u t h o r i t a r i a n and m a n ip u la tiv e
s o c ia l sy ste m , p e rp e tu a te d by th e ch an g in g " g e n e ra tio n s " in
th e c o tt a g e . The p r e v a ilin g n o rm ativ e system was c o n f l i c t
in g to th e s t a f f v a lu e s , and b a s i c a ll y i t was v e ry s i m il a r
to th e norm s and v a lu e system o f d e lin q u e n t s u b c u ltu r e s .
S im ila r ly , th e r e l a ti o n s h i p betw een th e c o tta g e - p a r e n ts and
th e o ffe n d e rs resem b led t h a t o f th e s ta f f - in m a te r e l a t i o n
s h ip i n c u s to d ia l p r i s o n s . The c o tta g e p a re n ts te n d e d to
s u b je c t th em se lv e s to th e d e lin q u e n t s u b c u ltu re and t r i e d
to m a n ip u la te i t th ro u g h th e e s ta b lis h e d le a d e r s h ip .
S in ce th e tre a tm e n t s t a f f d id n o t have day to day
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s to th e c o tta g e , th ey were n o t aware o f
w hat was g o in g on in th e c o tta g e . Thus P olsky (1967:
28
11 +9"156) co n clu d ed t h a t th e d e lin q u e n t s u b c u ltu re o f th e
c o tta g e had a r i s e n b ecau se o f th e gap betw een th e c o tta g e
and th e r e s t o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n and t h a t i t c o n tin u e d to
e x i s t b ecau se th e is s u e o f c o n tr o l had ta k e n p reced en ce
o v e r a b s t r a c t th e r a p e u tic norms b ased upon in d iv id u a l
psychodynam ic th e o ry and p r a c t i c e . T h is s u b c u ltu re was
a c c e p te d a s in e v ita b le b o th by th e s t a f f and th e o f f e n d e r s .
The two system s (fo rm a l and in fo rm a l) were in d e p e n d e n t and
co m p lim en tary , y e t s c a r c e ly se rv e d a s e f f e c t i v e r e h a b i l i t a
t iv e in s tr u m e n ts . The p a ra d o x ic a l s i t u a t i o n was t h a t th e
boys had been b a rre d from e x te n s iv e i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e
p r o f e s s io n a l s t a f f and were rem ote from th e p r o f e s s io n a l
s t a f f ' s c u l t u r a l b ack g ro u n d , y e t th e y were e x p e c te d to
a c h ie v e th e g o a ls d e s c rib e d by th e members o f t h i s s t a f f .
T h is le d to som ething o th e r th a n th e d e s ir e d outcom e, to a
c o r r e c t i o n a l s e t t i n g w hich was a u t h o r i t a r i a n , c o e r c iv e ,
m a le v o le n t, and i n c o v e r t o p p o s itio n to th e o f f i c i a l v a lu e s
and g o a ls o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . Boys and s t a f f liv e d i n two
d i f f e r e n t w o rld s r a t h e r th a n a th e r a p e u tic m ilie u : th e
outcome was a s o c i a l system w hich was s i m il a r to s o c i a l
sy stem s w hich d ev elo p ed i n c u s to d y - o rie n te d c o r r e c tio n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s .
T hus, th e stu d y i l l u s t r a t e s v i v id l y t h a t a system
a t i c program s t r a t e g y , d e riv e d from t h e o r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s
and b a se d on e m p ir ic a l know ledge, i s a n e c e s s a iy c o n d itio n
29
f o r th e a tta in m e n t o f tr e a tm e n t g o a ls . I t r e q u ir e s system
a t i c , n o t p a r t i a l , im p le m e n ta tio n .
P a r t ic ip a t o r y O rg a n iz a tio n s
P a r tly in an a tte m p t to d e a l w ith problem s o f t h i s
ty p e , o th e r c o r r e c t i o n a l m odels have d e v e lo p e d . One i s th e
s m a ll, r e s i d e n t i a l g roup c e n t e r , b u i l t around p a r t i c i p a t o r y
te c h n iq u e s . The p ro to ty p e o f t h i s k in d o f tre a tm e n t m odel
was th e H ig h fie ld s program (M cCorkle, E l i a s , B ixby, 1 9 5 8 ).
One o f th e b a s ic a ssu m p tio n s o f t h i s program was t h a t
in te n s iv e m ethods o f tre a tm e n t can a c h ie v e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n
in a s h o r t tim e ( f o u r - s i x m o n th s). O th er f e a tu r e s o f t h i s
program w ere: ( a ) in te n s iv e i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e su rro u n d
in g comm unity; (b ) c lo s e i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e o f f e n d e r s ’
home; ( c ) fo c u s in g on th e group a s th e t a r g e t o f r e h a b i l i
t a t i o n . There were g roup m ee tin g s f i v e tim e s a week where
th e boys t r i e d to s p e l l o u t t h e i r problem s and p o s s ib ly to
so lv e them . These g roup m eetin g s had c o l l e c t i v e a s w e ll a s
p e rs o n a l v a lu e s . The a u th o rs c a lle d th e s e m ee tin g s "g u id ed
g roup i n t e r a c t i o n " and th e y d e s c rib e d th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l and
s o c io lo g ic a l fo u n d a tio n s o f th e s e group s e s s io n s a s th e
fo llo w in g :
Guided group i n t e r a c t i o n h a s th e m e r it o f com
b in in g th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l and th e s o c io lo g ic a l
a p p ro a ch e s to th e c o n tr o l o f human b e h a v io r. The
p s y c h o lo g ic a l ap p ro ach aim s to change th e s e l f
c o n c e p tio n o f th e boy from a d e lin q u e n t to a non
d e lin q u e n t, b u t t h i s p ro c e s s in v o lv e s chan g in g th e
mood o f th e boy from im p u lse s to law b re a k in g to
be law a b id in g .
30
To acco m p lish r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , th e s o c io lo g ic a l
a p p ro a ch i s a ls o n e e d e d . The i n s i g h t o f so c io lo g y
i s to re v e rs e th e p ro c e s s by w hich th e group in d u c ts
a boy i n to d e lin q u e n c y and com pels him to c o n tin u e
i n i t . In g u id ed group i n t e r a c t i o n , th e in f lu e n c e
o f th e group i s d ir e c te d to f r e e th e boy from b e in g
c o n tr o l le d by d e lin q u e n t a s s o c ia tio n and to g iv e
him th e d e s ir e and in n e r s tr e n g th to be autonom ous.
(M cC orkle, E l i a s , and B ixby, 1 9 5 8 :5 -6 )
The group m e e tin g s se rv e d a ls o a s a forum f o r
d e c is io n m aking. F o r ex am p le, i n th e s e m eetin g s th e p a r
t i c i p a n t s (th e boys and th e group l e a d e r ) , made such
im p o rta n t d e c is io n s a s when a boy was re a d y to go home.
R e s id e n tia l group c e n te r s a re u s u a lly s m a ll, th e s t a f f i s
m in im al, n o t s t r u c t u r e d , and th e ta s k s a re n o t w e ll d e fin e d .
The g o a l i n t h i s ty p e o f o r g a n iz a tio n was to develop
norm s among o ffe n d e rs w hich were p r o s o c ia l and c o n so n an t
w ith o f f i c i a l norm s. The p re v a le n t norm s a re m utual a i d ,
c o o p e r a tio n , and group s o c i a l c o n tr o l .
The s t a t u s h ie r a r c h y , a t l e a s t i n th e c a se o f
H ig h f ie ld s , resem b led a gang ty p e h ie r a r c h y . There w ere
two ty p e s o f group l e a d e r s , p h y s ic a l and i n s p i r a t i o n a l .
T his s t r u c t u r e made th e e n tra n c e to th e program e a s i e r f o r
m ost o f th e b o y s, b ecau se many o f them had been a s s o c ia te d
w ith gangs b e f o r e . In th e m ain , th e c o n ce rn was w ith p ro
v id in g an environm ent i n w hich s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs sh a re d
power and a u th o r ity (W alk er, 1 9 5 8 ).
Summary
T h is rev iew o f l i t e r a t u r e showed t h a t a lth o u g h
th e r e i s a c o n s id e ra b le amount o f l i t e r a t u r e o f a g e n e ra l
n a t u r e , th e r e i s a n e ed to o rg a n iz e th e e x is ti n g know ledge
o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , and to r e f i n e c e r t a i n con
c e p t s , F u rth e rm o re , a lth o u g h some o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l
t h e o r i e s and ty p o lo g ie s have im p lic a tio n s f o r and m ight be
a p p lie d to th e f i e l d o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , no one
o f them seems to p ro v id e a s u f f i c i e n t b a s is f o r th e compara'
t i v e a n a ly s is o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
H ence, i t a p p e a rs t h a t th e u n d e rs ta n d in g o f t h i s
f i e l d w ould be c o n s id e ra b ly enhanced by a w orkable ty p o lo g y
o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n c o n s tru c te d e s p e c ia lly f o r th e
c o m p a rativ e stu d y o f su ch o r g a n iz a tio n s . A w orkable
ty p o lo g y m ight se rv e a s a s u i t a b l e b a s i s f o r c l a s s i f y i n g
th e v a r io u s ty p e s o f s t r u c t u r e s t h a t c o u ld be e x p e c te d to
d e v elo p i n d i f f e r e n t ty p e s o f c o r r e c t i o n a l s e t t i n g s and
p ro v id e th e b a s is f o r im proved c o r r e c t i o n a l r e s e a r c h .
C o n se q u e n tly , th e f i r s t b a s ic s te p tow ard t h i s end
w i l l be th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f such a ty p o lo g y .
CH APTER I I
A TYPOLOGY OP CORRECTIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
S e v e ra l a u th o rs have su g g e ste d d e f i n i t i o n s f o r
ty p o lo g ie s w hich can be o f u se to t h i s stu d y (S c h ra g , 1961;
H em pel, 1952; McKinney, 1966; P e rd in a n d , 1966; R hoads,
1967; R u d n er, 1 9 6 6; S tin ch co m b e, 1 9 6 8 ). A lthough e ac h
»
d e f i n i t i o n h a s some s p e c i a l f e a t u r e s o f i t s own, th e r e
seems to be a c e r t a i n co n sen su s among th e s e v e r a l d e f i n i
t io n s i n re g a rd to th e m ajo r f u n c tio n s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
o f a ty p o lo g y .
The p rim a iy f u n c tio n o f a ty p o lo g y i s to p r e s e n t a
s e t o f ty p e s w hich " i d e n t i f y , s im p lif y , and o rd e r th e con
c r e t e d a ta so t h a t th e y may be d e s c rib e d i n term s t h a t make
them c o m p a ra b le ." (M cKinney, 1966:216) T h is f u n c tio n i s
f u l f i l l e d by c o n s tr u c tin g ty p e s w hich have a c o n s t e l l a t i o n
o f a t t r i b u t e s w hich c l e a r l y d i s t in g u i s h them from o th e r
ty p e s i n th e ty p o lo g y . T h is ty p o lo g y th e n , sh o u ld be a b le
to l i n k e m p ir ic a l d a ta to some t h e o r e t i c a l fram ework by
s u g g e s tin g c e r t a i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and by h e lp in g to d e riv e
h y p o th e s e s .
The ty p o lo g y , i n o th e r w o rd s, i s an embryo th e o ry
t h a t n e e d s f u r t h e r r e f in e m e n t,o f i t s c o n c e p ts and
32
33
e la b o r a tio n o f i t s p o s tu la te s b e fo re i t can be
s t a t e d i n fo rm al term s a s a d e d u c tiv e sy stem .
(S c h ra g , 1961:357)
B asic E lem ents o f a Typology
I t i s su g g e ste d t h a t a w orkable ty p o lo g y sh o u ld
c o n ta in th e fo llo w in g e le m e n ts (R u d n er, 1 9 6 6 :3 5 -^ 0 ):
(1 ) a c o n ce p t d e te rm in in g th e -typology’s u n iv e rs e
o f d is c o u r s e . In o th e r words the. dom ain o f th e ty p o lo g y
h a s to be c l e a r l y d e f in e d , e . g . , human b e in g s , o r s o c i a l
g ro u p s , o r o r g a n iz a tio n s , e t c e t e r a .
(2 ) some r e l a t i o n s t h a t d e term in e an o rd e rin g among
th e members o f th e u n iv e r s e o f d is c o u r s e . T h is im p lie s
t h a t th e ty p o lo g y sh o u ld be a b le to s u g g e s t w hich ty p e i s
h ig h e r o r lo w er on a c e r t a i n d im e n sio n .
(3 ) s ta te m e n ts im p ly in g t h a t c e r t a i n f e a tu r e s
( e . g . , t r a n s i t i v i t y , asym m etry) c h a r a c te r iz e th e r e l a t i o n s
among th e ty p e s . T h is elem en t p ro v id e s th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
d is tin g u is h in g among th e ty p e s on th e d im e n sio n s(s ) and
e s t a b l i s h e s th e d if f e r e n c e and th e o rd e rin g among them .
(*f) a s e t o f c o n c e p ts ( f r e q u e n tly a " p o la r - p a ir "
o r "ex trem e o p p o s ite s " ) u s u a lly d e s ig n a tin g some s p e c i f i c
members o f th e u n iv e r s e o f d is c o u rs e t h a t a re " d i s t a n t "
from e a c h o th e r o r a t o p p o s ite ends o f th e a rr a y i n to w hich
th e o rd e rin g r e l a t i o n s o rd e r th e members o f th e u n iv e r s e o f
d is c o u r s e . T h is b a s i c a l l y p o in ts o u t th e im p o rtan ce o f
th e e x is te n c e o f c l e a r l y d e fin e d p o la r ty p e s w hich
c o n s t i t u t e th e two en d s o f e ach co n tin u u m , and w hich u su a lly
do n o t e x i s t i n r e a l i t y .
T h is d e f i n i t i o n o f th e ty p o lo g y and th e n e c e s s a ry
e le m e n ts o f i t p ro v id e d th e g u id e lin e s i n th e c o n s tr u c tio n
o f th e fo llo w in g ty p o lo g y o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
A Typology o f C o rre c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n
I t h as heen p o in te d o u t i n th e rev iew o f l i t e r a
tu r e , t h a t only one w ork h a s p ro v id e d a ty p o lo g y o f c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s ( S t r e e t , V in te r , and P errow , 1 9 6 6 ) .
The p ro p o se d -typology i n t h i s work was b ased on th e con
tinuum o f c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n . I t was sug
g e s te d t h a t ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s can be
o rd e re d and d is tin g u is h e d on th e b a s is o f t h e i r fo rm al g o a l
o r i e n t a t i o n on t h i s co n tinuum . S im ila r ly , i t was se e n in
th e re v ie w o f th e g e n e r a l o r g a n iz a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e t h a t
th e g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n s seems to be o f
c r u c i a l im p o rtan ce i n o r g a n iz a tio n a l a n a ly s is (P a rs o n ,
1961; S e lz n ic k , 1961; E t z i o n i , 196*0. C o n se q u e n tly , th e
g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s seemed to
em erge a s a n e c e s s a ry component o f any -typology c o n cern ed
w ith t h i s k in d o f o r g a n iz a tio n , e s p e c ia lly i n te rm s o f i t s
c o n c e rn w ith c u sto d y v e rs u s tr e a tm e n t.
The p o s s i b i l i t y and r a t i o n a l i t y o f p re s e n tin g th e
c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t continuum a s a com ponent o f a -typology i n
th e f i e l d o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s was p o in te d o u t by
35
Z ald (1 9 6 0 :5 8 ).
I t i s p o s s ib le } . . . to p la c e a g iv e n i n s t i t u t i o n
on a continuum whose p o le s a re d e fin e d by g o a l
r a t i o s i n w hich c u sto d y o r r e h a b i l i t a t i o n predom i
n a t e . Most i n s t i t u t i o n s may be c h a r a c te r iz e d by
th e dom inance o f one g o a l o v e r th e o th e r .
G oal o r i e n t a t i o n a lo n e , how ever, does n o t p ro v id e
an a d eq u a te b a s is f o r c l a s s i f y i n g o th e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f
an o r g a n iz a tio n . T h is i s e s p e c ia lly tr u e when we ta k e i n to
c o n s id e r a tio n th e e v e r-g ro w in g num ber o f c o r r e c tio n a l p ro
gram s f o r j u v e n ile s . T h e re fo re , some o th e r d im en sio n s had
to be c o n s id e re d .
A n o th er r e le v a n t dim ension su g g e ste d by th e l i t e r a
tu r e had to do w ith th e scope o f an o r g a n iz a tio n , i n t h i s
c a s e , w h e th er an o r g a n iz a tio n was a t o t a l o r n o n to ta l
i n s t i t u t i o n ( E tz io n i, 1961; Goffm an, 1961; Lubeck and
Empey, 1 9 6 8 ).
The scope o f an o rg a n iz a tio n r e f e r s to th e e x te n t
to w hich th e a c t i v i t i e s o f th e p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th e o rg a n i
z a tio n s a re lim ite d to o th e r p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th e same
o r g a n iz a tio n ( t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n ) a s a g a in s t th e e x te n t to
w hich t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s in v o lv e n o n p a r tic ip a n ts o f th e
o r g a n iz a tio n (open i n s t i t u t i o n ) . In th e c o n te x t o f c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n , th e scope r e f e r s to th e e x te n t o f
re g im e n ta tio n p r e s e n t and th e e x te n t o f e x is ti n g p o s s i b i l i
t i e s to i n t e r a c t w ith th e o u ts id e com m unity.
A continuum was su g g e ste d ra n g in g from a t o t a l
o r g a n iz a tio n on one hand to an open m e d ia to ry o r g a n iz a tio n
on th e o t h e r . The m e d ia to ry o r g a n iz a tio n was d e s c rib e d by
Lubeck and Empey (1 9 6 8 :2 ^ 3 ) a s an o rg a n iz a tio n w h ich ,
r a t h e r th a n b ein g c o n cern ed w ith th e problem s o f th e
o f f e n d e r s ' i n t e r a c t i o n i n th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l s e t t i n g , a s
th e t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n d o e s , i s co n ce rn e d w ith th e problem s
o f th e o f f e n d e r s ' i n t e r a c t i o n i n th e com m unity. In l i n e
w ith t h i s o b je c tiv e :
. . . th e m ediatoxy i n s t i t u t i o n i s c h a r a c te r iz e d
n e i t h e r by th e t o t a l c o n fin e m e n t, n o r by th e h ig h
d e g re e o f p e rm is s iv e n e s s and freedom w hich i s
g r a n te d to l e s s s e r io u s o ffe n d e rs who a re on p ro b a
t i o n o r a suspended s e n te n c e . I n s te a d i t se ek s to
d e v e lo p new o r g a n iz a tio n a l arra n g em e n ts by w hich
n o rm a tiv e c o n tr o ls can be s u b s t i t u t e d f o r p h y s ic a l
i s o l a t i o n and d u r e s s .
(The m e d ia to ry o rg a n iz a tio n h a s been ch o sen a s th e one end
o f th e co n tin u u m , a lth o u g h th e "ex trem e" ty p e a t t h i s
d im en sio n would be th e "open" o r n o n r e s id e n tia l o rg a n iz a
t i o n . The m ain re a so n f o r t h i s c h o ic e h a s been th e f e a s i
b i l i t y o f d e a lin g w ith c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich
have a t l e a s t some r e s i d e n t i a l re q u ire m e n ts ).
A t h i r d im p o rta n t dim ension w hich em erged from th e
l i t e r a t u r e rev iew was r e l a t e d to th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro
c e s s . T h is dim ension seem s to be u s e f u l in i n d ic a t i n g th e
e x te n t to w hich d e c isio n -m a k in g i s p erem ptory o r p a r t i c i
p a to ry .
A perem ptory o r g a n iz a tio n i s c h a r a c te r iz e d by a
c e n t r a l i z e d d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s . I t te n d s to be
a u t h o r i t a r i a n because th e d e c is io n s a re made a t th e "to p "
37
o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l h ie r a r c h y and th e y fo llo w a u n i
l a t e r a l flo w :
a d m in is tr a tio n
s t a f f
o ffe n d e rs .
The extrem e exam ple o f t h i s k in d o f c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n i s th e maximum s e c u r ity p r i s o n , where t h e r e i s
a maximum e x te n t o f c e n t r a l i z e d d e c is io n -m a k in g .
A p a r t i c i p a t o r y c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n i s b ased
on th e s h a rin g o f d e c is io n s among a l l segm ents o f th e
o r g a n iz a tio n a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , in c lu d in g o f f e n d e r s . The flow
o f d e c is io n s u n d e r th e p a r t i c i p a t o r y c o r r e c t i o n a l p o lic y
te n d s to be c i r c u l a r :
s t a f f
o ffe n d e rs
a d m in is tr a tio n
The p e r e m p to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y continuum seems to
o f f e r a good b a s is to d i s t in g u i s h among d i f f e r e n t c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
The S u g g ested Typology
W hile i t m ig h t be p o s s ib le to in c lu d e o th e r dim en
s io n s , i t seemed t h a t th e in c lu s io n o f th e s e th re e dim en
s io n s m ig h t, i n c o n c e r t, se rv e a s a w orkable b a s is f o r
c la s s i f y i n g c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . Taken c o l l e c t i v e l y ,
th e y w ould p ro v id e th e fo llo w in g k in d s o f in fo rm a tio n f o r a
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n : ( a ) th e g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n as
m easured by th e c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t continuum ; (b ) i t s o rg an
i z a t i o n a l scope a s m easured by th e to ta l- m e d ia to r y con
tinuum ; and ( c ) th e n a tu r e o f i t s d e c isio n -m a k in g s t r u c tu r e
a s m easured by th e p e r e m p to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y co n tinuum .
I t i s n o t o u r c o n te n tio n t h a t th e s e th re e dim en
s io n s a re th e o n ly r e l e v a n t o n e s. I t i s v e ry w e ll p o s s ib le
t h a t o th e r s tu d e n ts o f t h i s f i e l d c o u ld f in d c e r t a i n dimen
s io n s , b e s id e s th e s e t h r e e , w hich c a n be u s e f u l i n th e com
p a r a tiv e a n a ly s is o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . Even s o ,
th e r e i s v i r t u e i n parsim ony a t t h i s s t a g e , a s w e ll a s in
co m p reh en siv en ess; w ith o u t any f u r t h e r d im e n sio n s, th e
ty p o lo g y s t i l l p ro v id e s f o r th e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f o rg a n iz a
t io n s i n t o e ig h t b a s ic ty p e s . See F ig u re 1 on th e fo llo w
in g p a g e .
D e s c rip tio n s o f th e E ig h t Types
1 . C ustody— T o ta l— Perem ptory *
G o a ls: The m ain g o a l i s th e c o n ta in m e n t o f th e
o ff e n d e rs by c lo s e c o n tr o l and s u r
v e il l a n c e •
T o ta l T o ta l
Custody
T reatm ent
M ediatory M ediatory
Perem ptory
Perem ptory Perem ptory
P a r tic ip a to r y
P a r t ic ip a t o r y
P a r tic ip a to r y
P a r tic ip a to r y
P ig . 1 . — The su g g e ste d ty p e s o f c o r r e c tio n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s
u>
\o
Scope: The scope o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r
a c tio n i s b ro a d , l i f e i s reg im en te d and
a l l a s p e c ts o f i t a re co n d u cted a t th e
same p la c e .
D e cisio n -m ak in g : The o r g a n iz a tio n a l d e c is io n
m aking i s c e n t r a l i z e d and u n i l a t e r a l .
T h is ty p e o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n would be
w e ll r e p r e s e n te d by th e t r a d i t i o n a l p r i s o n .
2 . Custody— T o ta l— P a r t ic ip a t o r y
G o a ls: Goal o r i e n t a t i o n i s tow ard th e c o n ta in
m ent o f o f f e n d e r s . T here i s an empha
s i s on c lo s e c o n tr o l and s u r v e i ll a n c e .
Scope: The scope o f i n t e r a c t i o n i s b ro a d .
T here i s re g im e n ta tio n in e f f e c t , a l l
a s p e c ts o f l i f e a re co n d u cted a t th e
same p la c e .
D ecisio n -M ak in g : T here i s an o p p o rtu n ity o f
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g
f o r a l l , in c lu d in g th e o ff e n d e r s .
In many r e s p e c ts th e p e n it e n t i a r y a t C hino,
C a lif o r n ia would r e p r e s e n t t h i s ty p e o f c o r r e c tio n a l o rg an
i z a t i o n , where th e p r is o n i s a t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n w ith c e r
t a i n c u s to d ia l o b j e c ti v e s , b u t th e o ffe n d e rs a re g iv e n
o p p o rtu n ity to be in v o lv e d i n th e d e cisio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s .
3 • C ustody— M ediatory— Perem ptory
G o a ls: The g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s tow ard th e
co n ta in m e n t o f o f f e n d e r s , th ro u g h
c lo s e d c o n tr o l and s u r v e illa n c e .
Scope: The scope o f i n t e r a c t i o n among th e p a r
t i c i p a n t s o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n i s r e l a
t i v e l y n a rro w . T here i s a w ide s c a le
i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e o u ts id e s o c ie ty
(w ork, s c h o o lin g , s e r v i c e s , r e c r e a t i o n ,
e t c e t e r a ) .
D ecisio n -M ak in g : The pow er o f d e cisio n -m a k in g
i s c e n tr a liz e d i n th e hands o f th e
a d m in is tr a tio n , and i t s flow i s u n i
l a t e r a l , w ith o u t th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f
lo w er l e v e l s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs .
I t i s q u ite h a rd to f in d a good example f o r t h i s
ty p e o f o rg a n iz a tio n i n r e a l i t y * P ro b a b ly , th e r e e d u c a tio n /
developm ent o rg a n iz a tio n in S t r e e t * s , V in te r* s , and
P e rro w 's stu d y (1966) w ould have some resem blance to t h i s
type*
k. Custody— M ediatory— P a r t ic ip a t o r y
G o a ls: The g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s tow ard th e con
ta in m e n t o f o ffe n d e rs th ro u g h c lo s e
c o n tr o l and s u r v e i ll a n c e .
Scope: The scope o f i n t e r a c t i o n among th e
o r g a n iz a tio n a l p a r t i c i p a n t i s r e l a
t i v e l y n a rro w , th e y i n t e r a c t r e g u l a r ly
w ith th e o u ts id e community*
k2
D ecisio n -M ak in g : The d e cisio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s
i s open to a l l th e p a r t i c i p a n t s , in c lu d
in g th e o f f e n d e r s .
As i t was th e c a se i n c o n n e c tio n w ith th e fo rm er
ty p e , i t i s h a rd to f i n d a c o n c re te r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f t h i s
o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p e . I f th e a b o v e-m en tio n ed , r e e d u c a tio n /
developm ent o r g a n iz a tio n s would e s t a b l i s h a s tro n g Boy’s
Government w hich w ould p a r t i c i p a t e i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g ,
a n d /o r w ould la u n c h a "Guided Group I n te r a c tio n " program
w hich w ould p ro v id e o f f e n d e r ’ s p a r t i c i p a t i o n in th e
d e c i s i o n s , th e n t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n c o u ld be r e p r e s e n ta tiv e
o f t h i s su g g e ste d tyP©*
5 . T reatm en t— To t a l —Pe remp to ry
G o a ls: The b a s ic g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s th e
tre a tm e n t o f th e o f f e n d e r s . I t means
t h a t th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o b je c tiv e i s to
r e h a b i l i t a t e th e o ffe n d e rs r a t h e r th a n
p u n ish o r keep them .
S cope: The scope o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r
a c t io n i s b ro a d , e . g . , th e re i s v e iy
l i t t l e i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e o u ts id e
com m unity. T here i s re g im e n ta tio n i n
e f f e c t , and a l l a s p e c ts o f l i f e a re
co n d u cted a t th e same p la c e .
D ecisio n -M ak in g : The program i s d i r e c te d from
above w ith o u t th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f th e
* + 3
o f fe n d e rs and th e lo w e r s t a f f m em bers,
i . e . , th e d e c isio n -m a k in g i s c e n t r a l
iz e d and i t s flow i s u n i l a t e r a l .
H ollym eade i n P o ls k y 's stu d y (1 967) c o u ld r e p r e s e n t
t h i s ty p e o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n . The g o a l o r i e n t a
t i o n o f Hollym ead i s tow ard tr e a tm e n t. The o f f i c i a l l y
s t a te d g o a l i s : " re e d u c a tio n r a t h e r th a n d e te n tio n "
(P o ls k y , 1 9 6 7 s l3 ). I t i s a ls o a t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n , w here
a l l a s p e c ts o f l i f e a re co n d u cted a t th e same p re m is e s , and
th e r e i s only lim ite d i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e o u ts id e commun
i t y . And, f i n a l l y , H ollym eade i s a p erem p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n ,
because th e o ffe n d e rs have v e ry l i t t l e say when fo rm al
d e c is io n s a re m ade.
6 . T reatm en t— T o ta l— P a r t ic ip a t o r y
G o a ls: The b a s ic g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s to w ard
r e h a b i l i t a t i n g , r a t h e r th a n p u n is h in g
o r k e e p in g th e o f f e n d e r s .
S cope: The scope o f i n t e r a c t i o n among th e p a r
t i c i p a n t s i s b ro a d , a c e r t a i n e x te n t o f
re g im e n ta tio n i s i n e f f e c t , a l l a s p e c ts
o f l i f e a re c o n d u cted on th e same
p re m is e s .
D ecisio n -M ak in g : T here i s an in v o lv em en t o f
th e lo w er e sc h e lo n o f s t a f f and th e
o f fe n d e r s in th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l
d e c is io n -m a k in g .
Mf
The tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n
d e s c r ib e d by S t r e e t , V in te r , and Perrow (1966) w ould be an
a d e q u a te r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f t h i s "type, a lth o u g h th e p a r t i c i
p a tio n i n d e c is io n s d id n o t re a c h a v e iy h ig h l e v e l y e t
i n i t .
7 . T reatm en t— M ediatory— P erem ptory
Goals: The basic goal orientation of the cor
rectional program is toward rehabilita
tion, rather than punishment or deten
tion.
S cope: The scope o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r a c t i o n
i s r e l a t i v e l y n a rro w , th e p a r t i c i p a n t s
i n t e r a c t r e g u la r ly w ith th e o u ts id e
com m unity.
Decision-Making: The organizational decision
making is in the hands of the adminis
tration. It is centralized, and its
flow is unilateral.
The r e p r e s e n ta t iv e o f t h i s ty p e o f c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n would be a r e s i d e n t i a l g ro u p c e n te r whose
p o lic y w ould n o t p ro v id e f o r th e o f f e n d e r ’s p a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s . T h is o rg a n iz a tio n w ould
have c e r t a i n p r o p e r tie s o f th e " s e r v ic e o rg a n iz a tio n " i n
B la u 's and S c o t t ’ s (1 9 6 2 : 52-54-) ty p o lo g y , where th e b a s ic
a ssu m p tio n i s t h a t th e c l i e n t does n o t know w hat w i l l se rv e
^5
h i s h e s t i n t e r e s t a n d , t h e r e f o r e , th e p r o f e s s io n a l h a s to
make d e c is io n s f o r him .
8 . T reatm en t— *M e d ia to x y — P a r t ic ip a t o r y
G o a ls: The h a s ic g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e c o r
r e c t i o n a l program i s tow ard r e h a b i l i
t a t i n g th e o f f e n d e r s , r a t h e r th a n k eep
in g o r p u n ish in g them .
S cope: The scope o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r
a c t io n i s r e l a t i v e l y n a rro w . The p a r
t i c i p a n t s i n t e r a c t r e g u la r ly w ith th e
su rro u n d in g com m unity. The re g im e n ta
t i o n i n th e o rg a n iz a tio n i s l i m i t e d .
D ecisio n -M ak in g : The o ffe n d e rs and a l l th e
s t a f f members ta k e p a r t r e g u la r ly i n
th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s .
I t seems t h a t H ig h fie ld s (M cC orkle, E l i a s , and
B ixby: 1958) w ould be a good r e p r e s e n ta t iv e o f t h i s ty p e
o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n . In H ig h fie ld s th e m ain
o b je c tiv e i s r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , th e o f fe n d e rs w ork and v i s i t
i n th e com m unity, and th e "g u id ed group i n te r a c t io n " p ro
gram in v o lv e s a l l th e o ffe n d e rs i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g
p r o c e s s .
An A n a ly tic a l E v a lu a tio n o f th e
S u g g ested Typology
The e v a lu a tio n o f a ty p o lo g y sh o u ld be co n d u cted
on two l e v e l s ( l i k e th e e v a lu a tio n o f a th e o x y ). These
1 * 6
l e v e l s a re th e a n a l y t i c a l l e v e l w here th e ty p o lo g y i s
e v a lu a te d i n term s o f i t s congruence w ith lo g ic a l and
e p is te m o lo g ic a l p r i n c i p le s and th e e m p ir ic a l l e v e l w here
i t s u s e f u ln e s s i n r e a l i t y i s t e s t e d . The a n a l y t i c a l ev alu a
t i o n o f th e ty p o lo g y w i l l he a tte m p te d h e r e , w h ile th e
e m p ir ic a l e v a lu a tio n w i l l he co n d u cted i n l a t e r c h a p te r s
o f t h i s s tu d y .
The su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
t io n s was h ased on th r e e s e p a ra te and presum ably r e l e v a n t
d im e n sio n s. Each o f th e s e dim ensions se rv e d a s a h a s is
f o r a continuum .
F o llo w in g S c h ra g ’ s (1 9 6 1 :3 5 7 ) s u g g e s tio n , th e
ty p o lo g y h a s a tte m p te d " to fo rm u la te e m p iric a l r e l a t i o n
s h ip s among c o n ce p ts o r v a r i a b l e s •" I t h a s aim ed a ls o a t
la y in g down th e fo u n d a tio n s f o r b u ild in g a d e d u c tiv e s y s
tem . F u rth e rm o re , a s an "embiyo th e o ry " i t a ls o prom ised
th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f e x p la n a tio n o f c e r t a i n e m p iric a l o u t
com es, and p r e d ic tio n o f f u tu r e o utcom es, when: ( a ) th e
d i f f e r e n t c o r r e c t i o n a l program s w i l l be d e fin e d i n more
d e t a i l , and (b ) th e ty p o lo g y 's c o n c e p ts w i l l be more
r e f in e d and e la b o r a te d u p o n .
The f o u r b a s ic e le m e n ts o f a ty p o lo g y (B udner,
1 9 6 6 : 35~1 +0 ) have been s t a t e d and rev iew ed i n an e a r l i e r
p a r t o f t h i s c h a p te r . The f i r s t r e q u ir e d elem en t i s th e
d e te rm in a tio n o f th e ty p o lo g y 's u n iv e rs e o f d is c o u r s e . The
u n iv e rs e o f d is c o u rs e o f th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y i s
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n . The second elem en t i s th e sug
g e s tio n o f some k in d o f o rd e rin g s among th e members o f th e
u n iv e rs e o f d is c o u r s e . In th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y , t h i s
elem en t i s r e p re s e n te d by th e su g g e ste d o rd e rin g o f th e
d i f f e r e n t ty p e s o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s on th e b a s is
o f th e th r e e o r g a n iz a tio n a l d im e n sio n s. The t h i r d r e q u ir e d
elem en t i s th e e x is te n c e o f s ta te m e n ts im p ly in g t h a t c e r
t a i n f e a t u r e s c h a r a c te r iz e th e r e l a t i o n s among th e d i f f e r
e n t ty p e s . T h is re q u ire m e n t seems to be s a t i s f i e d by th e
im p lic a tio n s o f asym m etry, e . g . , ty p e a o rg a n iz a tio n i s
more tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d th a n ty p e b , and i t i s n o t p o s s ib le
a t th e same tim e t h a t ty p e b w i l l be more tre a tm e n t-
o r ie n te d th a n type a; th e same s i t u a t i o n p r e v a ils re g a rd in g
t r a n s i t i v i t y . The f o u r th and l a s t re q u ire m e n t i s th e
e s ta b lis h m e n t o f p o la r o r id e a l- ty p e s a t th e ex trem es o f
th e co n tin u u m . T h is re q u ire m e n t i s s a t i s f i e d by th e sug
g e s tio n o f two p o la r ( i d e a l ) ty p e s i n th e ty p o lo g y , nam ely:
th e c u sto d y — t o t a l — p erem p to ry v s . th e tre a tm e n t—m e d ia to iy
— p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n s .
These fo rm al re q u ire m e n ts o f th e ty p o lo g y , by and
l a r g e , have been m et. How ever, th e r e m ight be some " s o f t
s p o ts ." The ty p o lo g y h a s a tte m p te d to p ro v id e a c e r t a i n
q u a l i t a t i v e o rd e rin g among c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
T h is o rd e rin g seems to be v e ry c l e a r re g a rd in g th e two
p o l a r - t y p e s , b u t i t i s n o t a s c l e a r re g a rd in g th e
48
in te rm e d ia te ty p e s , f a r t h e r e m p iric a l and t h e o r e t i c a l
s tu d ie s w i l l he needed to r e f in e and c l a r i f y th e r e l a t i o n s
among th e in te rm e d ia te -types.
In summary, th e a n a l y ti c a l e v a lu a tio n o f th e sug
g e s te d ty p o lo g y seems to l i v e up to Hem pel’s d e f i n i t i o n
( 1 9 5 2 : 63- 8 5 ) o f i d e a l -types:
. . . an a tte m p t to advance c o n c e p t fo rm a tio n i n
s o c io lo g y from th e s ta g e o f d e s c r ip tio n and
’e m p iric a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n ,' w hich i s e x e m p lifie d
by m ost c l a s s i f i c a t o r y and o rd e rin g ty p e s , to
th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f t h e o r e t i c a l sy stem s and
m o d els.
fu rth e rm o re , i t i s hoped to be an im p o rta n t s te p
tow ard c lo s in g a m ajo r gap i n th e f i e l d o f c o r r e c tio n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich h a s s u f f e r e d , u n t i l now, from th e la c k
o f a d e t a i l e d , com prehensive and w orkable ty p o lo g y . In
a d d it i o n , i t aim s to be h e lp f u l i n s u g g e s tin g p r o p o s itio n s
re g a rd in g th e d i f f e r e n t f a c e t s o f c o r r e c tio n s i n an o rg a n i
z a t io n a l c o n te x t. S im ila r ly , i t m ig h t be u s e f u l i n p r e
d i c t i n g th e n a tu re o f s o c i a l system s w hich d ev elo p i n th e
d i f f e r e n t ty p e s o f c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
In th e fo llo w in g c h a p te r th e th r e e c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich se rv e a s th e b a s is o f th e e m p iric a l
e v a lu a tio n a re d e s c rib e d i n d e t a i l .
CHAPTER I I I
DESCRIPTION A ND CLASSIFICATION OF
ORGANIZATIONS UNDER STUDY
The e m p iric a l e v a lu a tio n o f th e ty p o lo g y w i l l be
b ased on th e a n a ly s is o f th e p e rc e p tio n s o f s t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs o f th e th r e e c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s m entioned
e a r l i e r . The u n d e rly in g assum ption i s t h a t fo rm al o rg a n i
z a t io n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a t t r i b u t e s have an im p act on
th e b e h a v io r and th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e p a r t i c i p a n t s . T his
assu m p tio n h a s em erged a f t e r th e rev iew o f numerous s tu d ie s
w hich had been co n d u cted on a wide ran g e o f o rg a n iz a tio n s
(B la u , 1 9 6 6 ; G o u ld n er, 1967; Clemmer, 1965; S ykes, 1968;
M cC leery, 1961; P o ls k y , 1967; B erk , 1 9 6 6 ; S t r e e t , 1965;
G rusky, 1959; S t r e e t , V in te r , and P erro w , 1966; M cC orkle,
E l i a s , and B ixby, 1 9 5 8 ).
The e m p iric a l e v a lu a tio n o f th e ty p o lo g y , how ever,
w i l l o b v io u sly be l i m i t e d . I t exam ines j u s t one f a c e t o f
o r g a n iz a tio n a l l i f e , and in v o lv e s o n ly th re e o u t o f th e
e ig h t su g g e ste d o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p e s . T hus, i t seems c le a r ,
t h a t f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h w i l l be n e e d e d , e i t h e r to a c c e p t o r
to r e j e c t th e ty p o lo g y .
49
The C o r r e c tio n a l O rg a n iz a tio n s
u n d e r Study 1
The th r e e ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s in
w hich th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e p a r t i c i p a n t s have been
a n a ly z e d , were th e fo llo w in g : ( a ) Boys* R ep u b lic ( I ) a t
C hino, S o u th e rn C a lif o r n ia in A u g u st, 1966; (b ) Boys*
R e p u b lic ( I I ) a t th e end o f 1 9 6 8; and ( c ) th e S ilv e r la k e
E x p erim en t a t Los A n g eles i n 1 9 6 6 -6 8 .
Boys' R ep u b lic I and Boys' R ep u b lic I I w ere th e
same c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n , b u t i n t h i s stu d y th e y a re
t r e a t e d a s s e p a ra te and d i f f e r e n t e n t i t i e s b ecau se o f th e
e x te n s iv e changes t h a t were i n s t i t u t e d i n th e c o r r e c t i o n a l
program betw een 1966 and 1 9 6 8 .
The th r e e c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s were i n t e r
r e l a t e d i n th e se n se t h a t th e S ilv e r la k e E xperim ent was a
j o i n t e n t e r p r i s e o f th e Boys' R ep u b lic and th e Youth S tu d ie s
C e n te r o f th e U n iv e rs ity o f S o u th ern C a li f o r n ia .
The D e s c rip tio n o f th e O rg a n iz a tio n s
The d e s c r ip tio n o f each one o f th e s e th r e e c o r r e c
t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s fo llo w s a l o g i c a l se q u e n c e . E i r s t ,
th e t h e o r e t i c a l a s s u m p tio n s , w hich a re th e fo u n d a tio n o f
th e c o r r e c t i o n a l p ro g ram s, a re p r e s e n te d . S econd, th e
change a s su m p tio n s , w hich d e fin e th e so u g h t changes i n th e
•^■This c h a p te r r e l i e s to a g r e a t e x te n t on: Empey,
N ew land, Lubeck (1 9 6 6 :1 -3 6 ); Empey and Lubeck (1970s
C h a p te rs 2 , 3 ) j and S c o tt ( 1 9 6 8 ) .
o ff e n d e r s and th e a p p ro a ch e s to a c h ie v e them and a re
d e riv e d d i r e c t l y from th e t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s, a re
re v ie w e d . F i n a ll y , th e c o r r e c t i o n a l program s t r a t e g i e s
w hich c o n s t i t u t e th e o p e r a t io n a l iz a t i o n o f th e d i f f e r e n t
change a ssu m p tio n s a re p r e s e n te d .
1 • Boy8 R ep u b lic I
Boy^ B ep u b lic I (BE I ) was e s t a b l is h e d i n 1907 a s a
p r i v a t e , n o n p r o f i t, n o n s e c ta r ia n c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n
f o r ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n ts . I t i s lo c a te d on a 215 a c re farm
in C hino, Los A ngeles C ounty, S o u th e rn C a lif o r n ia . BE I
conform ed r a t h e r c lo s e ly to G offm an's ( 1 9 6 1 : 5- 6 ) d e s c r ip
tio n o f t o t a l o rg a n iz a tio n s i n th e se n s e : ( 1 ) a l l a s p e c ts
o f l i f e w ere c o n d u cted a t th e same p la c e and u n d e r th e same
s in g le a u th o r ity ; ( 2 ) e ac h phase o f th e member’ s d a ily
a c t i v i t y was c a r r i e d on i n th e company o f s e v e ra l o th e r s ;
(3 ) a l l p h a se s o f th e d a y 's a c t i v i t i e s were t i g h t l y
sc h e d u le d and re g im e n te d ; (*0 th e v a rio u s e n fo rc e d a c t i v i
t i e s w ere b ro u g h t to g e th e r i n to a s in g le r a t i o n a l p la n
d e sig n e d to f u l f i l l th e o f f i c i a l aim s o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n .
T h e o r e tic a l a ssu m p tio n s. The b a s ic t h e o r e t i c a l
a ssu m p tio n s a b o u t d e lin q u e n ts and th e e t i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s
o f d e lin q u e n c y were th e f o llo w in g : ( a ) "D e lin q u e n t boys
a re im m atu re. They te n d to be im p u lsiv e " and o f te n la c k
th e i n t e r n a l c o n tr o ls w hich a re n e c e s s a ry f o r a s u c c e s s f u l
a d ju s tm e n t i n s o c i e t y . These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s can be
52
a t t r i b u t e d l a r g e ly to in a d e q u a te homes and in a d e q u a te
s o c i a l en v iro n m en t; (b ) "D e lin q u e n t boys la c k a d e q u a te edu
c a t i o n a l , v o c a tio n a l, and in te r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s . " These
s k i l l s a re among th e m ost im p o rta n t f a c t o r s f o r s u c c e s s f u l
a ch iev em en t i n a m odem , i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y . The f a c t t h a t
d e lin q u e n t boys do n o t p o s s e s s th e s e s k i l l s s e r io u s ly handi
c ap s t h e i r ch an ces f o r achievem ent and a d ju stm e n t i n m odern
s o c i e t y . T h is d e f ic ie n c y i s c lo s e ly r e l a t e d a ls o to t h e i r
la c k o f m a tu r ity , la c k o f i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l , and h e d o n is tic
b e h a v io r •
These t h e o r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s im ply t h a t th e
o f fe n d e r s a re d e p riv e d o f "a sound e m o tio n a l env iro n m en t
a t hom e," and th e o p p o rtu n ity o f "accom plishm ent in
acad em ic, v o c a tio n a l, o r s o c ia l e n d e a v o rs ." T hus, th e y
"need a s tr u c tu r e d en v iro n m en t i n w hich b o th s e t s o f
in a d e q u a c ie s can be d e a l t w ith ." (Empey, New land, L ubeck,
1 9 6 6 :2 7 )
Change a s s u m p tio n s . The change a ssu m p tio n s, a s was
a lre a d y m en tio n e d , have been d e riv e d l o g i c a l l y from th e
t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s. The m ain o b je c tiv e o f BE I was
to change th e d e lin q u e n ts ' a n t i s o c i a l b e h a v io r by a tta c k in g
th o se a r e a s where th e b a s ic i n a b i l i t i e s seemed to o c c u r.
These a ssu m p tio n s s t a t e d t h a t i n o rd e r to a c h ie v e
m ea n in g fu l changes i n th e b e h a v io r o f th e o f f e n d e r s , th e
ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n m ust p ro v id e :
( a ) a w e ll- s tr u c tu r e d en v iro n m en t w hich w i l l com
p e n sa te f o r th e la c k o f s tr u c tu r e w hich th e hoys e x p e r i
enced i n th e p a s t ,
(b ) a way to p e rs o n a l m a tu ra tio n by p re p a rin g th e
boys to assume more r e s p o n s ib le r o l e s and to d ev elo p more
e f f e c t i v e i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l s , and
,(c) an ad eq u ate academ ic and v o c a tio n a l t r a i n i n g
program to im prove la g g in g s k i l l s and to change a t t i t u d e s
tow ard e d u c a tio n and w ork.
T hus, th e m ain em phasis o f change assu m p tio n s was
fo c u se d on t r a i n i n g . In t h i s r e s p e c t BR I resem b led th e
re e d u c a tio n /d e v e lo p m e n t ty p e o f o r g a n iz a tio n s i n S t r e e t 's ,
V i n t e r 's , and P e rro w 's (1 9 6 6 :5 5 ) s tu d y . A ccording to th e s e
a u th o r s , i n t h i s ty p e o f c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n th e
o ffe n d e rs were s e e n , 1 1 . . . a s p r im a r ily dependent and
n e g le c te d y o u n g s te rs whose d e v ia n t b e h a v io r was due to
t h e i r in a d e q u a te and d is o rg a n iz e d hom es." The changes
so u g h t w ere: " . . . t o c o u n te ra c t th e a d v erse e f f e c t s o f
th e in m a te 's p r i o r e x p e rie n c e s and beyond t h i s i t was a ls o
n e c e s s a ry to f a c i l i t a t e developm ent o f t h e i r p o t e n t i a l s . "
The c o r r e c t i o n a l program s t r a t e g y . BR I was a r e l a
t i v e l y sm a ll " t o t a l " com m unity. The c o r r e c t i o n a l e m p h a sis,
a s a d i r e c t im p lic a tio n o f th e t h e o r e t i c a l and change
a s su m p tio n s , was p u t m ain ly on e d u c a tio n a l and v o c a tio n a l
t r a i n i n g . A ll th e n e c e s s a ry f a c i l i t i e s f o r th e
a d m in is tr a tio n o f th e program were lo c a te d on th e p re m ise s—
an a c c r e d ite d h ig h s c h o o l, w orkshops, a g r i c u l t u r a l "build
i n g s , e t c e t e r a . The o ffe n d e rs liv e d i n c o tta g e s w hich
housed a p p ro x im a te ly tw e n ty -fiv e e a c h . The days w ere f u l l y
programmed and re g im e n te d i n th e sen se t h a t m ost o f th e
e v eiy d ay a c t i v i t i e s w ere sch ed u led and th e o ffe n d e rs p a r
t i c i p a t e d i n them in th e company o f s e v e r a l o th e r s .
A lthough th e s e arra n g em e n ts a re u s u a lly p r e v a le n t i n t o t a l
and c u sto d y o r ie n te d o r g a n iz a tio n s , in BR I l i t t l e a t t e n
t i o n was p a id to c u s to d ia l f u n c tio n s . T here was some
c o o p e ra tio n betw een th e sm all s u p e rv is o ry s t a f f and th e
o f f i c i a l s o f th e s tu d e n t governm ent. T h is s tu d e n t g o v ern
m ent was o rg a n iz e d a c c o rd in g to th e m odel o f a c i t y g o v ern
m en t. Each c o tta g e was re p re s e n te d by a co u n cilm an . The
head o f th e s tu d e n t governm ent was th e m ayor. There were
a ls o o th e r e le c te d o f f i c i a l s among th e s tu d e n ts , in c lu d in g
a p o lic e c h i e f , a ju d g e , and a d i s t r i c t a tto r n e y . Empey,
Newland and lu b e c k ( 1 9 6 6 : 3 2 ) p o in t o u t t h a t i t i s q u ite
h a rd to e v a lu a te w hat c o n tr ib u tio n th e s tu d e n t governm ent
made e i t h e r to th e ev ery d ay o p e ra tio n o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n o r to th e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f th e o f f e n d e r s . I t
was u se d to some e x te n t by th e s u p e rv is o iy s t a f f f o r con
t r o l p u rp o s e s , b u t th e r e have been no c l e a r in d ic a t i o n s how
much th e s e r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s h e lp e d in th e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f
o th O rs.
The av erag e le n g th o f s ta y o f o ffe n d e rs i n th e
o r g a n iz a tio n was s ix te e n m onths. How ever, th e re were some
o ffe n d e rs who sta y e d f o r somewhat s h o r t e r p e rio d s and
o th e r s who sta y e d up to two y e a r s . The p h y s ic a l ap p earan ce
o f BR I was s i m il a r to t h a t o f an a g r i c u l t u r a l s c h o o l. The
p l e a s a n t, q u ie t s u rro u n d in g s and th e h e a lth y , n e a t a p p e a r
ance w ere assum ed to have a m itig a tin g e f f e c t on th e
d e p r iv a tio n s o f th e o ffe n d e rs who were com m itted to th e
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n a g a in s t t h e i r w i l l .
BR I was a ls o a com plex o r g a n iz a tio n . There was an
e x te n s iv e and w e ll- d e f in e d d iv is io n o f la b o r among s t a f f .
The d i r e c t o r was m ain ly o ccu p ied w ith th e a d m in is tr a tiv e
d u tie s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . H is b a s ic a c t i v i t i e s became
s i m il a r to th o se o f a b u s in e s s e x e c u tiv e : b u d g et d e c is io n s ,
fo rm u la tio n o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l o b j e c ti v e s , fund r a i s i n g ,
e t c e t e r a . T his arran g em en t resem b les th e p r e v a ilin g
s i t u a t i o n i n b u s in e s s o r g a n iz a tio n s : " . • . a s we p ro c e e d
upward i n th e h ie ra rc h y 'a d m in is tr a tiv e * d u tie s come to
occupy more and more o f th e a d m i n i s t r a t o r 's tim e and te c h
n i c a l d u t ie s l e s s . " (Sim on, 1965:2^5)
Much o f th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r th e program d i r e c
t i o n and f o r th e ev ery d ay a c t i v i t i e s la y w ith th e program
d i r e c t o r . He was i n c h arg e o f th e tre a tm e n t program and
was a ls o th e p r i n c i p a l o f th e l o c a l h ig h s c h o o l. In a d d i
t i o n , th e sm all s u p e rv is o ry s t a f f and th e work s u p e r v is o r s
w ere u n d e r h i s d i r e c t i o n . T h is o r g a n iz a tio n a l se tu p h a s
e n su re d th e tre a tm e n t o r i e n t a t i o n o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l p ro
gram by p la c in g a l l th e f o c a l p o s itio n s u n d e r th e s u p e r
v i s i o n o f th e d i r e c t o r o f th e tre a tm e n t program .
In c o n c lu s io n , BR I ad o p ted tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d c o r
r e c t i o n a l p o l i c i e s . At th e same tim e , th e s e p o l i c i e s were
c o n d u cted i n a s e t t i n g w hich was s i m il a r to t h a t o f th e
t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n . T h is im p lie s t h a t th e scope o f i n t e r
a c tio n o f th e p a r t i c i p a n t s was b ro a d . S im ila r ly , s e v e r a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f p erem ptory o r g a n iz a tio n s were i n e f f e c t ,
such a s lim ite d p a r t i c i p a t i o n in th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro
c e s s and only a lim ite d range o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w hich
c o u ld be assum ed by th e o f f e n d e r s .
2 . The S ilv e r la k e E x p erim en t^
The t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s. The c o r r e c t i o n a l
p ro b lem , a s i t i s p e rc e iv e d by Empey, Lubeck (1 9 7 0 ), was
d e fin e d f o r t h i s e x p erim e n t by th e c a u s a tio n th e o ry com
p r is e d o f f o u r m ajo r p o s t u l a t e s :
P o s tu la te 1 . Lower s o c ia l c la s s s t a t u s r e s u l t s
i n d e c re a se d a ch iev e m e n t.
S tu d ie s i n th e f i e l d in d ic a te t h a t ju v e n ile d e li n
quency i s an outcome o f s o c ia l e x p e rie n c e s (C ohen, 1955;
Cloward and O h lin , I9 6 0 ; S h o rt and S tro d b e c k , 1 9 6 5 ). The
p
^ D e ta ile d d e s c r ip tio n o f th e t h e o r e t i c a l and change
a s s u m p tio n s , and th e program s tr a te g y a re found i n th e
fo rth c o m in g book by Empey and L ubeck, "The S ilv e r la k e
E x p erim e n t: T e s tin g D elinquency Theory and Community
I n te r v e n tio n " 1970, A ld in e .
57
m a jo r ity o f d e lin q u e n ts w ith whom c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
t io n s m ust work a re lo w e r c l a s s . The e a r l y fa m ily e x p e r i
e n c e s and th e slum en v iro n m en t p u t them i n a d isa d v a n ta g e d
p o s itio n i n an " a c h ie v e m e n t-o rie n te d " s o c i e t y . A cco rd in g
to Empey and Lubeck (1 9 7 0 :C h ap ter 4 ) :
. . . e v id e n ce i n d i c a t e s t h a t lo w e r - c la s s c h ild r e n
la c k th e c u l t u r a l background and th e knowledge o f
in s tr u m e n ta l s te p s by w hich to u s e th e sc h o o l
s o c i a l i z a t i o n e x p e rie n c e s u c c e s s f u ll y .
P o s tu la te 2 . D ecreased ach iev em en t r e s u l t s i n
in c r e a s e d s t r a i n .
T h is p o s tu la te i s b ased upon th e a ssu m p tio n t h a t
th e g e n e ra l v a lu e sy stem o f s o c ie ty i s a c c e p te d and sh a re d
by a l l s o c i a l c l a s s e s . T hus, when c o n v e n tio n a l g o a ls can
n o t be a c h ie v e d by many y o u n g s te rs , th ro u g h c o n v e n tio n a l
n o rm a tiv e m eans, th e r e s u l t i s s t r a i n .
T h is developm ent i n d ic a t e s t h a t i n th e c a se o f
*
ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n c y th e problem does n o t l i e i n th e f a c t
t h a t d e lin q u e n ts d is c a r d th e t r a d i t i o n a l v a lu e sy ste m . On
th e c o n tr a iy , th e y seem to s u b s c rib e to i t to a g r e a t
e x t e n t . The problem i s t h a t because o f t h e i r b a c k g ro u n d ,
lo w er c l a s s y o u n g s te rs a re i n an a d v e rse p o s itio n to
"a c h ie v e " th e c o n v e n tio n a l g o a ls .
The e x is te n c e o f t h i s p ro b lem , a c c o rd in g to Cohen
( 1 9 5 5 : 1 1 9 ) i p u ts th e w orking c la s s boy " in th e m ark et f o r a
• s o l u t i o n . '" The c r i t i c a l q u e s tio n s a r e : w hat k in d s o f
a l t e r n a t i v e s a re open to him , and w hich o f th e a l t e r n a t i v e s
i s he g o in g to choose a s th e s u i t a b l e s o lu tio n f o r h i s
problem?
P o s tu la te 3« In c re a s e d s t r a i n r e s u l t s in
h ig h i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w ith d e lin q u e n t p e e r s .
Cohen (1959) s t a t e d t h a t th r e e g e n e ra l a l t e r n a t i v e s
a re a v a ila b le f o r th e w orking c la s s b o y . One i s c o n tin u in g
" to c o n fo rm , d e s p ite c o n tin u e d f r u s t r a t i o n . " T h is a l t e r n a
t iv e i s th e only one w hich i s m o ra lly and sy m b o lic a lly
v a li d a t e d by th e v a lu e s o f th e w id e r s o c i e t y . A second
a l t e r n a t i v e i s " to b re a k w ith h i s r e f e r e n c e gro u p s and
acknow ledge o th e r r e f e r e n c e g ro u p s , whose norms le g itim iz e
d e v ia n t s o lu tio n s and a t t r i b u t e fa v o ra b le r o le sym bolism to
th em ." The a c c e p ta n c e o f t h i s s o l u t io n by many in d iv id u a ls
le a d s to th e evolvem ent o f d e lin q u e n t s u b c u ltu r e s . T h is
developm ent can be seen a s a " c o lle c tiv e problem s o lv in g "
s i t u a t i o n .
The t h i r d a l t e r n a t i v e i s f o r th e in d iv id u a l to "go
i t a lo n e " — an a l t e r n a t i v e w hich means th e ch o o sin g o f s o l i
t a r y form s o f d e v ia n t b e h a v io r. One o f th e s e fo rm s, p e r
h a p s th e m ost e x tre m e , i s becom ing m e n ta lly i l l . Among th e
t h r e e , t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e a p p e a rs to be th e m ost im p ro b ab le
and th e l e a s t common, b ecau se i t i s th e m ost c o s tly b o th
p e r s o n a lly and s o c i a l l y . Only when s o lu tio n s su p p o rte d by
g ro u p s a re p re c lu d e d , w i l l th e t h i r d a l t e r n a t i v e be c h o se n .
Among th e f i r s t two a l t e r n a t i v e s , b o th o f w hich a re
s o c i a l l y o r i e n t e d , th e c o n fo rm is t one i s th e m ost common.
H ow ever, f o r th o se who do n o t fo llo w t h i s c o u rs e ,
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n d e lin q u e n t g ro u p s may be th e r e s u l t .
E m p iric a l ev id en ce i n d i c a t e s t h a t m ost d e lin q u e n t a c t s a re
com m itted i n th e company o f o t h e r s . The " f u n c tio n s " o f th e
d e lin q u e n t group i n t h i s re g a rd were sum m arized by Empey
and Lubeck (1 9 7 0 :C h a p te r 2 ):
P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a d e lin q u e n t g ro u p , and a c c e p ta n c e
o f i t s s u b c u ltu r a l s ta n d a r d s , i s s u b s t i t u t e d a s an
a l t e r n a t i v e means f o r a c h ie v in g th e s t a t u s , re c o g
n i t i o n , and b e lo n g in g w hich have n o t been a c h ie v e d
i n c o n v e n tio n a l g ro u p s .
P o s tu la te 4 . I d e n t i f i c a t i o n w ith d e lin q u e n t
p e e rs r e s u l t s i n d e lin q u e n c y .
I d e n t i f i c a t i o n w ith d e lin q u e n t p e e rs i s f a c i l i t a t e d
a ls o by th e d e f i n i t i o n o f th e y o u n g s te r s ' b e h a v io r by th e
com m unity. The o f f i c i a l s and th e members o f th e community
" la b e l" them a s d e lin q u e n ts . The i n t e r a c t i o n and th e r e l a
t io n s h ip betw een th e s e boys and th e community become
u n e a s y . T h e ir d e lin q u e n t s t a t u s i s r e in f o r c e d a g a in and
a g a in .
T h is r e a c tio n o f th e community l i m i t s f u r t h e r th e
ran g e o f c o n fo rm ist a l t e r n a t i v e s a v a ila b le to th e s e young
s t e r s . T h is developm ent i n d ic a t e s t h a t a s s o c ia tio n s w ith
d e lin q u e n t p e e rs b o th cau se and r e s u l t from d e lin q u e n t
b e h a v io r. They a re in te r d e p e n d e n t.
Change a s s u m p tio n s .
1 . The d e lin q u e n t group sh o u ld be made th e t a r g e t
o f ch an g e.
The group n a tu r e o f ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n c y i n d i c a t e s
60
t h a t among many o f f e n d e r s , d e lin q u e n c y becomes a p a t t e r n o f
c o n fo rm is t b e h a v io r. W olfgang (1 9 6 7 :1 ^ 7 ) p o in ts o u t:
. • th e more com m itted th e y o u th become to t h e i r own
s u b c u ltu r e , th e more c a p tiv e th e y become to t h e i r conform
i t y . " T h e re fo re th e in d iv id u a l h a s to be t r e a t e d i n th e
group c o n te x t w ith w hich he s tr o n g ly i d e n t i f i e s h im s e lf .
F o llo w in g C re s s e y 's (1 9 5 5 ) s u g g e s tio n s , Empey and Lubeck
(1 9 7 0 :C h a p te r 3 ) s u g g e s t t h a t t h i s o b je c tiv e can be
a c h ie v e d by im plem enting c e r t a i n change p r i n c i p l e s :
( a ) D e lin q u e n ts sh o u ld be a s s im ila te d i n to
g ro u p s w hich em phasize la w -a b id in g b e h a v io r a n d ,
c o n c u r r e n tly , a li e n a t e d from g ro u p s w hich fa v o r
d e lin q u e n t b e h a v io r.
(b ) S tro n g p r e s s u r e can be a c h ie v e d by m aking
th e group i t s e l f th e medium o f c h a n g e . U n less
p r e s s u r e s f o r change a re g e n e ra te d w ith in th e g ro u p ,
th e n p re s s u r e s e x e r te d by o u ts id e r s w i l l have l i t t l e
im p a c t.
( c ) The o v e rr id in g purpose o f any group sh o u ld
be se e n by members a s t h a t o f c h an g in g d e lin q u e n t
b e h a v io r.
(d ) The d e lin q u e n t sh o u ld be sp o n so red i n a
re fo rm a tio n r o l e . The m ost e f f e c t i v e mechanism
f o r e x e r tin g group p r e s s u r e on members w i l l o c c u r
i n g ro u p s in w hich d e lin q u e n ts a re in d u ced to j o in
w ith n o n d e lin q u e n ts f o r th e p u rp o se o f changing
o th e r d e lin q u e n ts .
2 . S o c ia l s t r a i n among d e lin q u e n ts sh o u ld be
re d u c e d .
The t h e o r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s have su g g e ste d t h a t
d e lin q u e n ts e x p e rie n c e c o n s id e ra b le s o c i a l s t r a i n .
In r e a l i t y , m ost c o r r e c t i o n a l program s a re n o t
d e sig n e d to red u ce s t r a i n . They a re n o t i n a p o s itio n to
p ro v id e c o n v e n tio n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r which, p e e r s u p p o rt
c o u ld be g a in e d . As h a s been in d ic a te d ) an in fo rm a l inm ate
system te n d s to d ev elo p w hich i s o p p o s itio n a l to o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l g o a ls and p e rs o n n e l, and r e s i s t a n t to change
(Clem m er, 19 6 8; S y k es, 1 9 6 8 ; C low ard, I9 6 0 ; C re sse y , 1 9 6 1 ) .
One o f th e m ain s t r u c t u r a l problem s o f th e " t r a d i
ti o n a l " c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s i s t h e i r c a s t e - l i k e
s o c ia l c h a r a c t e r . In m ates and s t a f f a re sh a rp ly d iv id e d
in to d i s c r e t e g ro u p s.
T here i s no s t r u c t u r a l means by w hich th e o ffe n d e r
can be upw ardly m obile and a ch iev e a re w a rd in g ly
le g itim a te r o le i n th e sy stem . (Empey and L ubeck,
1 9 7 0 : C h ap ter 3 )
The su g g e ste d p r i n c i p le s o f re d u c in g s t r a i n a re th e
f o llo w in g :
( a ) The p r o t e c ti o n and rew ard s p ro v id e d by any
change program f o r can d o r sh o u ld exceed th o se p ro
v id e d e i t h e r by d e lin q u e n ts f o r a d h eren ce to a
d e lin q u e n t code o r by o f f i c i a l s f o r r i g i d conform
i t y and 'good b e h a v io r .'
(b ) The s t r u c t u r a l r e s t r a i n t s w hich have t r a d i
t i o n a l l y b lo ck ed com m unication sh o u ld be rem oved.
( c ) Changes i n th e d e lin q u e n t segm ent o f th e
o rg a n iz a tio n w i l l in e v ita b ly produce changes in
th e o f f i c i a l segm ent.
3 . Means f o r le g itim a te achievem ent by d e lin q u e n ts
sh o u ld be made a v a i la b l e .
The t h e o r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s have in d ic a te d t h a t
d e lin q u e n ts te n d to e x p e rie n c e d e c re a se d a ch iev em en t.
Empey and Lubeck (1 9 7 0 :C h ap ter 2 ) su g g e ste d th e fo llo w in g
p r i n c i p l e s to change t h i s s i t u a t i o n :
62
( a ) The d e lin q u e n t m ust be m o tiv a te d to w ant to
a c h ie v e . T h is can be accom plished i f he i s spon
s o re d in a re fo rm a tio n r o l e , by becom ing an a c tiv e
p a r t i c i p a n t i n th e r e s o l u ti o n o f h i s own problem s
and th o se o f h i s p e e r s , and i f th e r e a re in c e n tiv e s
i n th e c o r r e c tio n a l p ro c e s s f o r a heavy d eg ree o f
in v o lv e m e n t.
(b ) A r i te - o f - p a s s a g e f o r th e o ffe n d e r from a
d e lin q u e n t to a n o n -d e lin q u e n t s t a t u s i s n e c e s s a r y .
He n e ed s e f f e c t i v e lin k a g e w ith th e n o n -d e lin q u e n t
w o rld .
Program s t r a t e g y . The t h e o r e t i c a l and th e change
a ssu m p tio n s su g g e st th e need f o r an o r g a n iz a tio n w hich
p o s s e s s e s th r e e m ajor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s
(1 ) an o r g a n iz a tio n w hich would enhance th e u se
o f group te c h n iq u e s i n th e ch an g in g o f d e lin q u e n ts .
(2 ) an o r g a n iz a tio n whose s t r u c tu r e would h e lp
to remove some o f th e o b s tr u c tio n s and s t r a i n s
w hich have made c o lla b o r a tio n betw een d e lin q u e n ts
and c o r r e c t i o n a l w o rkers d i f f i c u l t .
(3 ) an o rg a n iz a tio n w hich c o u ld p ro v id e an
e f f e c t i v e lin k a g e w ith th e n o n d e lin q u e n t community
and i t s i n s t i t u t i o n s . (Empey and L ubeck, 1970:
C h ap ter
The S ilv e r la k e E xperim ent was e s t a b l is h e d as an a tte m p t to
im plem ent th e above-m entioned p r i n c i p l e s . There a re sev eral
f a c e t s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l program .
The E xperim ent was s e t up a s a r e s i d e n t i a l o r g a n i
z a tio n i n a m id d le -c la s s neig h b o rh o o d o f Los A n g e le s. T his
l o c a ti o n p ro v id e d a lin k a g e w ith th e su rro u n d in g com m unity.
T h is lin k a g e was d e sig n e d : ( a ) to d e c re a se th e b i t t e r n e s s
g e n e ra te d by c o n fin e m e n t, to e n a b le th e o ffe n d e rs to r e t a i n
some p e rs o n a l freed o m , and to p ro v id e f o r them some
63
o p p o r tu n ity to t r y o u t new and le g itim a te r o l e s ; Cb) to
p ro v id e a g r e a t e r d e g re e o f group s u p p o rt f o r th e d i f f i c u l t
changes t h a t an in d iv id u a l h a s to make; and ( c ) to r e i n t e
g r a te th e o ffe n d e rs in to n o n d e lin q u e n t a c t i v i t i e s and
i n s t i t u t i o n s .
I t was argued t h a t th e l i n e s o f com m unications
betw een s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs m ust be k e p t open. Conse
q u e n tly , th e number o f o ffe n d e rs and s t a f f was k e p t s m a ll.
The maximum number o f o ffe n d e rs a t any one tim e was tw e n ty ,
and th e s t a f f in c lu d e d o n ly a program d i r e c t o r , an
a s s i s t a n t d i r e c t o r , a p a rt- tim e co o k , and a p a r t- tim e work
s u p e r v i s o r - t u t o r , a t any one tim e .
Group m ee tin g s were h e ld f iv e tim e s a w eek. The
"g u id ed group in te r a c t io n " te c h n iq u e was u se d i n th e s e
m e e tin g s . T h is m ethod a tte m p ts to make th e group b o th th e
t a r g e t and th e medium o f change. The fu n d am en tal o b je c
t i v e s w ere:
. . . to e l i c i t and document th e problem s w hich
group members f a c e , to se a rc h f o r and f in d ade
q u a te a l t e r n a t i v e s , and to p ro v id e group su p p o rt
and p e rs o n a l rew ard s f o r th e a d o p tio n o f th e s e
o th e r a l t e r n a t i v e s . (Empey, L ubeck, 1970:
C h a p te r *+)
School a tte n d a n c e was th e p rim a ry lin k a g e w ith th e
s u rro u n d in g com m unity. I t s im p o rtan ce la y i n th e f a c t o f
th e in c r e a s in g n eed s f o r academ ic and v o c a tio n a l s k i l l s ,
th e d i f f i c u l t y o f f in d in g any c a re e r-b o u n d employment
w ith o u t a d eq u a te fo rm al e d u c a tio n , and th e s o c ia l im por
ta n c e o f sc h o o l in th e l i f e o f a d o le s c e n ts .
61*
Work a c t i v i t i e s were m andatory f o r a l l th e o ffe n d
e r s . They m a in ta in e d th e house and th e g ro u n d s. In a d d i
t i o n , some o f them w orked i n th e community and g o t p a id f o r
t h a t . The m ain o b je c tiv e s were th e im provem ent o f work
s k i l l s and h a b it s o f o ffe n d e rs and th e o b s e rv a tio n o f t h e i r
f u n c tio n in g in a work s i t u a t i o n w hich a ls o allo w ed them to
t r y o u t new r o l e s . In o rd e r to encourage th e t r y in g o u t
o f new r o l e s , two p o s i t io n s o f " ju n io r s t a f f members" b e a r
in g many o f th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f th e d i r e c ti o n o f th e
program were c r e a te d . J u n io r s t a f f members were p a id and
t h e i r p o s i t io n s se rv e d a s le g itim a te c h a n n e ls o f upw ard
m o b ility .
The program c a l l e d f o r th e boys sp en d in g m ost o f
t h e i r w eekends a t home o r w ith r e l a t i v e s . The i n t e n t was
to m a in ta in home t i e s and to u t i l i z e home and community
v i s i t s a s a so u rce o f in fo rm a tio n . In a s e n s e , th e s e v i s i t s
t e s t e d th e o ffe n d e rs and th e program i t s e l f . D uring group
m e e tin g s th e a c tu a l b e h a v io r in th e community was u s e d to
judge th e e x te n t to w hich a boy had b een in v o lv e d w ith th e
program , w hat h i s p ro g re s s had been and h i s r e a d in e s s f o r
r e l e a s e . The av erag e s ta y i n th e E xperim ent was s i x m onths.
In summary, S ilv e r la k e was an e x p e rim e n ta l program
b ased on tre a tm e n t o r ie n te d c o r r e c t i o n a l p h ilo so p h y h a v in g
th e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f th e o ffe n d e rs a s th e g o a l. The scope
o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r a c t i o n among th e p a r t i c i p a n t s was
r e l a t i v e l y n a rro w . The community l o c a ti o n and th e r e l a
t io n s w ith th e s u rro u n d in g s im ply t h a t S ilv e r la k e was a
m e d ia to ry o r g a n iz a tio n . The p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f th e o ffe n d
e r s and th e s t a f f members i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s
was open and was en co u rag e d .
• 3
3 . Boys* R epublic I I
The t h i r d c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n was B oys'
.Republic I I (BR I I ) . The d e s c r ip tio n o f t h i s o rg a n iz a tio n
was l e f t to be th e l a s t because i t ran k e d i n s t r u c t u r a l
term s somewhere betw een B oys' R ep u b lic I and S i l v e r l a k e .
Boys' R ep u b lic I I was s i t u a t e d a t th e same p h y s ic a l
s e t t i n g a s B oys' R ep u b lic I , a t C hino. The re a so n f o r
h a n d lin g BR I I a s a s e p a ra te o r g a n iz a tio n a l e n t i t y l i e s in
th e f a c t t h a t fu n d am en tal changes to o k p la c e i n i t s th e o
r e t i c a l and program s t r a t e g i e s betw een 1966 and 1 9 6 8 .
T h e o r e tic a l a ssu m p tio n s.
1 . The im m ediate p e e r group o f th e o ffe n d e r i s a
b a s ic f a c t o r i n th e developm ent o f h i s v a lu e s , n orm s, g o a ls ,
and b e h a v io r. T hus, th e in d iv id u a l d e lin q u e n t h a s to be
seen i n th e c o n te x t o f h i s p e e r group and i t s n o rm a tiv e
sy ste m .
^T here i s v e iy l i t t l e w r itte n m a te r ia l on B oys'
R ep u b lic I I . The m ain so u rc e s o f in fo rm a tio n a re S c o tt
(1 9 6 8 ), in fo rm a l d is c u s s io n s w ith Mr. M. S c o t t, who i s th e
tr e a tm e n t d i r e c t o r i n BR I I , and d is c u s s io n s w ith th e
r e s e a r c h team w hich was in v o lv e d i n th e S ilv e r la k e E x p e ri
m ent p r o j e c t .
66
As su g g e ste d e a r l i e r , v a rio u s inm ate subsystem s
te n d to d ev elo p i n a r e s i d e n t i a l s e t t i n g , w ith d r w ith o u t
th e c o n s e n t o f s t a f f . The ways i n w hich th e s e g ro u p s fo rm ,
and th e n a tu r e o f th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w hich d ev elo p i n them
and betw een them and th e s t a f f , o f te n p e rp e tu a te and r e i n
f o r c e d e lin q u e n t v a lu e s and a t t i t u d e s .
Jitirth e rm o re , i f t h i s u n o f f i c i a l system (boy p o p u la
t i o n ) i s ig n o r e d , o r d e a lt w ith p r im a r ily th ro u g h
s t a f f im posed c o n t r o l s , th e boys te n d to c o lla b o r a te
w ith each o th e r and d ev elo p a system w hich o p e ra te s
i n o p p o s itio n to th e s t a t e d o b je c tiv e s o f th e i n s t i
t u t i o n . ( S c o t t, 1968 :*+)
T h is developm ent can be h a lt e d and a lt e r e d by th e
s t a f f jo in in g w ith th e o ffe n d e rs ''i n e s ta b lis h in g a u n i f i e d
tr e a tm e n t system i n w hich boys and s t a f f c o o p e ra tiv e ly work
t o g e th e r to a c h ie v e a common goal." ( S c o t t , 1 9 6 8 :^ )
U sing V i n t e r ’s and J a n o w itz ' te rm in o lo g y (1959s
1 2 0 ), o ffe n d e rs i n B oys' R ep u b lic I I w ere se en l a r g e ly a s
" s o c ia l d e lin q u e n ts " whose d ev ian cy o r i g in a te s i n a d h eren c e
to th e n o n le g a l v a lu e s and norm s o f a d e lin q u e n t su b c u l
tu r e .
2 . O ffe n d ers w i l l commit th em se lv e s more r e a d i l y
to c o r r e c t i o n a l g o a ls , p o l i c i e s , and r u l e s when th e y have a
sh a re i n d e te rm in in g them . There i s - a la rg e body o f e v i
dence w hich i n d ic a t e s t h a t d e c is io n s made by s t a f f and
im posed upon o ffe n d e rs a re n o t a c c e p te d n o r fo llo w e d . I t
seem s: " e f f e c tiv e d e c isio n -m a k in g o r p ro b le m -so lv in g th u s
r e q u i r e s in v o lv em en t o f th o se in d iv id u a ls who a re to be
a f f e c te d by th e d e c is io n s ." ( S c o t t, 1968:*+)
T h is in v o lv em en t o f o ffe n d e rs i n th e d e c is io n
m aking p ro c e s s o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n a ls o g iv e s
them an o p p o rtu n ity to assume "an a c tiv e re fo rm a tio n r o le "
r a t h e r th a n "a p a s s iv e one in w hich he i s a c te d upon by
o t h e r s ." (Empey, 1968b : 75)
These t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s a re c le a r l y d i f f e r e n t
from th e t h e o r e t i c a l a ssu m p tio n s o f B oys' R epublic I , where
th e d e lin q u e n ts were t r e a t e d in d iv id u a lly and l i t t l e im por
ta n c e was a tta c h e d to th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f o ffe n d e rs i n th e
d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l program .
Change a s su m p tio n s.
1 . In a way s i m il a r to th e S ilv e r la k e E x p erim e n t,
th e l o g i c a l d e r iv a tio n o f change a ssu m p tio n s from th e th e o
r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s em phasized th e im p o rtan ce o f m aking th e
d e lin q u e n t p e e r group th e t a r g e t o f ch an g e.
S c o tt (1 9 6 8 :*+) h a s s t a te d t h i s p o in t c le a r l y :
S u c c e s s fu l 'change s t r a t e g i e s ' d e sig n e d to re c o n
s t r u c t a t t i t u d e s and a l t e r b e h a v io r, demand t h a t
s p e c ia l a t t e n t i o n be g iv e n t h i s u n o f f i c i a l sy ste m ,
th e p e e r g ro u p . I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t to n o te t h a t
th e s a n c tio n s ( p o s itiv e o r n e g a tiv e ) a boy r e c e iv e s
from h i s group w i l l f a r exceed th o se g iv e n by s t a f f
i n term s o f a c c e p t a b i l i t y o f volum e, i n t e n s i t y , and
p r i o r i t y . The a c c e p t a b i l i t y o f change to a boy i s
th e n , to a g r e a t e x t e n t , dep en d en t upon how a c c e p t
a b le th e id e a o f change i s to h i s p e e r s .
G ro sse r in an e a r l i e r work (1 9 5 8 :2 7 ) h a s a r r iv e d
a t a s i m il a r c o n c lu s io n :
B rin g in g a b o u t change . . . would r e q u ir e p ro d u cin g
68
w ith in th e i n s t i t u t i o n an in fo rm a l p e e r group w hich
i s n o t fo cu sed on h o s t i l i t y to th e a d m in is tr a tio n
and to a la w -a h id in g s o c ie ty and to l e t such a
g ro u p in flu e n c e th e newcomer.
2 . The change assu m p tio n s o f BR I I em phasize th e
need to d ev elo p a s o c i a l system in w hich th e s t a f f and th e
o ffe n d e rs c re a te a f u n c tio n a l r a t h e r th a n a c a s t e - l i k e r e l a
tio n s h ip betw een th e two g ro u p s. T here h a s a lre a d y been
some re f e r e n c e to t h i s assum ption i n th e t h e o r e t i c a l assump
t io n s w here i t was p o in te d o u t: " s t a f f m ust j o i n w ith boys
i n e s t a b l is h i n g a u n i f ie d tre a tm e n t system i n w hich boys
and s t a f f c o o p e ra tiv e ly work to g e th e r to a ch iev e a common
g o a l." ( S c o t t, 1968 :*+)
S u c c e ss fu l r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and a d ju stm e n t i n th e
community a f t e r r e le a s e can n o t be e x p e c te d i f an " o p p o si
t i o n a l inm ate c u ltu r e " d e v e lo p s, h o s t i l e to th e s t a f f and
th ro u g h them to th e v a lu e and a u th o r ity system s i n th e com
m unity .
The im portance o f t h i s assu m p tio n h a s been p o in te d
o u t i n d i f f e r e n t w orks. G ro sser (1 9 5 8 :2 9 ) h a s claim ed
t h a t , i f i n an i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e tu p , an a d o le s c e n t—
. . . i s to l iv e a s a p a r t o f th e la w -a b id in g
s o c ie ty he m ust be a b le to see h im s e lf in th e r o le
a c c e p te d by la w -a b id in g s o c ie ty . The g r e a t e r th e
d is ta n c e betw een a d m in is tr a tio n and i n s t i t u t i o n a l
p o p u la tio n th e l e s s l i k e l y a re th e young p e o p le 's
g ro u p s to change i n a d e s ir a b le d i r e c t i o n .
A ccording to Empey, New land, and Lubeck (1 9 6 6 :9 “
1 0 ) , to a c h ie v e f u n c tio n a l r e l a ti o n s h i p betw een o ffe n d e rs
and s t a f f :
69
. . • any c o r r e c t i o n a l program m ust do two th in g s :
( a ) i t m ust av o id p la c in g s t a f f members in r i g i d
p o s i t io n s w hich makes in e v ita b le th e p e rp e tu a tio n
o f opposing inm ate and o f f i c i a l su bgroups w ith in
th e c o r r e c t i o n a l program ; and (b ) i t m ust p ro v id e
m eans by w hich th e d e lin q u e n t segm ent can a c h ie v e
l e g i t im a t e r o l e s i n d e v elo p in g a new c o r r e c tio n a l
sy ste m .
The second p o in t r e f e r s to th e a lre a d y m entioned
o b je c tiv e o f p ro v id in g an a c tiv e r o le f o r th e o ff e n d e r s i n
th e r e h a b i l i t a t i v e p r o c e s s .
Program s t r a t e g y . The "new" c o r r e c tio n a l p o lic y o f
BR I I was im plem ented, m a in ly , by th e in tr o d u c tio n o f d a ily
group m e e tin g s . As in th e S ilv e r la k e E x p erim en t, and
e a r l i e r i n H ig h f ie ld s , th e "guided group i n te r a c t io n "
m ethod o f group m ee tin g s was c h o sen .
The i n i t i a t i o n and a d a p ta tio n o f t h i s m ethod i n to
th e c o r r e c t i o n a l program o f BR I I h a s been d e s c rib e d by
S c o tt (1 9 6 8 :2 ) a s fo llo w s :
The G .G .I. approach i s co m p atib le w ith , and
d e sig n e d t o , augment Boys* R ep u b lic o b je c tiv e s .
Some m o d ific a tio n o f th e program s t r u c tu r e was
n e c e s s a ry and in c lu d e d such th in g s a s (1 ) making
tim e a v a ila b le f o r d a ily g ro u p s, (2 ) a re d u c tio n
o f th e amount o f r e g im e n ta tio n , (3 ) a llo w in g boys
more f r e e tim e f o r u n s tr u c tu r e d a c t i v i t i e s , and
(^ ) re d u c in g th e ten d en cy to r e l y on fo rm al r u l e s
and p o l i c i e s in d e a lin g w ith b o y s. (The u n d e r lin -
in g s a re m in e, I). S . )
In a d d itio n to th e d a ily g roup m e e tin g s , m ee tin g s
w ith th e f a m ilie s o f th e o ffe n d e rs w ere sc h e d u le d . These
m ee tin g s a llo w th e f a m ily , as a -u n it, to t i y to u n d e rs ta n d
i t s p ro b lem s and to a tt a c k them c o l l e c t i v e l y i n o rd e r to
70
f i n d a s o lu tio n to them . F u rth e rm o re , th e y f a c i l i t a t e th e
a d ju s tm e n t o f th e o ffe n d e rs i n t h e i r su rro u n d in g s a f t e r
r e t u r n from th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n ( S c o t t, 1968:
2 - 3 ) .
These fa m ily c o n fe re n c e s , a ls o p ro v id e a c h a n n e l o f
com m unication and in fo rm a tio n w ith th e o f f e n d e r 's home com
m u n itie s .
A n o th er change i n s t i t u t e d s in c e 1966 was an
in c r e a s e i n th e e x te n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c is io n
m aking p ro c e s s by th e o f f e n d e r s . F or ex am ple, th e g ro u p s
d e c id e now when an o ffe n d e r i s rea d y to le a v e th e pro g ram .
In t h i s m a tte r , th e s t a f f h as th e r i g h t o f v e to , w hich h as
been e x e r c is e d s p o r a d ic a lly .
There were c e r t a i n changes i n th e s tu d e n t g o v ern
m ent a l s o . S ince 1 9 66, a s tro n g e r and w id e r r e p r e s e n ta tio n
o f th e o ffe n d e rs in th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n
h a s been p ro v id e d . The r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s a re now more
in d e p e n d e n t from th e s u p e rv is o iy s t a f f th a n e v e r b e f o r e •
They a re now re s p o n s ib le f o r t h e i r a c tio n s d i r e c t l y to
t h e i r p e e rs in s te a d o f to th e s u p e rv is o ry s t a f f . T h is
developm ent changed t h e i r r o le from b e in g u se d by th e
s u p e rv is o iy s t a f f a s a g e n ts o f c o n tr o l to b e in g a g e n ts o f
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . T h is e n la rg e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y c o u p le d w ith
some p a id p o s itio n s f o r th e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , i t was h o ped,
would le a d to a h ig h e r l e v e l o f m o tiv a tio n to work and to
assume even more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . T h is change i n th e r o le
71
of the student government has also provided a higher status
and prestige to the representatives. Being a representa
tive in the student government became a legitimate channel
of upward mobility.
Although there were significant changes in the
theoretical and change assumptions, and consequently also
in the program strategy, the correctional setting has
remained quite similar to that of Boys' Republic I. In
many respects it has retained some characteristics of total
organizations, e.g.: many facets of everyday life were
formally organized, a certain extent of regimentation was
in effect, the scope of interaction was broad, et cetera.
Similarly BR II remained a complex organization, with rela
tively large number of workers and with a detailed division
of labor.
As a general trend, however, BR II has clearly
moved away from the peremptory pole on the peremptory-
participatory continuum toward the participatory pole. It
is hard to assess, at first sight, the extent of this
change.
CHAPTER IV
CLASSIFICATION OP THE ORGANIZATIONS
In term s o f th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y , th e c o r r e c
t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s j u s t d e s c rib e d can be c l a s s i f i e d a s
fo llo w s :
1 . B oys’ R epublic' I (BR I )
Goal o r i e n t a t i o n : in t h i s r e s p e c t BR I can be con
s id e r e d a s a tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n
b ecau se th e r e seemed to be more em phasis upon t r a i n i n g and
ch an g in g th e a t t i t u d e s o f th e o ffe n d e rs th a n k e ep in g them
u n d e r t i g h t c o n tr o l o r p u n ish in g them . M oreover, th e r e
were no w a lls n o r fe n c e s around th e grounds, n o r was th e
c u s to d ia l fo rc e l a r g e .
S cope: th e scope o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r a c t i o n was
b ro a d . T here was o n ly a lim ite d e x te n t o f i n t e r a c t i o n w ith
th e su rro u n d in g com m unity. In a d d it i o n , many a s p e c ts o f
re g im e n ta tio n were i n e f f e c t .
D e c isio n -m a k in g : th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f o ffe n d e rs
and lo w e r e c h e lo n s o f s t a f f members i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g
p ro c e s s was l im i te d .
On th e b a s is o f th e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s BR I seems
b e s t c a te g o r iz e d a s a tr e a tm e n t— t o t a l — p erem p to iy ty p e o f
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n .
72
2 . B oys’ R ep u b lic I I (BR I I )
Goal o r i e n t a t i o n : t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n was a ls o
b a s i c a l l y tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d , w ith th e m ain em phasis on
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n r a t h e r th a n c o n fin e m e n t.
S cope: th e scope o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r a c t i o n was
s t i l l w id e , a lth o u g h some a tte m p t was made to in c re a s e th e
i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e o u ts id e com m unity, and a t th e same
tim e to d e c re a se somewhat th e e x te n t o f re g im e n ta tio n .
D e cisio n -m ak in g : th e r e was a c l e a r change i n
r e g a r d to th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s . The o ffe n d e rs have
been p ro v id e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n in d e c isio n -m a k in g and a ls o in
th e r e h a b i l i t a t i v e p r o c e s s .
T h is o r g a n iz a tio n seems to f i t th e d e s c r ip tio n o f
th e tr e a tm e n t— t o t a l — p a r t i c i p a t o i y o r g a n iz a tio n o f th e
su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y .
3* S ilv e r la k e E xperim ent (SL)
Goal o r i e n t a t i o n : t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n i s tre a tm e n t-
o r i e n t e d , h a v in g th e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f o ffe n d e rs as th e
m ain g o a l o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n .
S cope: th e scope o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l i n t e r a c t i o n
i s r e l a t i v e l y n a rro w . The o rg a n iz a tio n i s lo c a te d i n th e
m id s t o f th e com m unity, and th e o ffe n d e r s a re i n a c o n s ta n t
i n t e r a c t i o n w ith th e members o f th e com m unity.
D e c isio n -m a k in g : th e o ffe n d e rs ta k e an a c tiv e p a r t
b o th i n th e r e h a b i l i t a t i v e and th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s .
T h is c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n r e p r e s e n ts th e
treatment— mediatoiy— participatoiy organization in the
suggested typology. If the typology developed in
Chapter II is valid, and if the three organizations just
described operate at all consistently with their stated
design, then those organizations should be perceived
differently by the staff and offenders who participate in
them. In order to test the validity of this conclusion,
answers were sought for the following questions: (1) to
what extent do staff and offenders in the three organiza
tions perceive an emphasis upon treatment versus custodial
goals? (2) to what degree is there the support for organi
zational norms? (3) to what extent is the system of sanc
tions in each of the organizations perceived as reward or
punishment oriented? (*+) to what extent do staff and
offenders perceive themselves as divided into separate
subsystems? (5) to what extent are offenders perceived as
participating in the basic decision-making process? and
(6) to what degree is there a consensus between offenders
and staff on basic goals, norms, sanctions, stratification,
and the decision-making process in the different organiza
tions?
If the typology is accurate, the response of staff
and offenders to such issues should vaiy depending upon
their membership in the three different organizational
settings.
CHAPTER V
THE INSTRUMENT A ND THE DATA COLLECTION
In o rd e r to answ er th e m ajo r q u e s tio n s posed i n th e
l a s t c h a p te r , a s p e c ia l q u e s tio n n a ire ^ w hich was con
s t r u c te d f o r th e p u rp o se s o f a l a r g e r stu d y (Empey and
i
lu b e c k , 1970) was u t i l i z e d . I t was d e sig n e d to exam ine
f o u r m ajo r c h a r a c te r iz in g f a c t o r s o f o r g a n iz a tio n s , nam ely:
g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n , th e n o rm ativ e sy ste m , th e n a tu re o f san c
t i o n s , and th e system o f s t r a t i f i c a t i o n .
Goal O r ie n ta tio n
Goal o r i e n t a t i o n sh o u ld h e lp to in d ic a te w h e th er
c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s a re tr e a tm e n t o r cu sto d y
o r ie n te d . As S t r e e t , V in te r , and Perrow (1 9 6 6 :4 8 ) p o in t
o u t:
^Problem s c o n n e c te d w ith th e q u e s tio n n a ire m ethod
( C ic o u r e l, 19 6 4 :1 0 9 -1 1 1 ) were ta k e n i n t o c o n s id e r a tio n .
E s p e c ia lly W h e e le r's (1 9 5 8 :1 3 ) s ta te m e n t re g a rd in g problem s
w ith t h i s m ethod i n th e c o r r e c tio n a l c o n te x t were w e ll
ta k e n : " L im ita tio n s o f q u e s tio n n a ire m ethods a re w e ll
known. Some o f th e s e l i m i t a t i o n s a re p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p a re n t
when a p p lie d to a p o p u la tio n t h a t i s c o m p a ra tiv e ly l e s s
l i t e r a t e and more s u s p ic io u s th a n m ost p o p u la tio n s s tu d ie d
by s o c i o l o g i s t s . . . . These c o n d itio n s make i t n e c e s s a ry
to e x e r t more th a n th e u s u a l amount o f c a re in th e con
s t r u c t i o n and th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e ."
75
76
The primary elements of the goal definition refer
to the kinds of change sought in the inmates and
the ways they should behave once such changes have
been achieved.
Presumably, if the typology has merit and if organizational
practices are at all consistent with stated objectives,
then there should be some differences in the way staff and
offenders perceive those objectives. (The entire question
naire is presented in the appendix.) An example of the
kinds of items that were used to determine goal perceptions
is as follows:
This place usually seems more concerned with keeping
boys under control than with helping them with their
problems.
Agree Undecided Disagree
Organizational Norms
The second focal area is concerned with organiza
tional norms. The review of the literature implies that
there will be differences in the perception and ratifica
tion of organizational norms, depending upon the extent to
which organizations vary along the continuing of treatment-
custody, total-mediatory, and/or peremptory-participatoiy.
One of the questions asked in this context was as
follows:
Would you agree or disagree? Most boys here are
interested in just getting by while they are here.
They do not care to learn about why they did the
things that got them in trouble or how to change.
Agree Undecided Disagree
77
Sanctions
S a n c tio n s a re th e m echanism s o f norm e n fo rc e m e n t.
The system o f s a n c tio n in g (re w a rd s , p u n ish m en ts) depends
on th e n a tu r e o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n ( E tz io n i , 1961; S t r e e t ,
V in te r , and P errow , 1 9 6 6 ). I f th e su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y i s
u s e f u l , i t w ill be p o s s ib le to tr a c e d if f e r e n c e s o f p e rc e p
t io n s r e g a rd in g th e system o f s a n c tio n in g among th e p a r
t i c i p a n t s o f th e d i f f e r e n t o r g a n iz a tio n s .
S ta te m e n ts d e sig n e d to e l i c i t p e rc e p tio n s re g a rd in g
t h i s c o n te n t a re a were o f th e fo llo w in g n a tu r e :
Staff rewards boys for good behavior
Agree Undecided Disagree
Staff punishes boys for bad behavior
Agree U ndecided D isag ree
Boys rew ard o th e r boys f o r good b e h a v io r
Agree Undecided Disagree
Boys punish other boys for bad behavior
Agree Undecided Disagree
System of Stratification
This content area refers, in the current study, to
the existence of different sybsystems in the organization.
The review of literature suggests that in certain types of
correctional organizations there is a cleavage between the
offenders and the staff (Clemmer, 1965; Sykes, 1 9 6 8;
Street, 1965; Scott, 1 9 6 8 ) . A workable typology of
78
c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s w i l l be a b le to s u g g e st th e
e x is te n c e and th e e x te n t o f subsystem s i n th e d i f f e r e n t
o r g a n iz a tio n s .
One o f th e s ta te m e n ts c o n c e rn in g t h i s c o n te n t a re a
i s :
T h is p la c e i s p r e t t y much s p l i t i n to two v e iy
d i f f e r e n t gro u p s w ith s t a f f in one g roup and boys
i n th e o th e r
Agree U ndecided D isag ree
A d m in is tra tio n o f th e Q u e stio n n a ire
The com plete q u e s tio n n a ire was a d m in is te re d to
s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs a t B oys' R ep u b lic I in A ugust 1 9 6 6 .
The num ber o f re s p o n d e n ts was b2 s t a f f members and 127
o f f e n d e r s . It was a d m in is te re d to B oys' R epublic II in
November, 1 9 6 8 . ( A f te r th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l changes had
a lre a d y ta k e n p l a c e .) The num ber o f re s p o n d e n ts a t t h i s
tim e was 58 s t a f f members and l*+3 o f f e n d e r s . A c e r t a i n
unknown num ber o f s t a f f members in B oys' R ep u b lic resp o n d ed
to th e q u e s tio n n a ir e tw ic e s in c e th e y w ere p r e s e n t d u rin g
b o th a d m in is tr a tio n s . T h is f a c t h a s some r a m if ic a tio n f o r
th e a n a ly s is o f th e d a ta , n am ely, BR I s t a f f and BR II
s t a f f c a n n o t be c o n s id e re d a s two in d e p e n d e n t p o p u la tio n s ,
and t h e r e f o r e , th ey w ere a n a ly z e d o n ly d e s c r i p t i v e l y , and
n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y . F i n a l l y , th e q u e s tio n n a ire was a d m in is
te r e d f o u r tim e s i n th e S ilv e r la k e E x p erim en t b ecau se o f
th e sm a ll number o f p a r t i c i p a n t s a t any one tim e . The
d a te s o f a d m in is tr a tio n s w ere: Ja n u a ry 27? 1966; Ju n e 2?
1966; Ja n u a iy 5? 1967; and June *f? 1 9 6 8 . T h e .f in a l p o p u la
t i o n o f SL was n in e s t a f f members and s ix ty -tw o o f fe n d e rs ?
each o f whom f i l l e d th e q u e s tio n n a ire o u t only o n c e. The
num ber o f re s p o n d e n ts i n each o rg a n iz a tio n a re d is p la y e d
i n T able 1 .
The o ffe n d e r p o p u la tio n in th e th re e o r g a n iz a tio n s
was co m p rised o f boys betw een th e ag es o f f i f t e e n to
e ig h te e n a t th e tim e o f t h e i r e n tra n c e to th e p ro g ram . The
m a jo rity o f them w ere r e s i d e n t s o f S o u th e rn C a lif o r n ia ?
m ost o f whom had f a i l e d on p r o b a tio n . In f a c t? a b o u t
25 p e r c e n t o f them had a lre a d y s p e n t tim e i n v a rio u s c o r
r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . No p s y c h o tic s ? d ru g “a d d ic ts and
sex o ff e n d e r s w ere in c lu d e d i n th e p ro g ram s.
The s im ila r backgrounds o f th e th r e e o ffe n d e r popu
l a t i o n s s u g g e s t t h a t th e p o s s ib le d if f e r e n c e s in t h e i r p e r
c e p tio n s re g a rd in g th e s o c ia l sy stem s w i l l r e f l e c t c l e a r l y
th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l im p a ct and w i l l be in d e p e n d e n t o f
" dem ographic" f a c t o r s .
80
TABLE 1
THE POPULATION OP THE STUDY
^ ^ - " v ^ O r g a n i z a t i on
P a r t i c i p a n t
Group
BR I BR II SL ■ T o ta l
S t a f f k-2 58
9
109
O ffe n d e rs 12 7
l*+3 62 332
T o ta l
169
201 71
Mfl
CHAPTER VI
THE ANALYSIS OF THE LATA
In o rd e r to s im p lify th e a n a l y s i s , re s p o n se s to
each o f th e o r d in a l Item s in th e q u e s tio n n a ire were d i s
t r i b u t e d on a th r e e - p o in t s c a le * A ll th o se re s p o n se s
w hich a g re e d w ith a g iv e n q u e s tio n n a ire sta te m e n t w ere
/
g iv e n a +10 sc o re ; th o s e which were u n d e cid ed were g iv e n a
0 s c o re ; and a l l th o se w hich d is a g re e d w ere g iv e n a -1 0
s c o re .
P o r exam ple, in re sp o n se to th e ite m :
I f guys around h e re r e a l l y w ant t o , th e y can
u s u a lly sh a re in d e c is io n s ab o u t how t h i s p la c e
i s r u n .
A ll "ag re e" re s p o n se s were coded +10, a l l
"u n d ecid ed " re sp o n se s w ere coded 0 , and a l l " d is a g re e "
re s p o n se s were coded - 1 0 . The c o l l e c t i v e re sp o n se s f o r
each group on each ite m were th e n grouped in to a s in g le
sc o re by ad d in g up th e t o t a l p lu s and m inus s c o re s and
s u b tr a c tin g one t o t a l from th e o t h e r . Then, th e r e s i d u a l
was d iv id e d by th e t o t a l number o f re s p o n d e n ts .
T o ta l P lu s S c o res - T o ta l Minus S co res
Group S c a le Score = Number o f R espondents
The m ain a d v an tag e o f th e s c a le sc o re was t h a t i t
81
82
gave one sum m arized m easure f o r th e whole group on each
s c a la b le ite m , which was th e n e a s i l y com pared to th e
m easures o f th e o th e r g ro u p s.
On th o se ite m s w hich c o u ld n o t be coded in t h i s way
(th o s e w hich e l i c i t e d nom inal d a t a ) , sim ple p e rc e n ta g e d i s
t r i b u t i o n s were u se d in p r e s e n tin g th e f in d in g s .
S t a t i s t i c a l com parisons co n cern ed w ith d e g re e s o f
a s s o c ia tio n s o r d if f e r e n c e s among o ffe n d e rs were c o n d u cted
on th e b a s is o f two m easu res: (1 ) a m easure o f a s s o c ia -
tion-gam m a, w hich i s a p p lic a b le to o r d in a l d a ta and h a s a
PEE i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (C o s tn e r, 1965); (2 ) a t e s t o f s i g n i f i
c a n c e - c h i- s q u a r e , w hich can be a p p lie d b o th to nom inal and
o r d in a l d a ta . These m ethods were n o t u se d f o r th e s t a f f
g ro u p s, because th e BE I I s t a f f were n o t an in d ep e n d en t
group from BR I s t a f f (some s t a f f members were in c lu d e d in
b o th g ro u p s ). T hus, th e s e d a ta would n o t answ er th e th e o
r e t i c a l assu m p tio n s o f m ost s t a t i s t i c a l m e a su re s. A ddi
t i o n a l l y , in SL th e s t a f f was com prised o f n in e in d iv id u a ls
(due to changes in th e s t a f f d u rin g th e c o ll e c t io n o f th e
d a ta Ja n u a iy 1967 - June 1 9 6 9 ) and only v e iy s t r i n g e n t
s t a t i s t i c a l m easures would be a p p lic a b le to h an d le t h i s
sm a ll num ber.
The ffindings
I t w i l l be r e c a l l e d t h a t th e e m p iric a l a n a ly s is i s
d ir e c te d to an e x am in a tio n o f s ix m ajo r q u e s tio n s : (1 ) to
w hat e x te n t do s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e an em phasis
upon tr e a tm e n t v e rs u s c u s to d ia l g o a ls ? (2 ) to w hat d eg ree
i s th e r e th e su p p o rt f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l norm s? (3 ) to what
e x te n t i s th e system o f s a n c tio n s p e rc e iv e d a s rew ard o r
pun ishm ent o rie n te d ? (4 ) to w hat e x te n t do s t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e th em se lv e s as b e in g d iv id e d i n to
s e p a ra te su b sy stem s? (5 ) to w hat e x te n t a re o ffe n d e rs p e r
c e iv e d a s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n th e b a s ic d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro
c e s s ? (6 ) to w hat d e g re e i s th e re a co n sen su s betw een th e
p e rc e p tio n s o f s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs on th e p re c e d in g f iv e
q u e s tio n s ?
L et u s c o n s id e r th e s e q u e s tio n s one by one. These
q u e s tio n s were a d d re ss e d to examine m ajo r elem en ts w hich
a re common to a l l fo rm al o r g a n iz a tio n s , nam ely: g o a l
o r i e n t a t i o n , th e n o rm a tiv e sy ste m , th e n a tu re o f s a n c tio n s ,
th e sy stem o f s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s ,
and c o n sen su s i n th e o r g a n iz a tio n . I t was assumed t h a t
d if f e r e n c e s in p a tt e r n s o f p e rc e p tio n would emerge a s a
r e s u l t o f th e s t r u c t u r a l d if f e r e n c e s o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n s
( i . e . , tr e a tm e n t— t o t a l — perem ptory v s . tre a tm e n t— t o t a l —
p a r t i c i p a t o i y v s . tre a tm e n t—m e d ia to ry — p a r t i c i p a t o r y
p o l i c i e s ) .
(1 ) P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e E m phasis upon T r e a t
m ent V ersus C u s to d ia l G o als.
S in c e th e d e ta il e d d e s c r ip tio n s o f b o th th e th e o
r e t i c a l and c o r r e c t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s o f th e th re e
o rg a n iz a tio n s su g g e ste d th e y w ere a l l tre a tm e n t r a t h e r th a n
c u s to d y - o r ie n te d , i t seemed w ise to assume t h a t th e y would
a l l be lo c a te d tow ard th e tre a tm e n t end o f th e c u s to d y -
tre a tm e n t continuum . None o f them , f o r exam ple, made u s e
o f p h y s ic a l r e s t r a i n t s , n o r d id th e y have s iz a b le s u p e r
v is o r y s t a f f s . C o n se q u e n tly , th e o r g a n iz a tio n s i n th e
a n a ly s is a re a d d re sse d a s to ta l-p e re m p to ry (BR I ) , t o t a l -
p a r t i c i p a t o i y (BR I I ) , and m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to iy (SL)
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s , w ith th e tre a tm e n t-c u s to d y
dim ension o f th e ty p o lo g y g iv e n r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e a tt e n t i o n .
However, a s in d ic a te d i n T able 2 , we sh o u ld e x p e c t to f in d
im p o rta n t d if f e r e n c e s among s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs in th e
th r e e o rg a n iz a tio n s r e l a t i v e to t h e i r p e rc e p tio n s o f
o r g a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls .
a . Members o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to iy o rg a n i
z a tio n sh o u ld be more in c lin e d th a n th e o th e r s to p e rc e iv e
tre a tm e n t g o a ls a s m ost im p o rta n t.
b . Members o f th e to ta l-p e r e m p to r y (BR I ) o rg a n i
z a tio n sh o u ld be more in c l i n e d to p e rc e iv e th e preem inence
o f c u s to d ia l g o a ls th a n th e members o f th e o th e r o rg a n iz a
t i o n s .
c . Members o f th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I )
o rg a n iz a tio n sh o u ld e x p re s s p e rc e p tio n s w hich a re i n an
in te rm e d ia ry p o s itio n betw een th e members o f th e o th e r
o r g a n iz a tio n s .
In a g e n e ra l s e n s e , th e a n a ly s is o f o ffe n d e r
table 2a
CUSTODIAL VS. TREATM ENT ORIENTATION (GENERAL)
S c a le S c o r es
Item
0 f f e n d e r s S t a f f
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
This place usually seems
more concerned with keeping
boys under control than
with helping them with their
problems
-2 .1 3 -2 .2 7 -5 .1 6 -7.1M- -b .lb -1 0 .0 0
oo
v n
TABLE 2b
CUSTODIAL VS. TREATM ENT ORIENTATION (GENERAL)
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures
BR I BR I I O ffend
e r s
BR I SL Offend
e r s
BR I I SL O ffend-
e r s
Item
cd
cd
so
o
J M
cd
•H 0
Xl a*
O co Ph
cd
t»0
C D
u
cd
•H
x j a 1
o co P M
i
(30
< »
cd
•H $
& c r <
O C O
P M
T his p la c e u s u a lly
seems more con
cern ed w ith keep
in g boys u n d e r
c o n tr o l th a n w ith
h e lp in g them w ith
t h e i r problem s
(d eg ree o f freedom
= 2)
. 0 1 3 . 0
< .9 9
.304-
5 .9
< . 1 0
.293
5.4- < . 1 0
00
ON
re s p o n s e s p resen ted , in T ab les 2a and 2b su p p o rt th e assum p
t io n s j u s t made; n am ely , (1 ) t h a t a l l th r e e o rg a n iz a tio n s
a re tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d , and (2 ) t h a t th e m e d ia to ry -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (SL) i s p e rc e iv e d a s more t r e a t
m e n t-o rie n te d th a n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I),
w ith th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) occupying
an in te rm e d ia ry p o s i t i o n . The sum m arized re sp o n se s o f a l l
th r e e o ffe n d e r g ro u p s were n e g a tiv e to th e fo llo w in g ques
t io n : "T h is p la c e u s u a lly seems more co n cern ed w ith k eep
in g boys u n d e r c o n tr o l th a n w ith h e lp in g them w ith t h e i r
p ro b le m s." T h is means t h a t th e y te n d e d to d is a g re e w ith
th e s ta te m e n t. However, th e re sp o n se s o f o ffe n d e rs i n th e
m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n iz a tio n (SL) were c o n s id e ra b ly
more n e g a tiv e ( - 5 .1 6 ) th a n th o se in th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y
(BR I I ) ( - 2 .2 7 ) o r th e to ta l-p e r e m p to ry (BR I ) ( - 2 .1 3 )
o r g a n iz a tio n . D iffe re n c e s were such t h a t th e y ap p roached
s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) .
The re s p o n se s o f s t a f f m em bers, by c o n t r a s t ,
fo llo w e d a somewhat d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n . F i r s t , s t a f f were
f a r more in c lin e d th a n o ffe n d e rs to. r e j e c t th e n o tio n t h a t
t h e i r o r g a n iz a tio n s were c u s to d y - o rie n te d . Second, t h e i r
re s p o n se s d id n o t fo llo w th e p r e d ic te d p a t t e r n . W hile
s t a f f members a t SL r e j e c t e d th e c u sto d y o r i e n t a t i o n
e n t i r e l y (-1 0 .0 0 ) as was e x p e c te d , th e s t a f f a t BR I w ere
more in c l i n e d to r e j e c t i t ( - 7 . 11 * -) th a n th o se i n BR I I
( - ^ . l 1 *-). The d a ta do n o t e x p la in why, b u t th e ty p o lo g y
88
would have su g g e ste d a re v e rs e p a t t e r n , w ith BR I I , th e
t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o i y o r g a n iz a tio n , h a v in g a h ig h e r r e j e c t i o n
r a t e th a n BR I . The e x am in a tio n o f t h i s is s u e in g r e a t e r
d e t a i l , how ever, r e v e a ls t h a t t h i s d if f e r e n c e may have heen
an anom aly, sin c e o th e r re sp o n se s f o r s t a f f on o th e r ite m s
fo llo w e d th e p r e d ic te d p a t t e r n .
T ab les 3a and 38 p re s e n t more d a ta on th e same
i s s u e s , re s p o n se s to a s e r i e s o f th r e e q u e s tio n s d e sig n e d
to e x p lo re th e e x te n t to w hich a c u sto d y o r ie n ta tio n
e x is te d i n th r e e o r g a n iz a tio n s . R espondents were ask ed to
in d ic a te w h eth er th e y a g re e d o r d is a g re e d t h a t th e fo llo w
in g g o a ls were im p o rta n t: (1 ) p r o te c tio n o f th e o u ts id e
com m unity, (2 ) punishm ent o f law v i o l a t i o n s , and (3 ) t r a i n
in g i n d i s c i p l i n e .
The re sp o n se s o f o ffe n d e rs do n o t c o n s is te n tly
fo llo w th e p r e d ic te d p a t t e r n , i f one view s th e s e g o a ls as
c u s to d y - o r ie n te d . The m ost n o ta b le e x c e p tio n was th e SL
o ff e n d e r g ro u p . More th a n o th e r s , th e y ten d e d to view th e
g o a ls o f t h e i r o r g a n iz a tio n a s fa v o rin g p r o te c tio n o f th e
o u ts id e community and t r a i n i n g in d i s c ip l i n e (a lth o u g h
d if f e r e n c e s betw een them and o th e rs d id n o t approach
s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e ) .
The o n ly c u s to d y -o rie n te d g o a l, w hich was view ed
i n acco rd an ce w ith th e t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c ta tio n s , was
p u n ish m e n t. Here c l e a r l y , th e p a r t i c i p a n t s ( s t a f f and
TABLE 3a
CUSTODIAL ORIENTATION
S c a le S c o r e s
Item
0 f f e n d e ? s S t a f f
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
How. im p o rta n t do you
th in k th e fo llo w in g
g o a ls a re h e re ?
P r o te c tio n o f th e
o u ts id e community
-1 .6 5 -1 .2 1 - .5 0 -2.4-4-
0
■ c-.
•
1
- 1.11
Punishm ent o f law
v i o la t o r s
+ .4-7 0 .0 0 -3 .8 7 -1.4-3 -2 .1 1 -1 0 .0 0
T ra in in g i n d i s c i
p lin e
+1.34- +1.63 +2.4-2
+3.33 +3.93 - 3 .3 3
co
\o
TABLE 3L
CUSTODIAL ORIENTATION
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures
0 f f e n d e r 3
Item
BR I - BR I I BR I - SL BR I I - SL
gamma
i
C hi-
Square
Ph gamma
C hi-
Square
Ph gamma
C hi-
Square
Ph
How im p o rta n t do you
th in k th e fo llo w in g
g o a ls a re h e re ?
P r o te c tio n o f th e
o u ts id e community
d f = 2
-.0 3 9 .9
o
[>-
•
V
-.1 0 2
i r \
.
C M
< .30 . 0 6 t f .8 < .7 0
Punishm ent o f law
v i o la t o r s
d f = 2
.0^6
.3 <•.90 A ll 1 0 .8 <.01 .377 9 .1
< . 0 2
T ra in in g i n d is
c ip lin e
d f = 2
- .0 3 0 .1 <•95
-.1 0 1
l A
< .50
ON
vO
0
.
1
1 .6 < .5 0
91
o f f e n d e r s ) o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y (SL) o r g a n iz a tio n
a t t r i b u t e d th e l e a s t im p o rtan c e to t h i s g o a l w h ile con
v e r s e l y , th e p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th e to ta l-p e re m p to r y (BR I )
o r g a n iz a tio n view ed i t a s m ost im p o rta n t. The s t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs o f th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o r g a n iz a tio n
e x p re s s e d in te rm e d ia ry p o s i t i o n s . These d if f e r e n c e s among
th e o ffe n d e r g ro u p s o f BR I - S i and BR I I - SL a re s i g
n i f i c a n t on th e .01 and .02 l e v e l r e s p e c t iv e ly . T h is o u t
come, w hich i s c l e a r l y i n th e p r e d ic te d d i r e c ti o n i n d ic a t e s
t h a t th e punishm ent o f law v i o l a t o r s i s a c u s to d y -o rie n te d
g o a l w ith o u t any c o n tro v e rs y ab o u t i t .
T ab les *ta and ^-b p re s e n t th e p e rc e p tio n s o f
re s p o n d e n ts re g a rd in g w hat m ight be c o n s id e re d as tre a tm e n t
g o a ls : ( a ) t r a i n i n g th ro u g h e d u c a tio n and w ork,^ and
(b ) th e ch an g in g o f a t t i t u d e s o f boys so th e y w i l l u n d e r
s ta n d th e m se lv e s b e t t e r .
W ith re g a rd to t r a i n i n g th ro u g h e d u c a tio n and w ork,
o ffe n d e rs i n b o th p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n s te n d to
a ff ir m t h i s o b je c tiv e more s tr o n g ly th a n boys in th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) . D if f e r e n c e s , how ever, were
n o t g r e a t m aking th e m ost s i g n i f i c a n t f in d in g th e f a c t t h a t
iT he p e rc e p tio n o f t h i s g o a l a s tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d
m ig h t be somewhat q u e s tio n a b le , s i n c e , a s S t r e e t , V in te r ,
and Perrow (1966) i n d i c a t e , i t i s m ost commonly a s s o c ia te d
w ith a " re e d u c a tio n /d e v e lo p m e n t" o r g a n iz a tio n r a t h e r th a n
one w hich c o n c e n tr a te s upon such c l i n i c a l g o a ls a s p e rs o n a l
i t y c h a n g e . However, th e is s u e i s a sem an tic one and i s
u se d h e re to i n d ic a te any change t h a t m ig h t f a c i l i t a t e
f u tu r e a d ju s tm e n t in s o c i e t y .
TABLE l*a
TREATMENT ORIENTATION
Scale Scores
Item
Offenders Staff
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
How important do you
think the following
goals are here?
Training through edu
cation and work
Changing the feelings
and attitudes
+6.38
+5.79
+7.^9
+7.28
+7.10
+8.71
+8.57
+9.52
+ 8.10
+ 9.^7
+ 2 .2 2
+10.00
VO
to
TABLE Iffc
TREATMENT ORIENTATION
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures
0 f f e n d e r s
Item
BR ][ - BR I I BR I - SL BR I I - SL
a J
t w o C hi-
Square
P M gamma
C hi-
Square
P M C hi-
Square
P M
How im p o rta n t do
you th in k th e
fo llo w in g g o a ls
a re h e re ?
T ra in in g th ro u g h
e d u c a tio n and work
d f = 2
-.1 5 0 3 .0 .30
0
.
1
.9
< .7 0
.057 .2 .90
Changing th e f e e l
in g s and a t t i t u d e s
d f = 2
-.2 5 7 3 .7
o
C M
.
-.5 6 6
8 .9
< .02 -.3 5 7 2 .7 .30
V O
u>
9**
a l l th r e e gro u p s te n d to p e rc e iv e t h i s o b je c tiv e a s im por
t a n t .
Among s t a f f , th e r e were some im p o rta n t d i f f e r e n c e s .
While s t a f f members i n BE I and BR I I saw t r a i n i n g a s
h ig h ly im p o rta n t (+ 8 .5 7 and + 8 .1 0 ) s t a f f members a t SL
p e rc e iv e d i t a s much l e s s im p o rta n t ( + 2 .2 2 ) . Empey and
Lubeck (1970s C h ap ter 9 ) o f f e r a f e a s i b l e e x p la n a tio n f o r
t h i s f i n d in g . A ccording to them , i t m ig h t be due to th e
s t a f f ' s p re o c c u p a tio n w ith " m a in ta in in g c o n tr o ls in th e
open community and o f ch an g in g d e lin q u e n ts p o in t o f view "
r a t h e r th a n e d u c a tin g them . S t a f f a t SL see th e a tta in m e n t
o f th e t r a i n i n g g o a l a s o u t o f t h e i r d i r e c t sp h e re o f
in f lu e n c e . D iffe re n c e s among s t a f f g ro u p s , how ever, were
n o t c o n s id e r a b le . In f a c t , a l l o f them seem to f e e l t h a t
t h e i r m ajo r o b je c tiv e s a re th o se o f ch an g in g f e e l in g s and
a t t i t u d e s .
In c o n c lu s io n , t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c ta tio n s were n o t
s u p p o rte d . W ith r e s p e c t to th e two " p u re s t" g o a ls , "pun
ish m en t o f th e o f fe n d e rs " ( c u s t o d i a l ) , and "changing th e
f e e l in g s and a t t i t u d e s " ( tre a tm e n t o r ie n te d ) th e y w ere
a lm o st c o m p le te ly c o n firm e d . How ever, th e y were n o t con
firm e d w ith r e s p e c t to g o a ls w hich were s u b je c t to l o c a l
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and v a r i a t i o n . I t m ig h t be th e c a se t h a t
th e d is c re p a n c y betw een th e t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c ta tio n s and
th e p a t t e r n s o f p e rc e p tio n s stem s from c o n c e p tu a l
95
d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e p a r t i c i p a n t s and th o se who s tu d y
c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s . F o r ex am p le, C ressey (1 9 6 1 :5 )
p o in ts o u t a s th e f i r s t purpose o f th e t r a d i t i o n a l p r is o n
th e " p r o te c tio n o f th e com m unity." However, i t was se e n
t h a t t h i s f u n c tio n was v a lu e d a s h ig h ly im p o rta n t among th e
p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th o se o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich a re i n a c o n s ta n t
c o n ta c t w ith th e com m unity» and c o n s id e re d to be more
t r e a tm en t- o r i e n te d .
I f th e s e d is c r e p a n c ie s a re ree x am in ed , th e p a tt e r n s
o f p e rc e p tio n s seem to be f a i r l y c o n s is te n t w ith th e
d if f e r e n c e s in th e c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s and t h e i r
p o l i c i e s .
(2 ) P e rc e p tio n s o f th e Degree to Which th e O rgani
z a t io n a l Norms Are S u p p o rted .
T h e o r e tic a l e x p e c ta tio n s i n t h i s f o c a l a re a o f
in q u ir y s u g g e s t t h a t th e r a t i f i c a t i o n o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l
norms w i l l be h ig h e s t among o ffe n d e rs i n th e m e d ia to ry -
p a r t i c i p a t o i y o rg a n iz a tio n (S L ), and lo w e st in th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) . O ffe n d ers i n th e t o t a l -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) w i l l e x p re s s i n t e r
m ediary v ie w s. C oncerning th e s t a f f g ro u p s , i t seems to
be a h a r d e r ta s k to s t a t e e x p e c ta tio n s . I t would be
f e a s i b l e to su g g e st t h a t th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f s u p p o rt f o r
norm s and r u l e s w i l l be e x p re ss e d by BR I s t a f f , and
p ro b a b ly th e lo w e st e x te n t o f su p p o rt would be e x p re s s e d
by SL s t a f f . The re a s o n in g b e h in d t h i s e x p e c ta tio n would
9 6
be t h a t BR I s t a f f p ro b a b ly would be more r i g i d and t r y to
keep th e r u l e s i n a l l th e s i t u a t i o n s , w h ile SL s t a f f w ould
be m o tiv a te d to e s t a b l i s h a new , more p e rm issiv e and f l e x
i b l e n o rm a tiv e sy ste m .
L e t u s b e g in o u r a n a ly s is w ith th e p e rc e p tio n s o f
norm s i n g e n e r a l. I n Item 1 , T able 5 a , i t w i l l be o b se rv ed
t h a t a l l gro u p s te n d to b e lie v e t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n a l r u l e s
a re h e l p f u l . However, o ffe n d e rs a t SL a ff ir m t h i s p o s i t io n
much more s tr o n g ly th a n o ffe n d e rs i n e i t h e r BR I o r BR I I .
D iffe re n c e s i n b o th c a s e s ap p ro ach s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e
(T able 5 b ).
P e rc e p tio n s among s t a f f members were g e n e r a lly th e
sam e, e x c e p t t h a t , w h ile s t a f f i n a l l th re e o rg a n iz a tio n s
d id n o t d i f f e r much from o t h e r , th e y w ere much s tr o n g e r i n
t h e i r a f f ir m a tio n o f th e h e lp f u ln e s s o f th e e x is ti n g r u l e s
th a n w ere th e o f f e n d e r s . A p p a ren tly th e y f e l t more
s tr o n g ly th a n o ffe n d e rs t h a t e x is ti n g r u l e s a re h e l p f u l .
Ite m 2 i n T a b le s 5a and 5b a p p ro a ch e s t h i s same
is s u e from a n e g a tiv e p e r s p e c tiv e . R espondents w ere ask ed
to a g re e o r d is a g re e w ith th e s ta te m e n t t h a t "m ost o f th e
r u l e s around h e re d o n 't make much se n se to m e." A lm ost
th e same p a t t e r n e m e rg es. O ffen d ers te n d e d to r e j e c t t h i s
s ta te m e n t, e s p e c i a l l y S ilv e r la k e b o y s, e x p re s s in g a g e n e r a l
s u p p o rt f o r e x is ti n g r u l e s . S t a f f members were even
s tr o n g e r i n t h e i r r e j e c t i o n , e x c e p t S ilv e r la k e s t a f f who
TABLE 5a
PERCEPTIONS OP ORGANIZATIONAL N O R M S
S cale S co res
Item s
0 f f e n d e r s S t a f f
BR I BR I I SL BR I BR I I SL
What do you th in k
ah o u t th e r u l e s
h e re ? H e lp fu l +;
U ndecided 0; Not
H e lp fu l -
+3.23 + 3. A +5.97 +8.78 + 7.2^ +7.78
Most o f th e r u le s
around h e re d o n 't
make much sen se to
me
- 2 M -2 .3 9
- 5 M -7 .3 8 -5 .1 8 +1.11
Most o f th e boys
h e re a re i n te r e s te d
i n j u s t g e ttin g by.
They d o n 't c a re to
le a r n a b o u t why th e y
d id th in g s t h a t g o t
them i n tr o u b le o r
how to ch an g e.
+2.13 + 3.71 -1 .9 ^
0 .0 +1.21 -*f .M + -
TABLE 5b
PERCEPTIONS OP ORGANIZATIONAL NORMS
Statistical Measurements
Items
O f f e n d e r s
BR I - BR II
-S IL
©
. 3
3 &
O C O _SdL
BR I - SL
Ja.
BR II - SL
©
. 3
-Q.P3- _ £ ± .
What do you think
ahout the rules
here?
df = 2
Most o f th e r u le s
around h e re d o n 't
make much sen se to
me.
df = 2
Most of the boys
here are interested
in just getting by.
They do not care to
learn about why
they did things
that got them in
trouble or how to
change.
df = 2
-.0 7 9
-.010
- l . k l
1 .5
.09
5.b
< .5 0
< .9 5
<.10
-.3 6 5
.307
.368
7 .0
5 .7
11.0
< .0 5
<.10
<.01
- . 2 * * 8
.31b
.510
b .8
6 .5
1 9 .0
<.10
< .0 5
<.001
'vo
te n d e d s l i g h t l y to a g re e w ith th e s ta te m e n t. T here i s no
way o f l o g i c a l l y e x p la in in g t h i s c o n tr a d ic to r y re sp o n se
when i n Item 1 SL s t a f f members su p p o rte d e x i s t i n g r u l e s .
P 3rhaps i t i s due to th e sm all N in v o lv e d where one o r two
members c o u ld change th e s ig n o f th e s c a le sc o re f o r th e
a c c e p ta n c e o f th e ite m . A nother p o s s ib le e x p la n a tio n o f
t h i s r e s u l t m ight be t h a t a lth o u g h SL s t a f f members te n d e d
n o t to se e o r g a n iz a tio n a l r u l e s a s m aking much s e n s e , th e y
d id b e lie v e t h a t th o se a re h e lp f u l i n ru n n in g sm oothly th e
p ro g ram .
P erh ap s th e m ost s i g n i f i c a n t re s p o n s e s may be found
i n Item 3> T ab les 5a and 5b. When ask ed to a g re e o r d i s
a g re e t h a t boys a re p r im a r ily i n t e r e s t e d i n " g e ttin g by"
r a t h e r th a n c h a n g in g , SL o ffe n d e rs te n d e d to d is a g re e w h ile
BR I and BR I I o ff e n d e r s te n d e d to a g r e e . As may be seen
in T able 5b, d if f e r e n c e s were h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t . W hile
t h i s f in d in g would conform to t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c ta tio n , th e
f in d in g t h a t BR I I o f f e n d e r s a g re e more s tr o n g ly w ith th e
s ta te m e n t th a n BR I o ffe n d e rs does n o t . One would have
e x p e c te d th e re v e rs e p a t t e r n . An e d u c a te d g u e ss w ould be
t h a t i t o c c u rre d b e ca u se BR I I boys w ere s t i l l a d a p tin g to
th e d a ily group p r o c e s s , and were s t i l l p ro b in g i t . D uring
th e s e r e l a t i v e l y e a r ly p h a s e s , a l l o f th e m a n ip u la tio n s
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f any c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n a re j u s t
com ing to l i g h t . In a perem ptory o r g a n iz a tio n such
100
manipulations tend to remain hidden until they are dealt
with in the groups; therefore, they tend to affect everyone
veiy strongly.
Responses of staff members, meanwhile, followed the
same general pattern, except that they tended tp reject the
item more strongly than offenders; that is, they tended to
perceive a greater willingness among boys to change than
boys themselves did. Again staff, like offenders in BR II,
tended to perceive the most unwillingness on behalf of the
offenders to change.
Another possible way of viewing norms is to examine
the ways in which prestige is granted. Who gets prestige
and for what reasons? If prestige is associated with
change and reformation, then one might assume that norms
favoring rehabilitation are supported.
Tables 6a and 6b are concerned with this issue. An
interesting pattern may be observed. Offenders at SL were
more inclined to grant prestige to those boys who made it
clear that they want to stay out of trouble than the other
two groups. By contrast, the latter were more inclined to
look up to boys who had worked their ways up to official
positions within their respective organizations. Boys at
SL and at BR II were also more inclined to grant prestige
to staff than boys in BR I. Finally, relatively few boys
in any organization favored those offenders who were
TABLE 6a
TH E PERCEPTIONS OP THE PEESTIGE SYSTEM IN THE ORGANIZATIONS
P e r c e n ta g e s
Items
0 f Fender s s t a f f
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
Whom do you look up to?
The hoys who worked their
way up to an official posi
tion Boys' Govt., Jr. Staff
b2.7 lfl.0
26.3
56.8
35.3 12.5
Boys who make it clear they
want to stay out of trouble
36.3 30.5 50.9 29.7 37.3 62.5
The "sly" guy who wants to
look good to staff but is
still getting in trouble
b.8 7.6 1.8 0.0
3.9 12.5
Staff
11.3
20.0
17.5 10.8 23.5 12.5
The hard guy who openly
defies staff and rules
2.b 0.0
3.5 2.7 0.0 0.0
The follower who is likely
to go either way
2.b 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TABLE 6b
THE PERCEPTIONS OP THE PRESTIGE SYSTEM IN THE ORGANIZATIONS
Statistical Measurements
O f f e n d e r s
Items
BR I - BR II BR
I - SL BR II - SL
gamma
i
— i
Q )
h
1 « )
3 § •
O C O P M
ii
SO
Chi-
Square
fk gamma
[Chi-
Square
i
P M
Whom do you look
up to?
d f = 5
—
7M < . 2 0
—
8 .3
< . 2 0 —
13 .1 < .0 5
102
103
remaining delinquent or trying to beat the system,
especially those at SL.
The responses of staff members followed the same
general pattern except that the differences noted were even
more pronounced. Staff members at SL and BR I, especially,
occupied polar positions, with SL staff favoring boys who
wanted to change, while BR I staff favored boys who occu
pied positions within the organization. This would seem to
be a significant finding, testifying perhaps to the insular
characteristics of total organizations where operations
within the system tend to become excessively important.
This pattern of perceptions among staff groups also imply
that BR I and BR II staff probably consider the offender
representatives in the Boys’ Government as agents of con
trol, hence attributing higher prestige to them.
In summary, the perceptions regarding the normative
system tend to support the theoretical expectations.
Generally, the tendency among all the offender groups is to
express supportive perceptions of the organizational rules.
However, the more informal "rehabilitative" norm (changing
of attitudes) does not seem to be supported by the offend
ers of BR I and BR II. The extent of support of this norm
by SL offenders is not very high. This suggests that this
norm is not internalized deeply even by the offenders of
the mediatory-participatory organization.
10^-
(3 ) P e rc e p tio n s R egarding th e System o f S a n c tio n s .
T here a re two b a s ic is s u e s w hich th e ty p o lo g y sug
g e s ts sh o u ld be c o n s id e re d i n com paring th e u se o f sa n c
t io n s i n perem ptory v e rs u s p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n s :
(1 ) who i t i s t h a t l e v i e s th e s a n c tio n s , and (2 ) w h e th e r
th e s e s a n c tio n s a re view ed a s punishm ent o r rew ard o rie n te d .
T ab les 7a and 7b a re co n cern ed w ith th e f i r s t
i s s u e . When asked who e n fo rc e s th e r u l e s i n each o f th e
o r g a n iz a tio n s — s t a f f , b o y s, o r s t a f f and boys to g e th e r — th e
m a jo r ity o f a l l o ffe n d e r re sp o n d e n ts r e p o r te d t h a t i t was a
j o i n t e f f o r t . But w h ile more SL and BR I I boys (71 p e r
c e n t) to o k t h i s p o s i t i o n , a s c o n tr a s te d to BR I boys (62
p e r c e n t ) , few er o f th e rem ain in g SL boys b e lie v e d t h a t
r u le en fo rcem en t was p r im a r ily a s t a f f f u n c tio n (SL, 8 p e r
c e n t v e rs u s 18 p e r c e n t f o r BR I and 16 p e r c e n t f o r
BR I I ) . I n s te a d , a b o u t o n e - f i f t h o f th e SL o ffe n d e rs s a id
t h a t r u l e s were e n fo rc e d by o th e r b o y s.
The pattern for staff members, meanwhile, was
generally the same, although certain specific exceptions
are worth noting. First, eight out of the nine SL staff
said that rule enforcement was a staff/offender joint
effort with only one saying that it was uniquely a staff
function. They differed from SL offenders in indicating
that rule enforcement is not an offender function, while a
significant number of SL boys did see that as an offender
function.
TABLE 7a
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE EXTENT OP PARTICIPATION BY
THE OPPENDERS IN THE SANCTIONING
P e rc e n ta g e s
Item
0 f f e n d e r s £ S t a f f
BR I BR I I SL BR I BR I I SL
W ho e n fo rc e s th e r u le s
h e re ?
S t a f f
18.3
1 6 .1 8 .1 19 .0
3 3 .9
1 1 .1
Boys
1 7 .5
8 .0 2 1 .0 0 .0 1 .8 0 .0
S ta f f and hoys
6 1 .9 7 1 .5 71.0 8 1 .0 64 .3 8 8 .8
No one 2 .4 4 .4 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0
H
o
vn
TABLE 7b
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE EXTENT OP PARTICIPATION BY
THE OPPENDERS IN TH E SANCTIONING
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures
0 f f e n d e r 8
Item BR I - BR I I BR I - SL BR I I - SL
C hi-Square P C hi-Square P C hi-Square P
W ho e n fo rc e s th e
r u l e s h e re ?
d f = 3
6 .5 < .1 0 5 .2 < .20 1 0 .6 < .0 2
107
BR I staff were similarly different from BR I boys.
While they were inclined, like SI staff, to view enforce
ment either as a joint effort (81 per cent) or a staff
effort (19 per cent), they differed from a significant
proportion of boys (17 per cent) who saw other boys as the
source of rule enforcement.
Perhaps the most significant difference, however,
was between BR II staff and offenders. Staff at BR II
(6^f per cent) were less inclined than offenders (71.5 per
cent) to see rule enforcement as a joint function and more
inclined to see it as a staff related (3^ per cent) func
tion. This difference is perplexing. Probably, the
offenders in BR II were impressed by the new policies
introduced to the organization and saw a favorable improve
ment toward their participation in the enforcement of
rules. At the same time the staff members did not feel
this improvement.
Thus, while a surprisingly high percentage of staff
and offenders see the enforcement of rules as a joint func
tion, the pattern tends to fit theoretical expectations
with more respondents in the mediatory-participatory organ
ization (SL) than in the total-peremptory organization
(BR I) acknowledging this endeavor.
Another aspect of the sanctioning systems under
examination is the reward versus punishment orientation in
th e d i f f e r e n t c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
The e x p e c ta tio n s d e riv e d from th e l i t e r a t u r e and
th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p o lo g y s u g g e st t h a t th e s a n c tio n in g
system w i l l he seen a s m ost re w a rd -o rie n te d in th e
m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n (SL) and i t w i l l he
view ed a s th e m ost p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d i n th e t o t a l -
p erem p to iy o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) . The s a n c tio n in g sy stem
w i l l he seen in an in te rm e d ia ry p o s i t io n i n th e t o t a l -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) .
A s e t o f f o u r ite m s was u se d to d eterm in e w h eth er
s a n c tio n s were p e rc e iv e d as rew ard o r p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d ,
and who p ro v id e d them . The ite m s and f in d in g s a re d i s
p la y e d i n T ab les 8a and 8 b .
T hree th in g s s ta n d o u t. F i r s t , a l l th re e o rg a n iz a
t io n s seem to he more punishm ent th a n re w a rd -o rie n te d .
T h is seem s to r e in f o r c e Empey’ s and L ubeck’ s (1970:
C h a p te r 9 )' f in d in g t h a t th e re i s a gap betw een th e e x te n t
o f rew ard and th e e x te n t o f punishm ent i n c o r r e c tio n a l
o r g a n iz a tio n s , punishm ent b ein g se en a s more p r e v a le n t th a n
re w a rd . T h is f in d in g i s e s p e c i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n re g a rd
to th e m e d ia to iy - p a r tic ip a to r y (SL) o r g a n iz a tio n , w here th e
c o r r e c t i o n a l program was d e sig n ed to he re w a rd -o rie n te d f o r
th e o f f e n d e r s , in o r d e r to n e u t r a l i z e th e rew ard in g e f f e c t s
o f th e d e lin q u e n t p e e r g ro u p .
S econd, s t a f f members a re i n c lin e d to see them selves
TABLE 8a
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE NATURE OP THE SANCTIONING SYSTEM
S c a le S c o r e s
Items
0 f f e n d e c a S t a f f
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
1 . Staff reward boys
for good behavior
+2.70 +3.28
+ 1.9^
+8.0*f + 7.86 +5.56
2. Boys reward boys
for good behavior
-1 .3 5
+ 2.97 +1.29
+3.66
+ .73
+2.22
3 .
Staff punish boys
for bad behavior
+6.5*f +7.73 +2.90 +8.81 + 6.91 + 6.67
i f. Boys punish boys
for bad behavior
+ 6.5^
+6.62 +7.58 +6.^-3 +3.09 +7 . 78
109
TABLE 8b
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE NATURE OP THE SANCTIONING SYSTEM
S t a t i s t i c a l M easures
Item s
O f f e n d e r s
BR I - BR II BR I - SL BR II - SL
ri S < d 8
td
©
fH
E i a 1 G )
Q i cd
E
a i as 1 as
*0 o m P h fa O C Q Ph t)0
O C O P h
oo
0
1— 1
.
1
1 2 . 8 < .0 1 .037 1 0 .6 < .01 .130 1 . 2 < .7 0
- »bl2 2 1 . 8 < .001
i
•
ro
¥
7 .3
< .1 0 .170 1 . 8 < .7 0
-.2 3 7
2 . 8 < .3 0 . i f 2 2 9 .8 < .01 .597 2 1 . 2 <.001
i
.
o
IV )
VO
.2 * f < .9 0 -.2 ^ 3
2 . ^ <.5o -.2 1 5 1 .7 < .7 0
1 . S t a f f rew ard beys
f o r good behavior
d f = 2
2 . Boys rew ard boys
f o r good behavior
d f = 2
3 . S t a f f p u n ish
boys f o r bad
b e h a v io r
d f = 2
b . Boys p u n ish
boys f o r bad
b e h a v io r
__________ d f = 2
I l l
as providing more rewards than hoys perceive. This indi
cates the existence of a gap between staff members and the
offenders: staff incline to construct a much more favor
able self image than the offenders attribute to them.
Third, the participator organizations (SL and
BR II) are not notably more reward-oriented than the per
emptory organization (BR I). In fact, the staff at SL see
themselves as providing fewer rewards than the other two
staff groups. Thus, the findings did not conform to the
theoretical expectation. The only significant exception to
this conclusion is inherent in the finding that SL offend
ers tend to perceive a lower extent of punishment from the
staff than offenders in the other organizations, or even
than their staff counterparts. What they and SL staff did
see, however, was a greater indication of boys at SL pun
ishing other boys. The finding can be seen as some con
firmation of the fact that an antidelinquent culture had
developed there, but apparently it provided for too few
rewards for nondelinquent behavior as compared to punish
ments for delinquent behavior.
A somewhat different picture was received after a
•'punishment-orientation index" had been constructed. This
index, presented in Table 9> combines the total reward
scores and the total punishment scores for each participant
group. The index was constructed by combining the scale
TABLE 9
INDEX 03? "PUNISHMENT ORIENTATION"
0 f f e n d e r s S t a f f
BR I BR II SL BR I BR II SL
11.73
8 .2 0
7 .3 5 3 .5 ^ l M 6 .6 7
D iffe re n c e s i n th e Index o f "Punishm ent O r ie n ta tio n " — O ffen d ers - S t a f f
BR I BR I I SL
8 .1 9 6 .6 9 .68
112
113
s c o re s o f ite m s 1 and 2 ( re w a rd s ), and 3 and (p u n ish
m en ts) i n T able 8 a . S in ce th e p e r c e p tio n s te n d e d to i n d i
c a te a h ig h e r e x te n t o f punishm ent o r i e n t a t i o n th a n rew ard
o r i e n t a t i o n i n each o r g a n iz a tio n , th e in d e x shows th e
" p u n is h m e n t- o r ie n ta tio n ." The in d e x was com puted by th e
fo llo w in g fo rm u la :
In d ex f o r i group =
P unishm ents (ite m s 3 + * * •) f o r i group -
Rewards (ite m s 1+2) f o r i group
i - r e p r e s e n ts a p a r t i c u l a r g roup u n d e r c o n s id e r a tio n
The com puted i n d ic e s i n d ic a te t h a t th e m ost
p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d p e rc e p tio n s among o ffe n d e rs were
e x p re s s e d i n th e to ta l-p e r e m p to r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) and
th e l e a s t p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d p e rc e p tio n s w ere e x p re s s e d i n
th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n (SL). T h is f in d
in g s u p p o rts th e e x p e c ta tio n s . The o ffe n d e rs i n th e t o t a l
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) te n d e d to see t h e i r
o r g a n iz a tio n a s more p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d th a n SL o ff e n d e r s
view ed t h e i r own, and l e s s p u n is h m e n t-o rie n te d th a n th e
BR I o f fe n d e rs f e l t a b o u t t h e i r o r g a n iz a tio n ; how ever,
t h e i r p e rc e p tio n s i n t h i s r e s p e c t w ere c lo s e r to th e
m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o f f e n d e r s .
The re s p o n se s o f s t a f f members fo llo w e d a d i f f e r e n t
p a t t e r n . The s t a f f o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n i
z a tio n (SL) p e rc e iv e d th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f p u n ish m en t-
orientation, while the staff of the total-participatory
organization (BR II) perceived the lowest extent of
punishment-orientation. It is possible that the SL staff
who were motivated by the rehabilitation-oriented correc
tional policies, felt frustrated by the use of punishment
to any extent, and therefore they viewed the punishment-
orientation in their own organization reaching such a high
extent. However, it should be mentioned that the percep
tions of the other staff groups seem to be unrealistically
low in comparison to the offenders’ perceptions in this
matter. The closeness of offender and staff "punishment
orientation indices" in the mediatory-participatory organi
zation (SL) seems to indicate a greater understanding
between these two groups about the value of sanctioning
than the understanding found in the other organizations,
especially in the total-peremptory organization (BR I).
In conclusion, the general pattern of perceptions
seems to indicate that although these three organizations
have adopted treatment-oriented correctional policies to
different degrees, they were not successful in changing the
punitive image of juvenile correctional organizations.
(*f) Perceptions Regarding the Extent of Division of
Offenders and Staff into Separate Subsystems.
The review of literature, the theoretical assump
tions, and the suggested typology lead to the expectation
1 15
t h a t th e d iv is io n o f s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs in to com peting
su b sy stem s w i l l be more l i k e l y to be p e rc e iv e d i n t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n s (BR I ) th a n in th e m e d ia to ry -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (SL). Meanwhile th e p e rc e p tio n s
i n th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) would
occupy an in te rm e d ia ry p o s i t i o n .
In g e n e r a l, th e a n a ly s e s i n T ab les 10a and 10b te n d
to . s u p p o rt th e s e e x p e c ta tio n s . In resp o n se to th e s t a t e
m en t, "T h is p la c e i s p r e t t y much s p l i t in to two v e ry
d i f f e r e n t g ro u p s , s t a f f v s , o f f e n d e r s ," th e o ffe n d e rs o f
th e to ta l-p e re m p to r y and t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n s
te n d e d to g iv e an a f f ir m a tiv e an sw er, w h ile o ffe n d e rs in
th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n iz a tio n s tr o n g ly d is a g re e d
(~1 +»35). These d if f e r e n c e s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t
(p < .0 0 1 ) in b o th c a s e s . O ffen d ers o f th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) a s e x p e c te d , a g re e d w ith th e
s ta te m e n t to a h ig h e r e x te n t th a n th e o ffe n d e rs o f th e
t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) , The d if f e r e n c e
betw een th e s e two o f f e n d e r groups ap p roached s t a t i s t i c a l
s ig n if ic a n c e (p < ,1 0 ) , The re s p o n se s o f th e r e s p e c tiv e
s t a f f g ro u p s te n d e d to s u p p o rt th e e x p e c ta tio n s f o r t h i s
ite m .
The two o th e r s ta te m e n ts c o n c e rn in g t h i s a re a o f
a n a ly s is w ere l e s s d i r e c t . A ll th e o ffe n d e r gro u p s te n d e d
to a g re e w ith th e s ta te m e n t t h a t " S ta f f u s u a lly s e e s th in g s
d i f f e r e n t l y from th e way boys se e th em ." The p a t t e r n o f
TABLE 10a
PERCEPTIONS EEGARBING THE EXISTENCE OP SEPARATE SUBSYSTEMS
S c a le S co res
Item s
0 f f e n d e ? a S t a f f
BE I BR I I SL BR I BR I I SL
T h is p la c e i s p retty -
much s p l i t i n to two
v e ry d i f f e r e n t groups
s t a f f v s . o ffe n d e rs
+2,9+ + .29 -**.35
00
.
+ .
-1 .2 3 -7 .7 7
S t a f f u s u a lly se e s
th in g s d i f f e r e n t l y
from th e way hoys
see them .
+ 1 +.28 +»f.85 + 1A 5 +3.90 + 5.96 - 2 .2 2
The o ffe n d e rs h e re
have p r e t t y much
t h e i r own s e t o f
r u l e s
+ .9*+ - .63 - .65 + 2 M + .5^ - 2 .2 2
TABLE 10b
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OP SEPARATE SUBSYSTEMS
S t a t i s t i c a l M easurem ents
0 f f e n d « >
4
C O
Item
BR H
1
I s
II BR I - SL BR II - SL
gamma
Chi-
Square
gamma
Chi-
Square
F 4 gamma
Chi-
Square
P 4
This place is pretty
much split into two
very different groups
staff vs. offenders
df = 2
.22**
5.1 * <.10 .621
28.3
<.001
A55 l*f.O <.001
Staff usually sees
things differently
from the way boys
see them
df = 2
-.710 .k <.90
.315 6.3 <.05 .380 <.01
The offenders here
have pretty much
their own set of
rules
df = 2
.1^7 2.2 <.5o .151 2.7 <.30 -.111 2.2 <.50
118
answ ers among o ffe n d e rs p a r t i a l l y co n firm ed th e e x p e c ta
t i o n s . A lthough a l l o ff e n d e r g ro u p s te n d e d to a g re e w ith
th e s ta te m e n t, th e e x te n t o f th e SL o ff e n d e r s was s i g n i f i
c a n tly lo w e r (p < .0 5 ) th a n t h a t o f BR I and BR I I o ffe n d
e r s (p < .0 1 ) . H ow ever, i n c o n tr a s t to e x p e c ta tio n s , BR I I
o ffe n d e rs te n d e d to a g re e more ( +if .8 5 ) w ith th e s ta te m e n t
th a n BR I o ffe n d e rs (+**.28).
The re s p o n se s o f s t a f f members to t h i s s ta te m e n t
ten d ed to be f a i r l y s i m il a r to t h a t o f th e o f f e n d e r s ,
n am ely , th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f agreem ent was e x p re ss e d by
th e BR I I s t a f f , w h ile th e SL s t a f f te n d e d to d is a g re e w ith
th e s ta te m e n t.
The p a t t e r n o f re s p o n se s i n BR I I m ight be in d ic a
t i v e o f th e changes o c c u rrin g i n t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n , w hich
co u ld r e s u l t i n a d is c re p a n c y betw een s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs
i n v iew in g c e r t a i n f a c e t s o f o r g a n iz a tio n a l l i f e . I t i s
p ro b a b le t h a t many o f th e s t a f f members have a lre a d y
a d o p te d th e p r i n c i p l e s o f new p o l i c i e s , b u t th e o ffe n d e rs
a re n o t y e t f u l l y aw are o f th e m eaning o f th e s e c h a n g e s.
The f i n a l s ta te m e n t on w hich agreem ent o r d is a g r e e
m ent was so u g h t w as: M The boys h e re have p r e t t y much t h e i r
own s e t o f r u l e s . " The resp o n se o f b o th s t a f f and o ffe n d
e r s te n d to be s u p p o rtiv e o f e x p e c ta tio n s . A n a ly sis o f
o f f e n d e r s ' re s p o n se s in d ic a te t h a t o n ly th o se in th e t o t a l -
p erem p to iy o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) te n d e d to a g re e w ith th e
s ta te m e n t (+ .9^)> w h ile o ffe n d e rs i n th e o th e r o rg a n iz a tio n s
119
tended to disagree to a limited extent (BR I I -.63; SL -
.65). These differences did not approach statistical sig
nificance .
The p a t t e r n o f re s p o n s e s among s t a f f members was
n o t to o d i f f e r e n t : how ever, th e d is p e r s io n o f th e d i f f e r
en ce s was more e x te n s iv e . The s t a f f i n th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) te n d e d to a g re e w ith th e
e x is te n c e o f a " p r iv a te " s e t o f r u l e s f o r o ffe n d e rs to a
h ig h e r d eg ree (+2.M+) th a n th e s t a f f o f th e t o t a l -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I I ) (+.5*0 o r th e s t a f f o f
th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n (SL) (+ 2 .2 2 ).
I t can be co n clu d ed t h a t th e e x p e c ta tio n s g e n e r a lly
te n d e d to be su p p o rte d i n t h i s a re a o f i n q u ir y . S t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n te n d e d to
p e rc e iv e s e p a ra te s t a f f - o f f e n d e r su b sy ste m s. A t th e same
tim e , p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n iz a
t i o n te n d e d n o t to b e lie v e i n th e e x is te n c e o f th e s e sub
sy ste m s, a lth o u g h o f fe n d e rs a d m itte d t h a t s t a f f members
te n d to see th in g s d i f f e r e n t l y th a n th e m s e lv e s . The o n ly
one u n e x p e c te d f in d in g was th e r e l a t i v e l y h ig h e x te n t o f
ag reem en t i n BR I I w ith th e s ta te m e n t t h a t " S ta f f u s u a lly
s e e s th in g s d i f f e r e n t l y from th e way boys se e th em ." As i t
was a lr e a d y p o in te d o u t , t h i s m ight be an in d ic a tio n o f th e
changes w hich w ere g o in g on i n t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n .
(5) P e rc e p tio n s R eg ard in g th e E x te n t o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n th e D ecision-M aking P ro c e s s .
120
The rev iew o f l i t e r a t u r e and th e ty p o lo g y s u g g e ste d
t h a t s t a f f and o f fe n d e rs i n m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n i
z a tio n s sh o u ld p e rc e iv e th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n d e c isio n -m a k in g , w h ile members i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry
o r g a n iz a tio n sh o u ld p e rc e iv e th e lo w e s t. The s t a f f and
o f f e n d e r s o f th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n sup
p o se d ly w i l l e x p re ss p e rc e p tio n s w hich w i l l in d ic a t e an
in te rm e d ia ry p o s i t i o n .
The a n a ly s is o f T ab les 11a and l i b r e s u l t e d i n
f in d in g s a s fo llo w s : f i r s t , a l l g ro u p s te n d e d to b e lie v e
t h a t M I f th e boys r e a l l y w ant to th e y can sh a re in
d e c i s i o n s ." T h is b e l i e f te n d e d to be th e h ig h e s t among
th e s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o r g a n iz a tio n (SL) and was th e lo w e st i n th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) . S i m i la r ly , s t a f f members
te n d e d to ag ree w ith th e s ta te m e n t more th a n o ff e n d e r s i n
th e r e s p e c tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n s . T h is p a t t e r n o f answ ers
s u p p o rts th e e x p e c ta tio n s . Second, th e p a t t e r n o f
re s p o n s e s ten d ed to s u p p o rt th e e x p e c ta tio n s re g a rd in g th e
e x te n t t h a t o ffe n d e rs have a say "a b o u t w hat k in d o f r u l e s
a re m ade." O ffe n d ers i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg an
i z a t i o n s (SL) te n d e d to b e lie v e to a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h e r
e x t e n t - (p < , o l ) th a n th e ' o ffe n d e rs i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry
o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) t h a t th e y have a say a b o u t th e r u l e s .
The d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y and th e
TABLE 11a
PERCEPTIONS OP THE EXTENT OP PARTICIPATION IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
S c a le S c o r e s and P e r c e n ta g e s
Item s
0 f f e n d e r s S t a f f
BR I BR I I SL BR I BR I I . SL
1 . I f th e boys r e a l l y w ant to
th e y can sh a re i n decisions
+3 A 6 + 5.*K> +7.21 +5.21 +6.1*f +10.00
2 . About how ranch do th e boys
have to say ab o u t w hat
k in d o f r u le s a re made? A
g r e a t d e a l; an av erag e
amount; n o t v e ry much
- 1 .2 6 - .28 + 2.50 - .71 + .73 + 3 .3 3
3 . S t a f f makes changes i n th e
program w ith o u t c o n s u ltin g
th e boys
0 .0 0 + .07 -2.*f6 +3.81
+1.25 + 3 .3 3
H-. W ho makes m ost o f th e
r u le s ?
M ostly s t a f f
M ostly boys
Boys and s t a f f
U ndecided
**6.0 %
11.1
3 3 .3
9 .5
**1.7 $
3 .6
**7.5
7 .2
2 5.8 %
1 2 .9
58.1
3 .2
^ 6 .3 %
0 .0
53.7
0 .0
3 7 .9 %
1 .7
5 5.2
5 .2
2 2 .2 %
0 .0
7 7 .7
0 .0
5 . W ho d e c id e s when an
o ffe n d e r goes home?
M ostly s t a f f
M ostly boys
Boys and s t a f f
U ndecided
2 * + .6 c / o
1 2 .7
53.2
9 .5
1 7 .^ $
25.
5*+.3
2 .9
h.8 %
3 2 .3
5 9 .7
2 .2
*1-5.0 %
2 .5
50.0
2 .5
3 1 .0 %
8 .6
55.2
5 .2
2 2 .2 %
0 .0
7 7 .7
0 .0
TABLE l i b
PERCEPTIONS OP THE EXTENT OP PARTICIPATION IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
S t a t i s t i c a l M easurem ents
Item s
O f f e n d e r s
BR I - BR II
o
h
l n S
o tn PM
BR I - SL
c6
t)0
i a
o m P M
BR II - SL
1
bo O M P M
1 . I f th e boys really
w ant to th e y can
sh a re i n decision:
d f = 2
2 . About how much do
th e boys have to
say a b o u t what
Kind o f r u le s are
made?
d f = 2
3 . S t a f f makes
changes i n th e
program w ith o u t
c o n s u ltin g th e
boys
d f = 2
W ho makes m ost
o f th e r u le s ?
d f = 3
4-. W ho d e c id e s when
an o ffe n d e r goes
home ? ^ _ ^______
.136
- .1 0 7
-.0 0 7
1.6
1 .7
.09
9 .2
1 1 .9 .
< .5 0
< .5 0
< .9 8
< .0 5
<.01
-A 0 3 6 .7
-A o i 10.8
.235 h.Q
1 2 .7
1 9 .7
< .05
<.01
<.20
.287
-.301
<.01
<.001
3 .2
5.8
5 .7
1 1 .0
6.0
<.20
<•10
<.10
<•02
<.20 122
123
t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o ffe n d e rs a ls o approached
s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 )• The same p a t t e r n was
m a in ta in e d among th e s t a f f gro u p s a s w e l l . '
T h ird , u n e x p e c te d ly , o ffe n d e rs i n th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry (BR I ) and t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o rg a n iz a
t io n s te n d e d n o t to a g re e b u t a ls o n o t to d is a g re e w ith th e
s ta te m e n t: " S ta f f makes changes in th e program w ith o u t
c o n s u ltin g th e b o y s." However, o ffe n d e rs i n th e m e d ia to ry -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n d is a g re e d w ith th e s ta te m e n t
(-2.*+6) a s i t was e x p e c te d . On th e o th e r h an d , s t a f f i n
a l l o r g a n iz a tio n s te n d e d to ag ree w ith th e s ta te m e n t above.
The r e l a t i v e l y h ig h e x te n t o f agreem ent among SL s t a f f
( +3»33) was u n e x p e c te d . I t m ight be t h a t a lth o u g h th e SL
s t a f f b e lie v e d t h a t o ffe n d e rs p a r t i c i p a t e i n th e d e c is io n
m aking ( a s i t was e x p re ss e d i n th e fo rm e r s ta te m e n t) , th e y
do fa c e c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s where th e y have to make changes
on t h e i r own. P ro b ab ly th e s e changes d id n o t seem to be
v e ry c r u c i a l i n th e e y e s o f th e o f f e n d e r s , and th u s th e y
d id n o t a t t r i b u t e much im portance to them .
F o u rth , th e p a t t e r n o f re s p o n se s to th e two d i r e c t
q u e s tio n s : "Who makes m ost o f th e r u le s ? " and "Who d e c id e s
when a boy goes home?" in d ic a te d t h a t th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f
s t a f f - o f f e n d e r j o i n t d e c isio n -m a k in g was seen in th e
m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n iz a tio n (S L ), w h ile th e lo w e st
was se en i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) . Con
v e r s e l y , the. e x te n t o f b e l i e f t h a t s t a f f a lo n e make
12**
d e c is io n s was th e h ig h e s t i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry o rg a n iz a
t i o n (BE I ) and th e lo w e st i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o r g a n iz a tio n . SL o ffe n d e rs ten d ed a ls o to p e rc e iv e a h ig h
p e rc e n ta g e (3 2 .3 ) o f d e c is io n s by boys a lo n e re g a rd in g th e
r e tu r n in g o f boys home. At th e same tim e , only 1 1 .1 p e r
c e n t o f BE I o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e d t h a t th e y make d e c is io n s
a lo n e i n t h i s m a tte r .
The d if f e r e n c e s on th e s e two q u e s tio n s te n d e d to be
more s i g n i f i c a n t betw een BE I and SL o ffe n d e rs (p < .01 and
p < .0 0 1 ) th a n betw een BE I and BE I I o ffe n d e rs (p < .05
and p < .0 1 ) , i n d ic a t i n g t h a t BE I I o ffe n d e rs have
e x p re s s e d view s w hich a re in te rm e d ia ry to th e view s o f th e
two o th e r g ro u p s; how ever, th e y a re more s im ila r to th o se
o f BE I th a n to th o se o f SL o f f e n d e r s . The p a tt e r n o f
re s p o n s e s o f s t a f f members on th e s e q u e s tio n s in d ic a te d a
s i m il a r t r e n d .
I n sum m arizing th e f in d in g s , i t can be c o n clu d ed
t h a t g e n e r a lly th e p a t t e r n o f re s p o n se s i n t h i s a re a o f
a n a ly s is te n d e d to su p p o rt th e e x p e c ta tio n s . There was a
g e n e ra l ten d en cy to i n d ic a te th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f p a r t i c i
p a tio n i n d e c isio n -m a k in g i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o r g a n iz a tio n (S L ), w h ile th e lo w e st e x te n t was in d ic a te d
i n th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n (BE I ) . The view s
e x p re s s e d i n th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n (BE I I )
te n d e d to be in te rm e d ia ry betw een th e view s o f th e
1 2 5
p a r t i c i p a n t s i n th e o th e r two o r g a n iz a tio n s .
(6 ) The Degree to Which There I s a C onsensus
betw een th e P e rc e p tio n s o f S t a f f and O ffend
e r s i n th e R e sp e c tiv e O rg a n iz a tio n s .
On th e b a s is o f th e l i t e r a t u r e , th e su g g e ste d
ty p o lo g y , and th e d e s c r i p t io n o f th e c o r r e c t i o n a l p ro g ram s,
i t was e x p e c te d t h a t th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f s t a f f - o f f e n d e r
c e n se n su s would be i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n iz a
t i o n , and th e lo w e st e x te n t would be betw een th e o ffe n d e rs
and s t a f f i n th e to ta l-p e r e m p to r y o r g a n iz a tio n .
P o r th e p u rp o se s o f t h i s s tu d y , Newcomb's (1965:
279) d e f i n i t i o n o f co n sen su s was a d o p te d . A ccording to him,
c o n sen su s i s "th e e x is te n c e , on th e p a r t o f two o r more
p e rs o n s ( i n t h i s case two g ro u p s , D .S .) , o f s im ila r o r ie n
t a t i o n s to w ard so m e th in g ."
The q u e s tio n o f co n sen su s betw een o ffe n d e rs and
s t a f f o f th e same o r g a n iz a tio n , was to u ch e d upon f r e q u e n tly
d u rin g th e a n a ly s is o f th e f i r s t f iv e a re a s o f i n q u ir y .
H ow ever, i n th o se in s ta n c e s th e h a n d lin g o f t h i s s u b je c t
was only m a rg in a l, n o n sy ste m a tic , and n o n e x h a u s tiv e . There
f o r e , th e r e seemed to be a need f o r a s y s te m a tic a n a ly s is
o f t h i s s u b j e c t .
The m easurem ent o f co n sen su s i n t h i s a n a ly s is was
d e te rm in e d by th e p a t t e r n s o f th e s c a le s c o re s o f s t a f f and
o f f e n d e r s . The o rd e rin g o f answ ers f o r each ite m , f o r
s t a f f and o f f e n d e r s , was a n a ly z e d . I f o ffe n d e rs i n an
126
o r g a n iz a tio n had th e h ig h e s t s c a le s c o re among o ffe n d e r
g ro u p s on a c e r t a i n ite m , and a t th e same tim e th e s t a f f o f
t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n had a ls o th e h ig h e s t s c a le sc o re among
s t a f f g ro u p s on th e same ite m , i t was c o n s id e re d to be a s a
s t a t e o f c o n se n s u s. The p e rc e p tio n s on tw e n ty -th re e s c a l
a b le ite m s have been exam ined.
The d a ta i n T able 12 c l e a r l y in d ic a te t h a t , i n
a cc o rd a n c e w ith e x p e c ta tio n s , th e e x te n t o f s t a f f - o f f e n d e r
c o n sen su s was th e h ig h e s t (69*6 p e r c e n t) in th e m e d ia to ry -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n , and lo w e st p e r c e n t) i n
th e to ta l-p e r e m p to r y o r g a n iz a tio n . The e x te n t o f s t a f f -
o f fe n d e r co n sen su s i n th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a tio n
was v e ry s i m il a r to t h a t i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry o rg a n iz a
t i o n , and was o n ly s l i g h t l y h ig h e r 0+7 »Q p e r c e n t ) .
T h is f in d in g s u g g e s ts t h a t th e c o r r e c t i o n a l p h i lo s
ophy o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n , and i t s
im p le m e n ta tio n , te n d e d to in f lu e n c e e f f e c t i v e l y th e e x te n t
o f agreem ent i n th e p a tt e r n s o f p e rc e p tio n s betw een s t a f f
and o f fe n d e rs re g a rd in g th e s o c i a l sy ste m . T h is o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l in f lu e n c e i s p o s itiv e i n th e se n se t h a t i t r e s u l t e d
i n a h ig h e :r e x te n t o f agreem ent i n th e p e rc e p tio n s betw een
th e two g ro u p s . P resu m ab ly , th e h ig h e r e x te n t o f agreem ent
would r e s u l t i n a h ig h e r e x te n t o f c o o p e ra tio n betw een
s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs to w ard a t t a i n i n g a common g o a l, nam ely ,
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n .
F u rth e rm o re , t h i s f in d in g r e in f o r c e d a t l e a s t two
TABLE 12
CONCENSUS BETW EEN THE PERCEPTIONS
S ta ff/O ffe n d e rs
A rea o f
A n a ly sis
Number
o f
Agreement on X Number o f Item s
Item s BR I BR I I SL
1 . C u s to d ia l v s .
T reatm ent O rien
t a t i o n
6 2 2 +
2 . S u p p o rt o f Norms if 1 2 1
3 .
The System o f
S a n c tio n in g 5
0 0 b
b. E x is te n c e o f
S ta ff-O ffe n d e r
Subsystem s
3 3 3 3
5 .
E x te n t o f P a r t i c
i p a t i o n i n th e
D ecision-M aking
5
4 - If
T o ta l
23
T o ta l
10
No. T o ta l %
b3.b
T o ta l
11
No. T o ta l %
4-7.8
T o ta l
16
No. T o ta l %
6 9 .6
p re v io u s f i n d in g s , nam ely: (a ) th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f
o f fe n d e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s
ten d e d to be p e rc e iv e d i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y organ
i z a t i o n (S L ), w hile th e lo w e st e x te n t was p e rc e iv e d i n th e
to ta l-p e re m p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n (BR I ) ; (b ) th e e x is te n c e o f
s e p a r a te s t a f f - o f f e n d e r subsystem s te n d e d to be p e rc e iv e d
t o th e lo w e s t e x te n t i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o rg a n i
z a tio n (S L ), and g e n e r a lly to th e h ig h e s t e x te n t i n th e
to ta l-p e re m p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I ) .
The a d a p ta tio n o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y p h ilo so p h y and p a r
t i c i p a t o r y p o l i c i e s by BR I I seemed to have o n ly a v e ry
l im ite d e f f e c t on th e s t a f f - o f f e n d e r c o n se n s u s. T h is m ight
be a r e s u l t o f th e c h an g in g n a tu re o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n , and
th e d iv e r g e n t in f lu e n c e s ( " t o t a l " s e t t i n g v e rs u s " p a r t i c i
p a to ry " p r a c t i c e s ) on th e c o r r e c t i o n a l program . P ro b a b ly ,
t h i s s i t u a t i o n w i l l change when th e p a r t i c i p a t o r y p o lic y
w i l l be more e s ta b lis h e d i n t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n .
CHAPTER V II
CONCLUSIONS A N D IMPLICATIONS
T h is stu d y had two b a s ic o b je c tiv e s : (1 ) th e con
s t r u c t i o n o f a ty p o lo g y f o r ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a
t i o n s , and (2 ) an e m p iric a l e x a m in a tio n o f th e g e n e ra l f i t
o f th e ty p o lo g y to a c t u a l c o n d itio n s .
A ty p o lo g y was c o n s tru c te d b ecau se o f th e a lm o st
com plete absence o f such fram ew orks i n th e f i e l d . A rev iew
o f th e l i t e r a t u r e su g g e ste d th e im p o rtan ce o f d e v e lo p in g a t
l e a s t th r e e b a s ic dim en sio n s f o r th e ty p o lo g y : (1 ) th e
g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f any c o r r e c tio n a l o rg a n iz a tio n e sp e
c i a l l y a lo n g th e c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t d im e n sio n , (2 ) th e scope
o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n , i . e . , w h eth er i t i s t o t a l o r m e d ia to ry
i n c h a r a c t e r , and (3 ) th e system o f d e c isio n -m a k in g t h a t i s
p r a c t i c e d , i . e . , w h eth er i t i s p erem p to ry o r p a r t i c i p a t o r y .
These dim en sio n s y ie ld e d e ig h t l o g i c a l l y p o s s ib le o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l ty p e s .
The e m p iric a l in q u ir y i n to th e f i t o f th e ty p o lo g y
was c o n d u cted on th e b a s is o f th e e l i c i t e d p e rc e p tio n s o f
s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs o f th r e e c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s .
The th r e e o rg a n iz a tio n s w ere: B oys' R ep u b lic i n 1966 a t
129
130
C hino, C a lif o r n ia (BR I ) , B oys' R ep u b lic i n 1969 (BR I I ) ,
and th e S ilv e r la k e E xperim ent (S I) a t Los A n g e le s. These
o r g a n iz a tio n s r e p r e s e n te d th r e e o f th e e ig h t ty p e s o f th e
su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y , nam ely: tre a tm e n t— t o t a l — p erem p to iy
(BR I ) , tre a tm e n t— t o t a l — p a r t i c i p a to r y (BR I I ) , and t r e a t
m ent—m e d ia to ry — p a r t i c i p a t o r y (S L ). However, th e f a c t
t h a t th e stu d y u n d e rto o k o n ly a p a r t i a l e x am in a tio n o f th e
ty p o lo g y l i m i t s th e p o s s ib le le v e l o f g e n e r a l i z a t io n .
N e v e rth e le s s , i t does s e rv e a s ah e x p lo ra to r y e x a m in a tio n
o f i t s u s e f u ln e s s .
The a n a ly s is o f p e rc e p tio n s ( s t a f f and o f f e n d e r s )
was co n d u cted i n term s o f s ix m ajo r q u e s tio n s : (1 ) to w hat
e x te n t do s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e an em phasis upon
tre a tm e n t v e rs u s c u s to d ia l g o a ls ? (2 ) To w hat d eg ree i s
th e r e th e su p p o rt f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l norm s? (3 ) To w hat
e x te n t i s th e system , o f s a n c tio n s p e rc e iv e d a s rew ard o r
punishm ent o r ie n te d ? (b) To w hat e x te n t do s t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e th e m se lv e s a s b e in g d iv id e d in to
s e p a r a te su b sy stem s? (5 ) To w hat e x te n t a re o ffe n d e rs
p e rc e iv e d a s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n th e b a s ic d e cisio n -m a k in g
p ro c e s s ? (6 ) To w hat d e g re e i s th e r e co n sen su s betw een th e
p e rc e p tio n s o f s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs oh th e p re c e d in g f i v e
q u e s tio n s ?
The g e n e ra l assu m p tio n was t h a t th e r e w ould be
d i f f e r e n c e s i n th e way s t a f f and o ffe n d e rs p e rc e iv e d th e
131
s o c i a l system p r e v a ilin g in t h e i r r e s p e c tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n s .
Beyond t h i s g e n e ra l a ssu m p tio n , th e re were s p e c if ic assum p
t io n s c o n c e rn in g th e d i r e c ti o n o f d i f f e r e n c e s .
A lthough a l l th r e e o rg a n iz a tio n s were seen a s
g e n e r a lly tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d i t was e x p e c te d t h a t s t a f f and
o ffe n d e rs i n th e tre a tm e n t—m e d ia to ry — p a r t i c i p a to r y (SL)
o r g a n iz a tio n would p e rc e iv e : th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f t r e a t
m ent o r i e n t a t i o n , th e m ost su p p o rt f o r o r g a n iz a tio n a l
norm s, th e m ost rew ard o r ie n te d s a n c tio n in g sy stem , th e
la c k o f e x is te n c e o f s e p a ra te s t a f f - o f f e n d e r su b sy stem s,'
th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g ,
and th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f consensus betw een s t a f f and
o ffe n d e r p e r c e p tio n s . The p a r t i c i p a n t s o f th e tr e a tm e n t—
to ta l-p e r e m p to ry (BR I ) o rg a n iz a tio n w ere e x p e c te d to
r e p r e s e n t th e p o la r e x tre m e , to th o se o f th e tr e a tm e n t—
m e d ia to ry —p a r t i c i p a t o r y p a r t i c i p a n t s a t S ilv e r la k e . Mean
w h ile , th e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n th e tre a tm e n t— t o t a l — p a r t i c i p a
to r y (BR I I ) o rg a n iz a tio n were e x p e c te d to e x p re ss i n t e r
m ediary v ie w s .
A s h o r t summary o f th e f in d in g s r e v e a ls th e fo llo w
in g :
1 . Em phasis upon T reatm ent V ersus C u sto d ia l G o als.
T here was a g e n e ra l agreem ent i n a l l th e o rg a n iz a
tio n s t h a t th e y seem to be concerned more w ith tr e a tm e n t
th a n c u s to d ia l g o a ls . Thus th e f in d in g s r e in f o r c e d th e
132
c o n te n tio n t h a t a l l th r e e o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n s were t r e a t
m e n t-o rie n te d .
Out o f th e e ig h te e n s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s com puted
among th e th re e o ffe n d e r p o p u la tio n s , o n ly th r e e y ie ld e d a
c h i sq u a re o f p < .05 o r lo w er and two approached s t a t i s t i
c a l s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) . On o n ly one is s u e were
re s p o n d e n ts i n th e two t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n s (BR I and BR I I )
d i f f e r e n t from th o se a t S i l v e r l a k e . O ffe n d ers i n th e
tr e a tm e n t— t o t a l — p erem p to ry (BR I ) and tre a tm e n t— t o t a l —
p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o r g a n iz a tio n s p e rc e iv e d t h e i r s o c ia l
sy stem s a s more p u n ish m e n t-o rie n te d th a n o ffe n d e rs in th e
tr e a tm e n t—m e d iato ry — p a r t i c i p a t o r y (SL) o r g a n iz a tio n .
These r e s u l t s were s i g n i f i c a n t on th e .01 and .02 l e v e l s
r e s p e c t i v e l y . At th e same tim e o ffe n d e rs in th e t r e a tm e n t-
m e d ia to ry — p a r t i c i p a t o r y (SL) o r g a n iz a tio n p e rc e iv e d t h e i r
o r g a n iz a tio n a s s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p < .0 2 ) more tr e a tm e n t-
o r ie n te d th a n th e tr e a tm e n t— t o t a l — perem ptory (BR I )
o ffe n d e rs view ed t h e i r o r g a n iz a tio n .
These r e s u l t s in d ic a te t h a t w h ile th e com m unity-
c e n te r e d S ilv e r la k e program was p e rc e iv e d a s l e s s p u n is h
m e n t-o rie n te d , i t was n o t p e rc e iv e d a s d i f f e r e n t re g a rd in g
o th e r g o a ls su ch a s th e im p o rtan ce o f e d u c a tio n o r o th e r
k in d s o f t r a i n i n g .
C o n se q u e n tly , s in c e b a s ic d if f e r e n c e s o c c u rre d on
o n ly one g o a l, th e tre a tm e n t-c u s to d y d im ension was n o t
133
t r e a t e d s e p a r a te ly i n th e rem a in d e r o f th e a n a l y s i s .
I n s te a d , th e o r g a n iz a tio n s were r e f e r r e d to a s t o t a l -
p erem p to ry (BE I ) , t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) and
m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y (S L ).
2 . The Degree o f S u p p o rt f o r O rg a n iz a tio n a l Norms.
The p a tt e r n o f re s p o n s e s te n d e d to fo llo w t h e o r e t i
c a l e x p e c ta tio n s , n a m e ly , th e d eg ree o f su p p o rt o f norm s
te n d e d to he c o n s id e ra b ly h ig h e r among th e o ffe n d e rs i n
th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n (S L ), th a n i n th e
o th e r o r g a n iz a tio n s . These com parisons y ie ld e d f i v e
s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s and two r e s u l t s
a p p ro a c h in g s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) o u t o f e ig h t
c o m p a riso n s.
The d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e o ffe n d e rs o f th e two
t o t a l o rg a n iz a tio n s d id n o t fo llo w any c l e a r - c u t p a t t e r n
and o n ly one o u t o f f o u r com parisons ap p roached s t a t i s t i c a l
s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) .
3 . The N atu re o f th e S a n c tio n in g System .
T here were th r e e f in d in g s o f s ig n if ic a n c e i n t h i s
a r e a . F i r s t , th e r e seemed to be a g e n e r a l agreem ent i n a l l
th e o r g a n iz a tio n s t h a t b o th s t a f f and th e o ffe n d e rs
to g e th e r e n fo rc e th e r u l e s . However, t h i s b e l i e f was
s tr o n g e r among th e o ffe n d e rs o f th e p a r t i c i p a t o r y o rg a n iz a
t i o n s (BR I I , 7 1 .5 p e r c e n t; SL, 7 1 .0 p e r c e n t) th a n i n th e
p erem p to ry o rg a n iz a tio n (BR I , 6 1 .5 p e r c e n t ) . S econd,
13*+
o f f e n d e r s i n a l l th r e e o r g a n iz a tio n s f e l t t h a t t h e i r
o r g a n iz a tio n s were more p u n ish m en t- th a n r e w a r d - o r ie n te d .
O ffe n d e rs i n th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o r g a n iz a tio n
saw t h e i r s t a f f a s p ro v id in g s i g n i f i c a n t l y more rew ard s
th a n o f fe n d e rs i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry (BR I ) (p < .0 1 )
o r g a n iz a tio n . They a ls o saw o ffe n d e rs a s p ro v id in g more
rew ard s th a n th e o ffe n d e rs i n th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry
(p < . 0 0 1 ) and i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y (p < . 1 0 )
o r g a n iz a tio n s . H ow ever, th e same g roup o f o ffe n d e rs (BR I I)
saw t h e i r s t a f f a s more p u n itiv e (p < .0 0 1 ) th a n th e
o ff e n d e r s o f th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n . The
a n a ly s is o f th e s a n c tio n in g system y ie ld e d s i x s t a t i s t i
c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o m p ariso n s and two com parisons w hich
ap p ro ach ed s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) . H ow ever, th e d i r e c t i o n
o f th e s e com parisons d id n o t fo llo w a c o n s is te n t p a t t e r n ,
and t h e r e f o r e d id n o t y i e l d m ean in g fu l c o n c lu s io n s . T h ird ,
when a s p e c ia l " p u n is h m e n t-o rie n ta tio n " in d e x was com puted
(s e e C h a p te r Y I) th e d a ta in d ic a te d t h a t th e o ffe n d e rs o f
th e to ta l-p e r e m p to ry o r g a n iz a tio n te n d e d to p e rc e iv e th e
h ig h e s t e x te n t o f p u n is h m e n t- o r ie n ta tio n , w h ile th e
o ff e n d e r s i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y o r g a n iz a tio n p e r
c e iv e d th e lo w e st e x t e n t . The m ain f i n d i n g , how ever, seems
to he th e f a c t t h a t th e o f f e n d e r s , r e g a r d le s s o f o rg a n iz a
t i o n a l a f f i l i a t i o n , saw t h e i r s o c i a l sy stem a s p u n ish m en t—
r a t h e r th a n re w a r d - o r ie n te d .
135
b, The E x is te n c e o f S t a f f O ffe n d er S ybsystem s.
The p a t t e r n o f p e rc e p tio n s i n t h i s a re a te n d e d to
m eet e x p e c ta tio n s . O ffe n d e rs in th e m e d ia to z y - p a r tic ip a -
to r y o r g a n iz a tio n te n d e d to in d ic a te t h a t th e r e were no
s t a f f - o f f e n d e r su b sy stem s in e x is te n c e i n t h e i r o rg a n iz a
t i o n , w h ile th e o th e r two o ffe n d e r g ro u p s te n d e d to p erceiv e
th e e x is te n c e o f d i f f e r e n t s t a f f - o f f e n d e r su b sy ste m s.
These d if f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t (BR I - SL p < .001 and
BR I I - SL p < .0 0 1 ). The e x te n t o f e x is te n c e o f th e s e
su b sy stem s seemed to be c o n s id e ra b ly h ig h e r f o r th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry th a n f o r th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o z y o ffe n d e rs
(p < .1 0 ) .
S im ila r ly , th e r e was s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s agreem ent
among SL o ffe n d e rs t h a t " s t a f f u s u a lly se e s th in g s d i f f e r
e n tly from th e way boys see them" th a n among BR I (p < .0 5 )
o f f e n d e r s and BR I I o f fe n d e r s (p < .0 1 ) .
Among n in e c o m p a riso n s, f o u r w ere s t a t i s t i c a l l y
s i g n i f i c a n t and one ap p ro ach ed s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) .
These d if f e r e n c e s te n d e d to be i n th e e x p e c te d d i r e c t i o n
betw een th e t o t a l v s . m e d ia to iy o r g a n iz a tio n s .
5 . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e D ecision-M aking P ro c e s s .
G e n e ra lly , th e m a jo rity o f th e p a r t i c i p a n t s
b e lie v e d t h a t " i f boys r e a l l y w ant to th e y can sh a re i n
d e c i s i o n s ." T h is b e l i e f was s i g n i f i c a n t l y s tr o n g e r among
SL o ffe n d e rs th a n among BR I o ffe n d e rs (p < .0 5 ) . T here
136
was a ls o a s i g n i f i c a n t l y s tr o n g e r b e l i e f among S I o ffe n d e rs
th a n among BR I o ffe n d e rs (p < .0 1 ) t h a t th e boys have a
" g re a t d e a l" to say a b o u t w hat k in d o f r u l e s a re made in
th e o r g a n iz a tio n .
The e x p e c ta tio n s were a ls o co n firm ed re g a rd in g th e
q u e s tio n s o f "who makes m ost o f th e r u l e s , " and "who decides
when an o ffe n d e r goes home?" In th e s e two q u e s tio n s th e
d if f e r e n c e s betw een BR I - SL boys w ere s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e
.01 and .001 le v e l; betw een BR I - BR I I a t th e .05 and .01
l e v e l; on th e f i r s t q u e s tio n betw een BR I I - SL on th e .02
l e v e l .
P if te e n s t a t i s t i c a l co m parisons were c o n d u c te d ,
sev en p ro v ed to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t and two
ap p ro ach ed s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 )* The r e s u l t s
te n d e d to be in th e e x p e c te d d i r e c t i o n .
6 . Consensus betw een S ta f f and O ffe n d er P e rc e p
t i o n s .
Consensus i n t h i s a n a ly s is was d eterm in ed by th e
p a tt e r n s o f th e s c a le s c o re s o f s t a f f and o f f e n d e r s . I f
o ff e n d e r s i n an o r g a n iz a tio n had th e h ig h e s t s c a le s c o re s
among o ffe n d e r gro u p s on a c e r t a i n ite m , and a t th e same
tim e th e s t a f f o f t h a t o r g a n iz a tio n had a ls o th e h ig h e s t
s c a le sc o re among s t a f f g ro u p s on th e same ite m , i t was
c o n s id e re d to be a s a s t a t e o f c o n s e n s u s . The p e rc e p tio n s
o f tw e n ty -th re e s c a la b le ite m s were exam ined. The a n a ly s is
1 3 7
in d ic a te d t h a t th e h ig h e s t e x te n t o f co n sen su s was
e x p re s s e d i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y (SL) o r g a n iz a tio n
( 6 9 .6 p e r c e n t ) , ^y c o n tr a s t th e d e g re e o f c o n sen su s i n
th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) (U-7.8 p e r c e n t) and t o t a l -
p erem ptory (BR I ) o r g a n iz a tio n s (M-3*^ p e r c e n t) was con
s id e r a b ly l e s s .
T able 13 in d ic a t e s t h a t 3 6 .2 p e r c e n t o f th e s t a t i s
t i c a l com parisons were s i g n i f i c a n t on .05 l e v e l o r lo w e r,
and 1 ^ .5 p e r c e n t o f them were a p p ro a ch in g s t a t i s t i c a l s ig
n if ic a n c e (p < .1 0 ) . F o rty -n in e and t h r e e - te n th s p e r c e n t •
o f th e com parisons have n o t re a c h e d s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i
c a n c e . The ta b le a ls o in d ic a t e s t h a t m ost o f th e d i f f e r
e n c e s w ere betw een th e to ta l-p e re m p to ry and th e m ed iato x y -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o ffe n d e rs n e x t to t h a t , betw een th e o ffe n d e rs
o f th e t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y and m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o r g a n iz a tio n s , w h ile th e d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e t o t a l -
perem p to ry and t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o ffe n d e rs were th e
l e a s t . T hus, th e f in d in g s in d ic a te d t h a t th e p a t t e r n o f
o f f e n d e r s ' p e rc e p tio n i n th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o rg a n iz a tio n ten d e d to be c l e a r l y i n th e d i r e c ti o n o f
e x p e c ta tio n s i n f o u r a re a s o f a n a l y s i s . These a re a s were
th e p e rc e p tio n s re g a rd in g th e o r g a n iz a tio n a l norm s, th e
e x te n t o f e x is te n c e o f s e p a ra te s t a f f o ffe n d e r su b sy ste m s,
th e e x te n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g p r o c e s s ,
and th e e x te n t o f c o n sen su s among s t a f f and o f f e n d e r s .
TABLE 13
DISTRIBUTION O ff THE STATISTICAL TESTS
Significant
P < .05
Approaching
cance
5 Signifi
e s < .10
Nonsignificant
Items
C Q
a
< D
- p
H
01
+»
0 1
( D
e B R II
h I
C Q
B R I I - SL
B R II
Hi
C Q
B R I I - SL
B R II
Hi
C Q
B R I I - SL
< f H
O
•
!§
o
•
o
!2 5
i
H
P 4
PQ
1
H
p q Total
B R I -
1
H
S 3
P Q Total
i
H
P £ J
p q
1
H
S 3
p q Total
Goal- Orienta
tion
6 18 0 2 1
3
0 1 1 2 6
3
If
13
Support of
Norms
h 12 0 2
3 5
1 1 1
3 3
1 0 i f
Nature of
Sanctioning
5 15 2 2 2 6 1 1 0 2 2 2
3 7
St af f - Offender
Subsystems
3 9
0 2 2 b 1 0 0 1 2 1 1 b
Participation
in Decisions
5 15
2 i f 1 7
0 0 2 2
3
1 2 6
T o ta l 23 69 ^ 12 9 25 3 3 b 10 16 8 10 31 *
P e r c e n t lOCtO 3 6 .2 l*f.5 ^9»3
139
A d d itio n a lly , th e r e was a ls o a tendency among th e
o ffe n d e rs o f t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n to a t t r i b u t e more im p o rtan c e
to tr e a tm e n t g o a ls and l e s s im p o rtan ce to c u sto d y g o a ls
th a n among th e o th e r o f fe n d e r g ro u p s. However, c o n c lu s io n s
i n t h i s r e s p e c t sh o u ld be more r e s t r i c t e d due to c e r t a i n
t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s id e r a tio n s w hich have been m entioned
a lre a d y d u rin g th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e d a ta .
The o ffe n d e rs i n th e to ta l-p e r e m p to ry (BR I ) and
t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y (BR I I ) o rg a n iz a tio n s a ls o te n d e d to
e x p re s s view s w hich a re g e n e r a lly i n l i n e w ith th e e x p e c te d
p a t t e r n s . However, th e s e p a tt e r n s were somewhat l e s s con
s i s t e n t th a n f o r th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y (SL) o rg a n iz a
t i o n . R egarding th e s e gro u p s th e r e s u l t s ten d ed to s u p p o rt
th e e x p e c ta tio n s in th e fo llo w in g a r e a s : th e e x te n t o f
e x is te n c e o f s e p a ra te s t a f f - o f f e n d e r su b sy ste m s, th e e x te n t
o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f o ffe n d e rs i n th e d e c isio n -m a k in g , and
th e e x te n t o f co n sen su s betw een th e p e rc e p tio n s o f o ffe n d
e r s and s t a f f . In c o n n e c tio n w ith th e c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t
o r g a n iz a tio n — s im ila r ly to th e m e d ia to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y
o f f e n d e r s — th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e o ff e n d e r s in th e t o t a l -
p erem p to ry and t o t a l - p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n iz a tio n s can be
i n t e r p r e t e d a s p a r t i a l l y conform ing to th e e x p e c ta tio n ( in
th e p u re ly c u sto d y and p u re ly tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d q u e stio n s).
In th e c a se o f th e p e rc e p tio n s o f th e n o rm a tiv e
and s a n c tio n in g sy s te m s, th e p a tt e r n s o f o f f e n d e r s '
I*f0
p e rc e p tio n s a re n o t c o n c lu s iv e i n th e s e two o r g a n iz a tio n s .
In re g a rd to th e s t a f f g ro u p s i t i s h a rd to a r r i v e
a t g e n e ra l c o n c lu s io n s b ecau se o f l i m i t a t i o n s o f th e d a ta .
The sm a ll s iz e o f SL s t a f f and th e in te rd e p e n d e n c e betw een
BR I and BR I I s t a f f g ro u p s (some s t a f f members a re i n c l u
ded i n b o th g ro u p s) make th e a n a ly s is somewhat t e n t a t i v e .
A lth o u g h th e p a tt e r n s o f p e rc e p tio n s o f th e s t a f f have been
a n a ly z e d d e s c r i p t i v e l y , and a tte m p ts w ere made to e x p la in
them i n th e d i f f e r e n t a r e a s o f a n a l y s i s , i t i s h a rd to
make com prehensive c o n c lu s io n s a b o u t t h e i r p e rc e p tio n s o f
th e s o c i a l sy ste m . To a r r i v e a t b e t t e r c o n c lu sio n s
a l a r g e r and in d e p e n d e n t s t a f f would be n e ed e d .
The g e n e ra l c o n c lu s io n s seem to in d ic a t e t h a t th e
su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y h a s some m e rit i n : ( a ) d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g
among c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s ; and (b ) su g g e s tin g
d if f e r e n c e s i n th e view s t h a t o ffe n d e rs fo rm u la te on th e
s o c i a l sy stem s w hich d ev elo p i n t h e i r r e s p e c tiv e o rg a n iz a
t i o n s . R u rth e r e m p ir ic a l s tu d y , how ever, i s r e q u ir e d
b e fo re d e f i n i t e s ta te m e n ts can be made a b o u t th e u s e f u ln e s s
o f th e ty p o lo g y on a l l e ig h t d im e n sio n s. I t rem ain s to be
se en i f th e r e a re o r g a n iz a tio n s w hich w ould f i t i n to a l l
th e t h e o r e t i c a l l y c o n s tr u c te d ty p e s .
I t sh o u ld be m entioned t h a t p ro b a b ly some o f th e
m e th o d o lo g ic a l problem s w hich c o n fro n te d t h i s stu d y stem
from th e f a c t t h a t i t was a p a r t o f a l a r g e - s c a l e r e s e a r c h
1^1
p r o j e c t . ^ Some t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s id e r a tio n s were s a c r i f i c e d
due to th e f a c t t h a t th e e m p iric a l a n a ly s is was co n d u cted
on a body o f d a ta w hich was p r e v io u s ly c o l l e c t e d . The
problem s w hich have em erged re g a rd in g th e s t a f f g ro u p s a re
a ls o due to t h i s s i t u a t i o n .
F u tu re r e s e a r c h w i l l have to answ er among many
o t h e r s , two a d d itio n a l q u e s tio n s : w hat i s th e im p act o f
th e s iz e o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n on th e e x p re s s e d view s con
c e rn in g th e s o c ia l sy stem ? And, how much o f th e e x p re s s e d
p e rc e p tio n s o f BR I I p a r t i c i p a n t s i s due to th e n a tu r e o f
th e new o r g a n iz a tio n a l p o l i c i e s , and how much i s due to
th e dynamic o f c h an g e , p e r se ?
Im p lic a tio n s
T h is stu d y seem s to have im p lic a tio n s i n two
a r e a s : ( a ) ty p o lo g y c o n s tr u c tio n , (b ) c o r r e c t i o n s .
( a ) The c o n s tr u c tio n o f t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p o l
ogy i s a s te p tow ard th e system atization o f th e f i e l d o f
ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n s . T h is s y s te m a tiz a tio n i s a p rim a ry
f u n c tio n o f a ty p o lo g y ; a s McKinney (1 9 6 6 :2 1 6 ) s t a t e s a
ty p o lo g y h a s to p r e s e n t a s e t o f ty p e s w hich " i d e n t i f y ,
s im p lif y , and o rd e r th e c o n c re te d a ta so t h a t th e y may be
d e s c rib e d i n term s t h a t make them c o m p a rab le ." U n til now
^Empey and lu b e c k , The S ilv e r la k e E x p e rim e n t:
T e s tin g D elin q u e n cy , Theory and Community I n te r v e n tio n
(1 9 7 0 ).
1^2
o n ly one ty p o lo g y o f ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s
was a v a i l a b l e , th e S t r e e t , V in te r , and Perrow ( 1 9 6 6 )
ty p o lo g y , w hich a tte m p te d to i d e n t i f y ju v e n ile o rg a n iz a
t i o n s a c c o rd in g to t h e i r o f f i c i a l g o a l o r i e n t a t i o n (c u sto d y
v s . t r e a tm e n t) . The c o n te n tio n o f th e c u r r e n t stu d y was
t h a t an o r g a n iz a tio n a l ty p o lo g y b ased only on one d im en sio n
i s n o t d e t a i l e d and s o p h is tic a te d enough to make m ean in g fu l
co m p ariso n s among d i f f e r e n t o r g a n iz a tio n s . T h is l a s t p o in t
was s u p p o rte d by th e e m p iric a l in q u ir y o f th e c u r r e n t
s tu d y . A lthough a l l th r e e o rg a n iz a tio n s u n d e r stu d y were
tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d (a c c o rd in g to th e c r i t e r i a s e t f o r t h i s
d im e n s io n ), th e p e rc e p tio n s re g a rd in g t h e i r s o c ia l sy stem s
w ere c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t .
B eside th e f u n c tio n o f s y s te m a tiz a tio n , a ty p o lo g y
i s su p p o sed to have some e x p la n a to ry and p r e d ic tiv e a b i l i t y ,
o r i n S c h ra g ’ s (1 9 6 1 :3 5 7 ) words i t i s supposed to be an
•'embryo th e o r y ."
The c u r r e n t ty p o lo g y , w hich was c o n s tr u c te d on th e
b a s is o f th r e e o r g a n iz a tio n a l d im e n sio n s: (a ) g o a l o r ie n
t a t i o n : c u s to d y - tr e a tm e n t, (b ) sco p e: t o ta l- m e d ia to r y ,
( c ) d e c isio n -m a k in g : p e r e m p to r y - p a r tic ip a to r y , was
d e sig n e d to p ro v id e su ch e x p la n a to ry and p r e d ic tiv e a b i l i
t i e s .
The e m p iric a l in q u ir y i n to th e u s e f u ln e s s o f th e
ty p o lo g y in d ic a te d t h a t i t does have some e x p la n a to ry and
1^ 3
p r e d i c ti v e v a lu e . T h is e x p la n a to ry and p r e d ic tiv e a b i l i t y
was n o t e q u a l i n a l l th e q u e s tio n s , and i n c e r t a i n i n s t a n
c e s i t was b a sed r a t h e r on s c a le s c o re s (w hich in d ic a t e
o n ly g e n e r a l te n d e n c ie s ) r a t h e r th a n on s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g
n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s . H ow ever, t h i s outcome a s a f i r s t s te p
i s p ro m isin g and i n d i c a t e s t h a t i t would be w o rth w h ile to
t r y to r e f i n e th e ty p o lo g y .
F i r s t , i t sh o u ld be s e e n , i f a l l e ig h t su g g e ste d
ty p e s o f ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s e x i s t in
r e a l i t y . T h is would in v o lv e some e x p lo ra to ry and d e s c r ip
t i v e r e s e a r c h w hich c o u ld a id i n r e f i n i n g th e su g g e ste d
ty p e s . S econd, th e c u s to d y -tre a tm e n t dim ension sh o u ld be
d e fin e d i n a more e la b o r a te d m anner. I t seems to be t h a t
\
m ost e x i s t i n g ju v e n ile c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s w ould be
c l a s s i f i e d a s " tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d " a lth o u g h th e r e i s a
w ide ran g e o f d if f e r e n c e s i n t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l and change
a s s u m p tio n s , and i n t h e i r c o r r e c tio n a l m ethods. A more
r ig o r o u s ly d e fin e d s e t o f c r i t e r i a f o r t h i s dim ension would
b e n e f i t th e e f f e c tiv e n e s s o f th e ty p o lo g y . T h ird , th e
e m p iric a l stu d y d e a l t o n ly w ith r e l a t i v e l y sm all o rg a n iz a
t i o n s . More r e s e a r c h sh o u ld be c o n d u cted to exam ine th e
r e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een th e s iz e o f th e o rg a n iz a tio n s and
t h e i r sc o p e . In o th e r w o rd s, i t sh o u ld be seen i f a la r g e
c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n (500 - 1000 o f fe n d e r s ) c o u ld
a d o p t a m ed ia to ry program o r i f i t n e c e s s a r il y would rem ain
l¥ *
a t o t a l o r g a n iz a tio n . F o u rth , i t a ls o sh o u ld he se en to
w hat e x te n t a la r g e o r g a n iz a tio n would be a b le to a d o p t a
p a r t i c i p a t o r y p o lic y . What e x te n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e
d e c isio n -m a k in g p ro c e s s c o u ld be p ro v id e d f o r th e o ffe n d e rs
i n a la r g e c o r r e c tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n .
These e la b o r a tio n s and re fin e m e n ts would make th e
ty p o lo g y more s e n s itiv e and t h i s i n tu r n would in c r e a s e i t s
p r e d i c ti v e and e x p la n a to ry c a p a c i t i e s .
I f th e e la b o r a tio n and re fin e m e n ts in c re a s e th e
above-m entioned c a p a c i t i e s , th e n i t w i l l se rv e two m ajo r
o b je c tiv e s o f e m p iric a l s c ie n c e , nam ely to
. . • d e s c rib e p a r t i c u l a r phenomena i n th e w orld
o f o u r e x p e rie n c e and to e s t a b l i s h g e n e ra l p r in
c i p l e s by means o f w hich th e y can be e x p la in e d
and p r e d ic te d . (H em ple, 1 9 5 2 :1 )
. (b ) Im p lic a tio n f o r th e f i e l d o f c o r r e c tio n s
The e m p iric a l i n q u i i y , b e sid e th e t e s t i n g o f th e
su g g e ste d ty p o lo g y , h a s some im p lic a tio n s f o r th e f i e l d o f
c o r r e c t i o n s .
I t su g g e ste d t h a t among tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d ju v e n ile
c o r r e c t i o n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s th e r e a re d if f e r e n c e s i n th e
" o r g a n iz a tio n a l c lim a te ." O rg a n iz a tio n a l c lim a te i s
d e fin e d a s
. . . a r e l a t i v e l y e n d u rin g q u a lity o f th e i n t e r n a l
environm ent o f an o r g a n iz a tio n t h a t (a ) i s e x p e r i
en ced by i t s m em bers, (b ) in f lu e n c e s t h e i r b e h a v io r ,
and ( c ) can be d e s c rib e d in term s o f th e v a lu e s o f
a p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( o r a t t r i b u t e s )
o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n . (T a g iu ri and L itw in , 1 9 6 8 :2 7 )
Ik5
I n t h i s s tu d y t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s w ere e x p r e s s e d b y
th e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e g a r d i n g th e s o c i a l
s y s te m i n t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . G e n e r a lly th e o r g a n i z a t i o n
w h ic h p r o v id e d o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f o f f e n d e r s
i n th e d e c is io n - m a k in g p r o c e s s ( p a r t i c i p a t o r y p o l i c y ) an d
p r o v id e d w id e r i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h th e s u r r o u n d in g com m unity
( m e d ia to r y p o l i c y ) seem ed t o c r e a t e a m ore f a v o r a b l e o r g a n i
z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e , w h ic h w o u ld r e s u l t i n th e r e i n t e g r a t i o n
o f o f f e n d e r s i n t o th e com m unity an d i n th e r e d u c t i o n o f
r e c i d i v i s m . C o n s e q u e n tly , i t m ig h t b e assu m ed t h a t t h i s
m ore f a v o r a b l e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e w o u ld h a v e a s t r o n g e r
r e h a b i l i t a t i v e e f f e c t . The d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e e n t h e p e r c e p
t i o n s o f t h e o f f e n d e r s o f th e m e d i a t o r y - p a r t i c i p a t o r y
o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d th e o f f e n d e r s i n t h e o t h e r tw o o r g a n i z a
t i o n s w e re s e e n m a in ly i n : ( a ) s u p p o r t o f n o rm s; ( b ) s t a f f -
o f f e n d e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s , ( c ) p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e d e c i s i o n
m a k in g p r o c e s s , an d ( d ) c o n s e n s u s .
T h ese r e s u l t s seem t o i n d i c a t e a c e r t a i n b r e a k
th r o u g h i n c o r r e c t i o n s c o n c e r n in g th e r e c u r r i n g p ro b le m i n
t r a d i t i o n a l , t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n s r e g a r d i n g th e o p p o s i t i o n a l
n a t u r e o f th e " in m a te c u l t u r e " (C lem m er, 1958; S y k e s ,
M e s s in g e r , I9 6 0 ; P o l s k y , 1967; S y k e s , 1 9 6 8 ). T h is ty p e o f
in m a te o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h i t s o p p o s i t i o n t o th e v a lu e s y s te m
o f th e w id e r s o c i e t y , a n d t o i t s im m e d ia te r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ,
th e s t a f f , h a s b e e n a m a jo r b lo c k i n th e way o f s u c c e s s f u l
1M -6
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n an d r e i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e o f f e n d e r s i n th e
c o m m u n ity . T h is e m p i r i c a l a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e w h ic h d e v e lo p e d i n th e m e d ia to r y -
p a r t i c i p a t o r y o r g a n i z a t i o n w as s u c c e s s f u l t o some e x t e n t i n
c h a n g in g t h i s o p p o s i t i o n a l a t t i t u d e o f o f f e n d e r s a n d o p e n
t h e way t o a m ore m e a n in g f u l c o o p e r a t i o n b e tw e e n s t a f f an d
o f f e n d e r s .
I n th e c a s e o f th e o t h e r tw o o r g a n i z a t i o n s , Boys*
R e p u b lic a t 1966 an d B o y s ' R e p u b lic a t 1 9 6 8 , i t i s h a r d e r
t o d e t e c t s u b s t a n t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s r e g a r d i n g th e s o c i a l
s y s te m a s i t w as p e r c e i v e d by th e o f f e n d e r s . N e v e r t h e l e s s ,
th e a n a l y s i s te n d e d t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e n e w ly a d o p te d
g r o u p p ro g ra m i n B o y s’ R e p u b lic I I h a d some e f f e c t s i n th e
d e s i r e d d i r e c t i o n m a in ly r e g a r d i n g th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e
d e c is io n - m a k in g p r o c e s s . M ost o f th e d i f f e r e n c e s , h o w e v e r,
w ere n o t s u b s t a n t i a l b e c a u s e th e o f f e n d e r s i n BR I I w e re
s t i l l a d a p t i n g t o th e d a i l y g ro u p p r o c e s s a n d w e re s t i l l
p r o b in g i t .
F u r t h e r c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e g u id e d g ro u p i n t e r
a c t i o n p ro g ra m c o u p le d w i t h a n i n c r e a s e i n th e i n t e r a c t i o n
w i t h th e o u t s i d e c o m m u n ity , e . g . , s c h o o l a t t e n d a n c e i n com
m u n ity s c h o o l s , e t c e t e r a , p ro b a b ly w o u ld s u p p o r t t h e c r e a
t i o n o f a m ore r e h a b i l i t a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e w h ic h
w o u ld f a c i l i t a t e th e r e i n t e g r a t i o n o f th e o f f e n d e r s i n t o
s o c i e t y a f t e r t h e i r r e l e a s e .
From th e e m p i r i c a l e v a l u a t i o n o f th e t h r e e
1 k7
c o r r e c t i o n a l p ro g ra m s i t c a n be c o n c lu d e d t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e
g o a l s o f c o r r e c t i o n s , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , a n d r e i n t e g r a t i o n
i n t o s o c i e t y c a n be a c h ie v e d o n ly by t r y i n g o u t new c o r r e c
t i o n a l p ro g ra m s b a s e d on t h e o r e t i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s , i n v o l v i n g
c o n tin u o u s r e s e a r c h a n d e v a l u a t i o n w h ic h c a n s e r v e a s f e e d
b a c k f o r th e a d ju s t m e n t a n d im p ro v em e n t o f t h e s e p r o g r a m s .
B I B L I O G R A P H Y
l*f8
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adamek, Raymond J . and Edward Z. D ager
1968 '‘S o c ia l s t r u c t u r e , i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and change in a
tr e a tm e n t- o r ie n te d i n s t i t u t i o n . " A m erican S o cio
l o g i c a l Review V ol. 3 3 , No. 6 ( December ) : 9 3 l “ 91 + 1 +.
B a rto n , A lle n H.
1965 "The c o n c e p t o f p ro p e rty -s p a e e i n s o c ia l re s e a rc h "
( e d .) i n P au l P . L a z a r s f e ld and M o rris R osenberg ( e d s .)
The Language o f S o c ia l R e se a rc h . New York: The
F re e P r e s s .
B e c k e r, Howard S .
1963 O u ts id e rs : S tu d ie s i n th e S o c io lo g y o f D ev ian ce.
New York: The F ree P r e s s .
B e rk . B ern ard B.
1966 " O rg a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls and inm ate o r g a n iz a tio n ."
A m erican J o u rn a l o f S o cio lo g y V o l. LXXI, No. 5
( M arch):5 2 2 -5 3 ^ .
B i e r s t e d t , R o b ert
1963 The S o c ia l O rd e r. New York: M cG raw -H ill.
( e d . )
B la lo c k , H u b ert M.
i 960 S o c ia l S t a t i s t i c s . New Yorks M cG raw -H ill.
B la u , P e t e r M.
1955 The ly n am ics o f B u re au c ra c y . C hicago: U n iv e rs ity
o f Chicago P r e s s .
B la u , P e te r M. and R ic h a rd W. S c o tt
1962 Form al O rg a n iz a tio n s . San F ra n c is c o : C h a n d le r.
B u c k le y , W alter
1967 S o c io lo g y and Modern System s T heory. Englewood
C l i f f , N. J . : P r e n t ic e - H a l l .
Caplow , Theodore
196*+ P r i n c ip l e s o f O rg a n iz a tio n s . New York: H a rc o u rt,
B race & W orld.
1^9
1 5 0
C arzo , J r . , Rocco and John N. Yanouzas
196/ Form al O rg a n iz a tio n s a System A pproach. Homewood,
111 •: Irw in - H orsey.
C ie o u r e l, Aaron V.
1964- Method and M easurem ent i n S o c io lo g y . New Y ork:
The F ree P r e s s .
Clemmer, Honald
1965 The P ris o n Community. New Y ork: H o lt, R e in h a rt
(R ev.E d.) and W inston.
C low ard, R ich a rd A.
i 960 " S o c ia l c o n tr o l i n th e p r i s o n ," i n T h e o re tic a l
S tu d ie s i n S o c ia l O rg a n iz a tio n o f th e P r is o n .
New York: S o c ia l S cien ce R e se arch C o u n c il.
Pam phlet 15.
C low ard, R ich a rd A. and Lloyd E . O h lin
1960 D elinquency and O p p o rtu n ity . New York: The F ree
P r e s s .
Cohen, A lb e rt K.
1955 D e lin q u e n t Boys: The C u ltu re o f th e Gang.
New York: The F re e P r e s s .
C ohen, A lb e rt K.
1 9 6 ? "The stu d y o f s o c ia l d is o r g a n iz a tio n and d e v ia n t
b e h a v io r," i n R o b ert K. M erton. L eonard Broom,
L eonard S . C o t t r e l l , J r . ( e d s . ) , S ociology T oday.
New York and E v an sto n : H a rp er Torehbook e d i t i o n .
Cohen, A lb e rt £ • and Jam es F . S h o r t, J r .
1958 "R esearch i n d e lin q u e n t s u b c u ltu r e s ." The J o u rn a l
o f S o c ia l I s s u e s V ol. XIV.
C o s tn e r, H e rb e rt L .
1965 " C r i te r ia f o r m easures o f a s s o c i a t io n ." A m erican
S o c io lo g ic a l Review V o l. 3 0 , No. 3 ( J u n e ) :34-1-352.
C re s s e y , Donald R.
1955 "Changing c r im in a ls : th e a p p lic a tio n o f th e
th e o ry o f d i f f e r e n t i a l a s s o c i a t io n ." Am erican
J o u rn a l o f S o c io lo g y V o l. LXI (S e p te m b e r):116-120.
C re sse y , Donald R.
1961 The P ris o n S tu d ie s i n I n s t i t u t i o n a l O rg a n iz a tio n
( e d .) and Change. New York: H o lt, R e in h a rd , and
W inston.
151
C re sse y , Donald R.
1965 " P ris o n o r g a n iz a tio n ," i n Jam es G. March ( e d .)
Handbook o f O rg a n iz a tio n s . C hicago: Rand
McNally and Co.
Empey, Lamar T .
1 96/ A lte r n a tiv e s to I n c a r c e r a tio n . H.E.W. O ffic e o f
J u v e n ile D elinquency and Y outh D evelopm ent.
E m pey, L am ar T .
1 9 6 8 (a) "O ffen d er p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n th e c o r r e c t i o n a l p ro
c e s s : g e n e ra l t h e o r e t i c a l i s s u e s ," in O ffe n d ers
a s a C o rre c tio n a l Manpower R e so u rce . W ashington,
D. C .: J o i n t Commission on C o rre c tio n a l Manpower
and T ra in in g .
E m pey, L am ar T .
196 8 (h ) "Contem porary program s f o r c o n v ic te d ju v e n ile
o ff e n d e r s : problem s o f th e o r y , p r a c tic e and
r e s e a r c h ." P r e s i d e n t 's Commission on th e Causes
and P re v e n tio n o f V io len ce (N ovem ber).
E m pey, L am ar T .
1 9 6 0 ( c ) " S o c io lo g ic a l p e r s p e c tiv e s and sm a ll-g ro u p work
w ith s o c i a l ly d e p riv e d y o u th ." The S o c ia l S e r
v ic e Review V o l. *+2, No. ^ (D ecem ber).
Empey, Lamar T. and Jerom e Rabow
"The Provo e x p erim e n t i n d e lin q u e n c y ." A m erican
S o c io lo g ic a l Review V ol. 2 6 , No. 5 (O c to b e r):
679-695.
Empey. Lamar T ., George T . Newland, S te v en G. Lubeck
i 960 "The S ilv e r la k e e x p e rim e n t: a community stu d y i n
d e lin q u e n c y r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . " P ro g re ss R e p o rt
No. 3 , Youth S tu d ie s C e n te r, U n iv e rs ity o f
S o u th e rn C a lif o r n ia .
Empey, Lamar T ., George G. Newland
I 960 " S ta f f Inm ate C o lla b o ra tio n : A stu d y o f c r i t i c a l
in c id e n ts i n th e S ilv e r la k e e x p e rim e n t." J o u rn a l
o f R esearch i n Crime and D elinquency ( J a n u a ry ).
Empey, Lamar T. and S te v en G. Lubeck
I 960 "C onform ity and d ev ian ce i n ,t h e 's i t u a t i o n o f
co m p an y .'" Am erican S o c io lo g ic a l Review V o l. 3 3 ,
No. 5 ( O c to b e r) :760-77^.
152
Empey, Lamar T . and S te v en G. Lubeck
1970 The S ilv e r la k e E xperim ents T e s tin g D elinquency
Theory and Community I n t e r v e n ti o n , F orthcom ing
book, A ld in e , C hicago.
E ric k s o n , Maynard L .
U ndated "The group n a tu r e o f d e lin q u e n c y ." U n p u b lish ed
p a p e r.
E t z i o n i , A m itai
1961 A C om parative A n a ly sis o f Complex O rg a n iz a tio n s .
New York: The F ree P r e s s ,
E t z i o n i , A m itai
196^ Modem O r g a n iz a tio n s . Englewood C l i f f , N. J . :
P r e n t ic e - H a l l .
F e rd in a n d , Theodore N .
1966 T y p o lo g ie s o f D e lin q u e n c y . New Y o rk : Random
H ouse
F e s t i n g e r , Leon and D a n ie l Katz ( e d s .)
1965 R esearch M ethods i n th e B e h a v io ra l S c ie n c e s .
(p a p e r- New Y ork: H o lt, R in e h a rt and W inston,
back edi
t i o n )
G e rth , Hans and W right C. M ills
1967 From Max W eber. New Y ork: O xford.
(new e d .)
G ibbons, Don C.
1965 Changing th e L aw breaker: The T reatm ent o f
D e lin q u e n ts and C rim in a ls . Englewood C l i f f ,
N. J . : P r e n tic e - H a ll.
G ia llo m b o rd o , Rose
1966 S o c ie ty o f Women: A Study o f a Women P r is o n .
New York: Jo h n W iley and S o n s.
G l a s e r , D a n ie l
1958 "The s o c io lo g ic a l ap p ro ach to crim e and c o r r e c
t i o n , " in Law and C ontem porary I s s u e s . Duke
U n iv e rs ity School o f Law (Autum n).
G o ffm an , E r v in g
1961 "On th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , "
i n Donald R. C ressey ( e d .) The P r is o n . New York;
H o lt, R e in h a r t, and W inston.
153
G o u ld n er, A lv in
1965 " O rg a n iz a tio n a l a n a l y s i s ," i n R o b ert K. M erton,
( e d .) L eonard Broom, L eonard S . C o t t r e l l , J r . , ( e d s .)
S o c io lo g y Today. New York and E v an sto n : H arp er
T orchbooks.
G o u ld n er, A lv in
1967 P a tte r n s o f I n d u s t r i a l B u re a u c ra c y . New Y ork:
( e d .) The P ree P r e s s .
G re e r, S c o tt
1969 The Logic o f S o c ia l In q u iz y . C hicago: A ld in e
P u b lis h e r s .
G ro s s e r, George H.
1958 "The r o le o f in fo rm a l inm ate g ro u p s in change o f
v a lu e s ." C h ild re n V o l. 5 , No. 1 (Ja n u a ry -
Februazy ) .
G rusky, O scar
1959 " O rg a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls and th e b e h a v io r o f
in fo rm a l l e a d e r s ." A m erican J o u rn a l o f S o cio lo g y
V o l. LXV, No. 1 ( J u l y ) .
H a l l, A. L. and R. E . Pagen
1956 D e f in itio n o f System . G en eral System s I .
H em pel, C a rl G.
1952 "Symposium: problem s o f c o n c e p t and th e o ry
fo rm a tio n i n th e s o c ia l s c ie n c e s ," in S c ie n c e ,
L anguage, and Human R ig h ts . U n iv e rs ity o f
P h ila d e lp h ia P r e s s .
Hem pel, C a rl G.
1952 "P undam entals o f c o n ce p t fo rm a tio n i n e m p iric a l
s c ie n c e ." F o u n d a tio n s o f th e U n ity o f S c ien c e
V o l. I I , No. 7 , U n iv e rs ity o f Chicago P r e s s .
Homans, George C.
1950 The Human G roup. New York: H a rc o u rt, B race &
W orld, I n c .
Jo h n so n , E lm er H.
196^ C rim e, C o rre c tio n and S o c ie ty . Homewood, 1 1 1 .:
The D orsey P r e s s .
J o n e s , Jam es A.
196^ "The n a tu r e o f com pliance i n c o r r e c t i o n a l i n s t i
t u t i o n s f o r ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n ts ." J o u rn a l o f
R esearch on Crime and D elin q u en cy 1 , 2 ( J u l y ) :
8 3 -9 5 .
154-
K a tz . D a n ie l and R o b e rt L . Kahn
19d6 The S o c ia l P sychology o f O rg a n iz a tio n s .
New York: Jo h n W iley and S o n s.
K L ein, Malcolm and L o is Y. Craw ford
1960 "G roup, g a n g s , and c o h e s iv e n e s s ." Youth S tu d ie s
C e n te r, U n iv e rs ity o f S o u th ern C a lif o r n ia .
K orn, R ic h a rd R. and L loyd W. McCorkle
1 9 5 9 C rim inology and P en o lo g y , New York: H enry H o lt
and Co.
L i k e r t , R e n sis
1961 New P a tte r n s o f M anagement. New Y ork: McGraw-
H i l l .
L i t t e r e r , Jo sep h A. ( e d .)
1963 O rg a n iz a tio n s : S tru c tu r e and B e h a v io r.
New York: Jo h n W iley and S o n s.
L ubeck, S tev en G. and Lamar T . Empey
"M ediatory v s . t o t a l i n s t i t u t i o n : th e c a se o f
th e runaw ay." S o c ia l Problem s V o l. 1 6 , No. 2
( P a l l ) : 24-2-260.
M a rtin , Jo h n M. and Jo se p h P . P i t z p a t r i c k
1964- D e lin q u e n t B e h a v io r. New York: Random H ouse.
M a rtin d a le , Don
1960 The N ature and fy p e s o f S o c io lo g ic a l T heory.
B oston: H o u g h to n -M ifflin Co.
M eC leary, R ich a rd H.
1961 " A u th o rita ria n is m and th e b e l i e f sy stem o f
i n c o r r i g i b l e s , " i n Donald R. C ressey ( e d .) The
P r is o n . New Y ork: H o lt, R e in h a rt and W in sto n .
M cC orkle, L loyd W. and R ich ard R. Korn
1954- " R e s o c ia liz a tio n w ith in W a lls ." The A nnals o f
th e A m erican Academy o f P o l i t i c a l S cience 88- 9 8 .
M cC orkle, L loyd W ., A lb e rt E l i a s , and Bixby P . L o v e ll
1958 The H ig h f ie ld s S to r y . New Y ork: Henry H o lt and
Co.
McKinney, John C.
1966 C o n s tru c tiv e Typology and S o c ia l T heory.
New York: A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro fts .
M erton, R o b ert K.
1957 S o c ia l Theory and S o c ia l S tr u c tu r e . G len co e:
( e d .) The P ree P r e s s .
1 5 5
M ouledous, Jo sep h C.
1963 'O rg a n iz a tio n a l g o a ls and s t r u c t u r a l changes a
stu d y o f th e o r g a n iz a tio n o f a p r is o n s o c i a l
sy ste m ." S o c ia l F o rc es (M arch).
Newcomb, Theodore M.
1965 "The stu d y o f c o n s e n s u s ," i n M erton, Broom,
C o t t r e l l , J r . , S o cio lo g y Today. New York and
E v an sto n : H a rp e r Torchbook E d itio n .
P a rs o n s , T a lc o tt
1961 "S u g g e stio n s f o r a s o c io lo g ic a l ap p ro ach to th e
th eo zy o f o r g a n iz a tio n s ," r e p r i n t e d i n A m itai
E tz io n i ( e d .) Complex O rg a n iz a tio n s . New York:
H o lt, R e in h a r t, and W inston, 32-*+7.
P erro w , C h a rle s
1967 "A fram ew ork f o r th e c o m p a rativ e a n a ly s is o f
o r g a n iz a tio n s ." A m erican S o c io lo g ic a l R eview ,
V ol. 3 2 , No. 2 (A p ril):1 ^ « ~ 208.
P o ls k y , Howard W.
C o ttag e S ix . New York: John W iley and S o n s,
S cience E d itio n .
R hoads, John K.
1967 "The type a s a l o g ic a l fo rm ." S o cio lo g y and
S o c ia l R e se arch V o l. 51, No. 3 ( A p r i l ) .
R udner, R ic h a rd S .
1966 P h ilo so p h y o f S o c ia l S c ie n c e . Englewood C l i f f ,
N. J . : P r e n tic e - H a ll.
S c h e in , E dgar H.
1965 O rg a n iz a tio n a l P sy ch o lo g y . Englewood C l i f f ,
N. J . : P r e n t ic e - H a l l.
S c h ra g , C lare n ce
1961 "Some fo u n d a tio n s f o r a th e o ry o f c o r r e c t i o n s ,"
in Ronald R. C ressey ( e d .) The P ris o n .
New York: H o lt- R e in h a r t, W inston.
S c h u r, Edwin M.
1965 Crim es w ith o u t V ic tim s . Englewood C l i f f , N. J . :
P r e n t ic e - H a l l .
S c o t t, Max L .
i 960 "Sm all g ro u p s: an e f f e c t i v e tre a tm e n t a p p ro a ch
in r e s i d e n t i a l program s f o r a d o le s c e n ts ."
U npublished p a p e r.
156
S c o t t , W. R ich ard
196^ "Theory o f o r g a n iz a tio n s ," i n R o b ert E . 1 . P a r is
( e d .) Handbook o f S o c io lo g y . C hicago: Rand
M cN ally.
S e l l t i z , C l a i r e , M arie Jo h o d a , M orton D e u tsch , S t u a r t W.
Cook
1962 R esearch M ethods i n S o c ia l R e la tio n s . New York:
( e d .) H o lt, R e in h a r t, W inston.
S e lz h ic k , P h ilip
1961 "F oundation o f th e th e o ry o f o r g a n iz a tio n ,"
r e p r in te d i n A m itai E tz io n i ( e d .) Complex O rgan-
i z a t i o n s . New Y ork: H o lt, R e in h a r t, W inston.
S h o r t, J r . , James P . and P red S tro d tb e c k
1 9 6 ? Group P ro c e ss and Gang D e lin q u e n cy . U n iv e rs ity
o f Chicago P r e s s .
Sim on, H e rb e rt A.
1 9 6 $ A d m in is tra tiv e B e h a v io r. New York: The P ree
(p a p e r- P r e s s ,
back
e d i t i o n )
Sim pson, Jo n E .
1961 S e le c te d A sp ec ts o f I n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n a s P e r
c e iv e d by th e J u v e n ile O ffe n d e r. U npublished
P h.D . D i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity .
S t r e e t D a v id
1965 "Inm ates i n c u s to d ia l and tre a tm e n t s e t t i n g s . "
A m erican S o c io lo g ic a l Review V o l. 3 0 , No. 1
( F eb ru ary ): *+0- 55.
S t r e e t , D avid, R o b ert L . V in te r , C h a rle s Perrow
1966 O rg a n iz a tio n f o r T re a tm e n t. New York: P re e
P r e s s .
S tin ch co m b e, A rth u r 1 .
1968 C o n s tru c tin g S o c ia l T h e o rie s . New York:
H a rc o u rt, B ra c e , W orld.
S tu d t, E l l i o t , Sheldon i . M e ssin g e r, Thomas P . W ilson
i 960 C -U nit: S e a rc h f o r Community in P r is o n .
New Y ork: R u ss e ll-S a g e P o u n d a tio n .
S u th e r la n d , Edwin H.
19^7 P r in c ip le s o f .C rim inology. C hicago: l i p p i n c o t t
( e d .) Co.
15 7
S y k es. Gresham M.
i 960 The S o c ie ty o f C a p tiv e s . C o lleg e E d itio n .
New York: Atheneum.
S y k es, Gresham M. and Sheldon L . M essinger
1960 "Inm ate s o c i a l sy s te m ," i n T h e o r e tic a l S tu d ie s i n
S o c ia l O rg a n iz a tio n o f th e P r is o n . S o c ia l S c i
ence R esearch C ouncil Pam phlet 15.
T a g iu r i, Renado and George H. L itw in ( e d s .)
1968 O rg a n iz a tio n a l C lim ate—E x p lo ra tio n s o f a C oncept.
D iv is io n o f R e se a rc h , G raduate School o f B u sin e ss
A d m in is tra tio n , H arvard U n iv e r s ity , B o sto n .
V in te r , R o b e rt D. and M o rris Jan o w itz
1959 " E ffe c tiv e i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n ts ."
S o c ia l S e rv ic e Review 33 ( J u n e ) :1 1 9 -1 3 1 .
W alker, W illiam S .
1958 A P a r tic ip a n t- O b s e r v e r A n a ly sis o f Group P ro c e ss
and Group B e h av io r a t H ig h fie ld s P r o j e c t . Unpub
l is h e d P h.D . D i s s e r t a t i o n , New York U n iv e r s ity .
W eber, Max
1952 n rc fc L e e s s e n t i a l s o f b u re a u c r a tic o rg a n iz a tio n : an
id e a l- ty p e c o n s tr u c tio n ," i n R o b e rt K. M erton,
A ils a P . G ray, B a rb ara H ockey, Hanan C. S e lv in
( e d s . ) , R eader i n B u re a u c ra c y , 1 8 -2 6 . New York:
The P ree P r e s s .
W heeler, S ta n to n
1958 S o c ia l O rg a n iz a tio n in a C o rre c tio n a l Community.
U npublished P h.D . D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rs ity o f
W ashington.
W heeler, S ta n to n
1961 " S o c ia liz a tio n i n c o r r e c t i o n a l c o m m u n ities."
Am erican S o c io lo g ic a l Review V o l. 26, No. 5
(O c to b e r).
W heeler, S ta n to n
1966 "The s t r u c tu r e o f fo rm a lly o rg a n iz e d s o c i a l i z a
t io n s e t t i n g s , " i n O rv ille G. B rim , J r . and
S ta n to n W h eeler, S o c i a l i z a ti o n a f t e r C h ild h o o d .
New York: John W iley and S o n s.
W olfgang, M arvin E .
1967 "The c u ltu r e o f y o u th in ta s k fo rc e r e p o r t :
ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n c y and y o u th c rim e ." The
P r e s i d e n t ’s Commission on Law E nforcem ent and
A d m in is tra tio n o f J u s t i c e .
M ayer M.
i "The c o r r e c t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n f o r ju v e n ile
o f f e n d e r s ." S o c ia l Problem s (Sum m er):5 7 -6 7 .
A P P E N D I X
THE SILVERLAKE EXPERIMENT
SOCIAL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE NO. 1
159
THE SILVERLAKE EXPERIMENT
SOCIAL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE NO. 1
How o ld a re you:
Time i n i n s t i t u t i o n : ____________________
GOALS;
1 . How im p o rta n t do you th in k th e fo llo w in g g o a ls a re to
th e s t a f f h e re ?
a . The p u rp o se o f t h i s p la c e i s to p r o t e c t th e o u t
s id e community from boys who have com m itted
o f fe n s e s a g a in s t th e community*
( ) I m p o r ta n t
( ) U n d e c id e d
( ) N ot i m p o r t a n t
b . The purpose i s t r a i n i n g . th ro u g h e d u c a tio n o r w ork,
so t h a t th e boy w i l l le a r n th in g s he can u se a f t e r
he g e ts o u t.
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
c . The pu rp o se i s to p u n ish boys who have v i o l a t e d th e
la w , so t h a t th e y w i l l le a r n n o t to do i t a g a in .
( ) I m p o r ta n t
( ) U n d e c id e d
( ) N o t im p o r t a n t
d . The p u rp o s e i s t o c h a n g e th e f e e l i n g s o r a t t i t u d e s
o f th e b o y s o h e w i l l u n d e r s t a n d h i m s e l f b e t t e r .
C ) I m p o r ta n t
( ) U n d e c id e d
( ) N o t i m p o r t a n t
1 6 0
1 61
e . The pu rp o se i s t r a i n i n g i n d i s c i p l i n e so th e boy-
w i l i le a r n to do w hat o th e r s w ant him to d o ,
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
2 . How im p o rta n t do you th in k th e fo llo w in g g o a ls a re to
th e boys h e re ?
a . The purpose o f t h i s p la c e i s to p r o t e c t th e o u ts id e
community from boys who have com m itted o ff e n s e s
a g a in s t th e com m unity.
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
b . The .purpose i s t r a i n i n g , th ro u g h e d u c a tio n o r w ork,
so t h a t th e boy w i l l le a r n th in g s he can u s e a f t e r
he g e ts o u t.
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
c . The p urpose i s to p u n ish boys who have v i o l a t e d
th e law so t h a t th e y w i l l l e a r n n o t to do i t a g a in .
( ) Im p o rta n t
C ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
d . The purpose i s to change th e f e e l i n g s o r a t t i t u d e s
o f th e b o y s, so th e y w i l l u n d e rs ta n d th e m se lv e s
b e t t e r .
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
e • The pu rp o se i s t r a i n i n g in d i s c i p l i n e so th e boy
w i l l le a r n to do w hat o th e rs w ant him to do.
( ) Im p o rta n t
( ) U ndecided
( ) Not im p o rta n t
3* Would you a g re e o r d is a g re e ? Most boys h e re a re i n t e r
e s te d i n j u s t g e t t i n g by w h ile th e y a re h e r e . They do
1 6 2
n o t c a re to l e a r n a b o u t why th e y d id th e th in g s t h a t
g o t them in to tr o u b le o r how to c h an g e .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g re e
* + • T h is p la c e u s u a lly seems more co n ce rn e d ab o u t k e e p in g
boys u n d e r c o n tr o l th a n w ith h e lp in g them w ith t h e i r
p ro b le m s.
C ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
NORMS:
5. When you f i r s t came h e r e , who d id you go to to f i n d
o u t w hat i t was l i k e ?
( ) Boys
C ) S t a f f
( ) Boys and S t a f f
C ) No one
6 . Would y o u r l i f e i n t h i s program be e a s i e r i f th e r e were
more r u l e s , o r would i t be e a s i e r i f th e r e were few er
r u l e s ?
( ) More r u l e s
( ) A lr ig h t a s i t i s
C ) few er r u l e s
7 . When d e c is io n s and r u l e s a re m ade, who u s u a lly g e ts
m ost o f th e b e n e f i t s from them ?
( ) M ostly S t a f f
( ) M ostly Boys
( ) Boys and S t a f f
( ) No one b e n e f i ts from them
8 . The boys around t h i s p la c e have p r e t t y much t h e i r own
p r i v a t e s e t o f r u l e s .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
9 . Most o f th e r u l e s aro u n d h e re d o n ’t make much se n se to
me.
163
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
1 0 . Some boys and some p eo p le f e e l t h a t p la c e s l ik e t h i s
g iv e o p p o r tu n itie s f o r boys to l e a r n more a b o u t b e in g
d e lin q u e n t. How much, i f a n y th in g , have you le a r n e d
a b o u t how to commit crim es s in c e y o u 'v e been h e re ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
1 1 . A bout how much do th e boys in th e program have to say
a b o u t w hat k in d s o f r u l e s a re made?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) An a v erag e amount
C ) Not v e iy much
1 2 . S t a f f p e rs o n a lly k eep s th e boys in fo rm ed ab o u t th e
o p e ra tio n o f th e program .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
1 3 . S t a f f t a l k s to th e boys a b o u t p e rs o n a l m a tte rs su c h a s
th e way th e y b e h a v e , t a l k , dream , a f f e c t o th e r s , e t c .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
1 4 . How much does th e s t a f f t e l l boys th e y sh o u ld do c e r
t a i n th in g s to s ta y o u t o f tr o u b le ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
15• S t a f f p e rs o n a lly d e m o n stra te s to th e boys how ta s k s
sh o u ld be d o n e, c e r t a i n o p e ra tio n s p e rfo rm ed , e t c . ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
16^
1 6 . S t a f f makes changes i n th e program w ith o u t c o n s u ltin g
h o y s .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
17• Boys p e rs o n a lly keep o th e r hoys in fo rm ed a h o u t th e
o p e ra tio n o f th e program .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
1 8 . Boys t a l k to o th e r hoys a h o u t p e rs o n a l m a tte rs su ch a s
th e way th e y b e h a v e , t a l k , d r e s s , a f f e c t o t h e r s , e t c .
( ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
1 9 . How much do hoys t e l l o th e r hoys th e y sh o u ld do c e r
t a i n th in g s to s ta y o u t o f tr o u b le ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
C ) A l i t t l e
C ) None
2 0 . Boys p e rs o n a lly d e m o n stra te to o th e r hoys how ta s k s
sh o u ld he done, c e r t a i n o p e ra tio n s p e rfo rm ed , e t c .
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
C ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
2 1 . Boys make changes i n th e program w ith o u t c o n s u ltin g
o th e r h o y s.
C ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
2 2 . I f a guy r e a l l y w ants t o , he can ’c o n ’ h i s way around
m ost o f th e r u l e s a t t h i s p la c e .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
23. If guys around here really want to, they can usually
share in decisions about how this place is run.
C ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
2*f. In g e n e r a l, w hat do you th in k o f th e r u l e s around
h e re ?
C ) They’re h e lp f u l
( ) U ndecided
( ) T h e y 're n o t h e lp f u l
2 5 . How much do you a c t u a l l y th in k boys sh a re i n s o lv in g
problem s around h e re ?
( ) Too much
( ) About r i g h t
C ) Not enough
2 6 . W ho makes m ost o f th e r u l e s around h e re ?
C ) M ostly s t a f f
( ) M ostly boys
C ) S t a f f and boys to g e th e r
C ) U ndecided
REW A RD S AND PUNISHMENTS:
2 7 . Most o f th e r u l e s around h e re a re s t r i c t l y e n fo rc e d .
C ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
2 8 . W ho do you th in k d e c id e s when a boy goes home?
C ) M ostly s t a f f
( ) M ostly boys
C ) Boys and s t a f f to g e th e r
( ) U ndecided
2 9 . How o f te n do s t a f f members l e t boys g e t away w ith
d o in g th in g s t h a t th e y a re n o t supposed to do?
C ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
C ) None
166
3 0 . How much, do you th in k boys can do ab o u t ru n n in g th in g s
to s u i t th e m se lv e s?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
31* How much do boys put pressure on other boys to stay
out of trouble?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
C ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
C ) None
3 2 . How much do boys and s t a f f to g e th e r p u t p r e s s u re on
o th e r boys to s ta y o u t o f tr o u b le ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
33• How much does s t a f f a lo n e p u t p r e s s u r e on boys to
s ta y o u t o f tr o u b le ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
C ) None
3 ^ . How much do boys p u t p re s s u re on o th e r boys to c o v e r
up tr o u b le ?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
C ) None
35. Which o f th e above p r e s s u r e s i s th e g r e a t e s t ?
( ) S t a f f
( ) Boys
( ) S t a f f and boys
( ) No one
36. Who enforces the rules here?
( ) S t a f f
( ) Boys
167
( ) S t a f f and boys
( ) No one
3 7 . Would you say it is more important to get along with
the staff or with the other boys here?
( ) S t a f f
( ) Boys
3 8 . S t a f f rew ard s boys f o r good b e h a v io r.
C ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
39* S t a f f p u n ish e s boys f o r bad b e h a v io r.
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
^•0. S t a f f p e rs o n a lly t e l l s th e boys when th e y approve o f
w hat a boy h a s d o n e •
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g re e
^ 1 . S t a f f p e rs o n a lly t e l l s th e boys when th e y d isa p p ro v e
o f w hat a boy h a s done.
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
b2, Boys rew ard o th e r boys f o r good b e h a v io r.
C ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
^3* Boys p u n ish o th e r boys f o r bad b e h a v io r.
( ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
bb, Boys p e rs o n a lly t e l l o th e r boys when th e y approve o f
w hat a boy h a s d o n e.
1 68
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
*+ 5 • Boys p e rs o n a lly t e l l o th e r boys when th e y d isa p p ro v e
o f w hat a boy h a s d o n e.
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
ROUES AND STATUSES:
**6. A p o s itio n i n Boy G overnm ent, o r " J u n io r S ta f f " i s
r e a l l y a p o s i t io n to lo o k up t o .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
b7» T here a re to o many boys h e re who p u sh o th e r boys
a ro u n d .
( ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
^ 8 . S t a f f u s u a lly s e e s th in g s d i f f e r e n t from th e way boys
se e them .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
*+9. T h is p la c e i s p r e t t y much s p l i t i n t o two v e ry d i f f e r
e n t g ro u p s w ith s t a f f i n one group and boys i n th e
o t h e r .
( ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
5 0 . Do you f e e l t h a t members o f th e s t a f f a re r e a l l y
i n t e r e s t e d i n you b o y s, o r a re th e y j u s t d o ing t h e i r
jo b ?
( ) A ll a re r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d
C ) Only some a re i n t e r e s t e d
C ) They a re a l l j u s t d o in g t h e i r jo b
1 6 9
51 • W e would l ik e to know whom you lo o k up to m oat o f th e
below l i s t e d c a t e g o r i e s . L i s t them i n o rd e r: p u t a 1
b e fo re th e p e rso n o r group m ost lo o k ed up t o , a 2
b e fo re th e n e x t m ost lo o k ed up t o , and so on.
( ) The boys who worked t h e i r way up to an o f f i
c i a l p o s i t i o n , such a s J r . S t a f f , o r Boy
Government
( ) Boys who make i t c l e a r th e y w ant to s ta y o u t
o f tr o u b le
( ) The 's ly * guy who w ants to lo o k good to s t a f f
b u t i s s t i l l g e tt i n g i n tr o u b le
( ) S t a f f
( ) The 'h a r d ' guy who o p e n ly d e f ie s s t a f f and
th e r u l e s
( ) The f o llo w e r who i s l i k e l y to go e i t h e r w ay.
52. I f you had y o u r c h o ic e , who would you r a t h e r be h e re ?
L i s t o n ly o n e .
( ) The boy who h a s worked h i s way up to an o f f i
c i a l p o s i t i o n , such a s J r . S t a f f , o r Boy
Government
( ) The boy who makes i t c l e a r he w ants to s ta y
o u t o f tr o u b le
( ) The 's ly * guy who w ants to lo o k good to
s t a f f , b u t i s s t i l l g e t t i n g i n tr o u b le
( ) S t a f f
( ) The *hard* guy who o p e n ly d e f ie s s t a f f and
t h e .r u l e s
( ) The f o llo w e r who i s l i k e l y to go e i t h e r way
GBOUP
53• I f a guy w ants to c h an g e , w hat i s th e s in g le m ost
h e lp f u l th in g ?
( ) Group m ee tin g s
( ) S t a f f o u t o f group m e e tin g s
( ) O th er boys o u t o f th e group
( ) School
170
51 * . Boys u s u a lly a c t i n a d i f f e r e n t way w h ile i n group
th a n th e y do o u t o f g ro u p .
C ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
55. Groups a re im p o rta n t.
C ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
C ) D isa g ree
56. I f a hoy h a s a p ro b lem , h e ’ s r e a l l y a sk in g f o r
t r o u b le i f he b rin g s i t up i n g ro u p .
C ) Agree
C ) U ndecided
C ) D isag ree
57. Most o f th e tim e I f e e l p r e t t y c o m fo rta b le i n g ro u p .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isag ree
5 8 . I t ' s p r e t t y h a rd to change y o u r o ld ways o f d o in g
th in g s u n le s s you se e o th e r guys changing to o .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
59* How much a re boys r e a l l y b e in g h o n e s t w ith th e group?
( ) A g r e a t d e a l
( ) Some
( ) A l i t t l e
( ) None
6 0 . In th e lo n g r u n , i t r e a l l y pays to be h o n e s t w ith th e
g ro u p .
( ) Agree
( ) U ndecided
( ) D isa g ree
6 1 . A l o t o f th in g s t h a t guys c o u ld and sh o u ld t a l k a b o u t
i n group a re n e v e r s a i d .
171
( ) Agree
C ) Undecided
C ) Disagree
BESEARCH
6 2 . Boys in the program are honest with Research.
( ) Agree
C ) Undecided
C ) Disagree
63. Being interviewed by research really helps a boy to
look at himself and his behavior.
( ) Agree
( ) Undecided
( ) Disagree
6*+. Being interviewed by research is too much trouble.
( ) Agree
( ) Undecided
( ) Disagree
65. The guys in research are too hard to talk to.
C ) Agree
( ) Undecided
( ) Disagree
66. I*m afraid that if I am honest with research it might
get me in trouble.
( ) Agree
( ) Undecided
( ) Disagree
67. How do you feel about answering questions from
research people now in comparison to how you felt when
you first came here ? .
( ) Afraid at first, still afraid
( ) Afraid at first, not afraid now
( ) Rot afraid at first, afraid now
( ) Not afraid at first, not afraid now
17 2
6 8 . What k in d s o f th in g s would you be m ost l i k e l y n o t to
t e l l r e s e a r c h p e o p le ?

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Study Of Group Development In Purposive Groups

PDF

S.T.P.: A Simulation Of Treatment Processes

PDF

A Study Of Factors Related To Police Diversion Of Juveniles: Departmentalpolicy And Structure, Community Attachment, And Professionalization Of Police

PDF

A Longitudinal Model Of Residence Change

PDF

A Sociological Approach To The Etiology Of Female Homosexuality And The Lesbian Social Scene

PDF

A Comparison Of Perceptions Reported By Nondelinquents And Delinquents Regarding Their Identification With Selected Socialization Agents And Normative Prescriptions

PDF

Administrative Motivation: A Study Of Correctional Administrators

PDF

Some Correlates Of Friction: A Study Of Staff-Line Relations

PDF

Incarceration And A Sense Of The Rules: Strategy Differences Among Juveniles

PDF

Academic Specialization And The Construction Of Social Reality: Ideologies Regarding Deviance

PDF

Juvenile Delinquency: Linkage Between Maintenance And Precipitating Variables As Part Of A System

PDF

Correlates Of Mental Health In An Aged Population: An Analysis Of Supported Self-Disclosure

PDF

Bam: An Innovative Change Model--Barriers Encountered In The Implementation Of A Classical Research Design To Modify The Behavior And Attitude Of Staff And Inmates In A Correctional Institution

PDF

Factors In The Conviction Of Law Violators: The Drinking Driver

PDF

Cultural Continuity And Discontinuity In Adolescent Socialization

PDF

Reference Group Theory, Selection, And The Images Of Professions

PDF

A Study To Define An Operational Index Of Innovation For School Administrators

PDF

A Study Of The Role And Function Of The Prison Officer

PDF

Some Social Factors Affecting The Power Structure And Status Of A Professional Association In Reference To Social Work

PDF

An Analysis Of The Present Iranian Penal System

Asset Metadata

Creator Shichor, David (author)

Core Title A Typological Study Of Juvenile Correctional Organizations

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Sociology, Criminology

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,sociology, criminology and penology

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Empey, Lamar T. (committee chair), Klein, Malcolm W. (committee member), Nelson, Elmer K. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-407088

Unique identifier UC11361269

Identifier 7016889.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-407088 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7016889.pdf

Dmrecord 407088

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Shichor, David

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA