A humane and fair treatment of prisoners is of intrinsic value in itself, and is generally acclaimed to reduce prisoners’ psychological distress and misconduct in prison, and their criminal behavior after release from prison. To create a more just prison climate, scholars have emphasized the importance of correctional staff. However, there is a lack of empirical research on the relationship between correctional officers’ characteristics and prisoners’ perceptions of a just treatment in prison. Our study fills this gap in knowledge. Data were used from (a) the Prison Project, a large-scale study in which prisoners held in all Dutch remand centers were surveyed (n = 1,610) and (b) the Dutch Correctional Staff Survey 2011 (n = 690). Multilevel analyses showed that prisoners perceived their treatment in prison as more procedurally just in units where there are more female officers, where officers held more positive attitudes toward rehabilitation, and where there is a higher officer-to-inmate ratio.
AhmedS. (1996). Fairness in prisons (Doctoral thesis). Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3.
AjzenI.FishbeinM. (1977). Attitude-behavior relationships: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888-918.
4.
AndersonL. R.BlanchardP. N. (1982). Sex differences in task and social-emotional behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 109-139.
5.
AntonioM. E.YoungJ. L. (2011). The effects of tenure on staff apathy and treatment orientation: A comparison of respondent characteristics and environmental factors. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 1-16.
6.
BierieD. M. (2012a). Is tougher better? The impact of physical prison conditions on inmate violence. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56, 338-355.
7.
BierieD. M. (2012b). Prison violence, gender, and perceptions: Testing a missing link in discretion research. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 209-228.
8.
BoboL.LicariF. C. (1989). Education and political tolerance: Testing the effects of cognitive sophistication and target group affect. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 285-308.
9.
BottomsA. E. (1999). Interpersonal violence and social order in prisons. Crime and Justice, 26, 205-282.
10.
BurtonV. S.JuX.DunawayR. G.WolfeN. T. (1991). The correctional orientation of Bermuda prison guards: An assessment of attitudes toward punishment and rehabilitation. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 15, 71-80.
11.
CallanV. J. (1993). Subordinate-manager communication in different sex dyads: Consequences for job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 13-27.
12.
CampS. D.GaesG. G.LanganN. P.SaylorW. G. (2003). The influence of prisons on inmate misconduct: A multilevel investigation. Justice Quarterly, 20, 501-533.
13.
CasperJ. D.TylerT. R.FisherB. (1988). Procedural justice in felony cases. Law & Society Review, 22, 483-507.
14.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CreweB.LieblingA.HulleyS. (2011). Staff culture, use of authority and prisoners quality of life in public and private sector prisons. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 44, 94-115.
17.
CullenF. T.LatessaE. J.BurtonV. S. J.LombardoL. X. (1993). The correctional orientation of prison wardens. Is the rehabilitative ideal supported?Criminology, 31, 69-92.
18.
CullenF. T.LutzeF. E.LinkB. G.Travis WolfeN. (1989). The correctional orientation of prison guards: Do officers support rehabilitation?Federal Probation, 53, 33-42.
19.
DenissenJ. J.GeenenR.van AkenM. A.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2008). Development and validation of a Dutch translation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 152-157.
20.
DervanL. E. (2011). American prison culture in an international context: An examination of prisons in America, The Netherlands and Israel. Stanford Law & Policy Review, 22, 413-428.
21.
Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency. (2009). Brochure custodial institutions agency: Where freedom ends and may be regained. The Hague, The Netherlands: Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency.
22.
Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency (2012). Van werkdruk naar werkplezier [From work stress to job]. The Hague, The Netherlands: Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency.
23.
Dutch Inspectorate for the administration of penal sanctions (2011). Meerpersoonscelgebruik [The use of double bunking]. The Hague, The Netherlands: Dutch Inspectorate for the administration of penal sanctions.
24.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (1991). Explaining sex differences in social behavior: A meta-analytic perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 306-315.
25.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
26.
Emmers-SommerT. M. (2004). The effect of communication quality and quantity indicators on intimacy and relational satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 399-411.
27.
FairweatherL. (2000). Psychological effects of the prison environment. In FairweatherL.McConvilleS. (Eds.), Prison architecture: Policy, design and experience (pp. 31-48). Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.
28.
FarkasM. A. (1999). Correctional officer attitudes toward inmates and working with inmates in a “get tough” era. Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 495-506.
29.
GaesG. G.CampS. D.NelsonJ. B.SaylorW. G. (2004). Measuring prison performance: Government privatization & accountability. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
30.
GordonM. S. (2006). Correctional officer control ideology: Implications for understanding a system. Criminal Justice Studies, 19, 225-239.
31.
GoverA. R.MacKenzieD. L.ArmstrongG. S. (2000). Importation and deprivation explanations of juveniles’ adjustment to correctional facilities. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 450-466.
32.
HoxJ. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
33.
JurikN. C. (1985). Individual organizational determinants of correctional officer attitudes towards inmates. Criminology, 23, 523-539.
34.
KiferM.HemmensC.StohrM. K. (2003). The goals of corrections: Perspectives from the line. Criminal Justice Review, 28, 47-69.
35.
KingstonP. W.NockS. L. (1987). Time together among dual-earner couples. American Sociological Review, 52, 391-400.
36.
KrausS. J. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 58-75.
37.
KruttschnittC.DirkzwagerA. (2011). Are there still contrasts in tolerance? Imprisonment in the Netherlands and England 20 years later. Punishment & Society, 13, 283-306.
38.
LambertE. G.HoganN. L. (2009). Exploring the predictors of treatment views of private correctional staff: A test of an integrated work model. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48, 504-528.
39.
LambertE. G.HoganN. L.BartonS. M.ElechiO. O. (2009). The impact of job stress, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment on correctional staff support for rehabilitation and punishment. Criminal Justice Studies, 22, 109-122.
40.
LieblingA. (2004). Prisons and their moral performance: A study of values, quality and prison life. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
LieblingA.DurieL.StilesA.TaitS. (2005). Revisiting prison suicide: The role of fairness and distress. In LieblingA.MarunaS. (Eds.), The effects of imprisonment (pp. 209-231). Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.
42.
LindE. A.TylerT. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum.
43.
McGrathA. (2009). Offenders’ perceptions of the sentencing process: A study of deterrence and stigmatisation in the New South Wales children’s court. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 42, 24-46.
44.
MolG.D.Henneken-HordijkI. (2008) Gedetineerd in Nederland 2007. Een survey onder gedetineerden in het Nederlandse gevangeniswezen [Imprisonment in the Netherlands 2007. A survey among all prisoners in Dutch correctional facilities]. The Hague, The Netherlands: Dutch Custodial Institutions Agency.
45.
MollemanT.LeeuwF. (2012). The influence of prison staff on inmate conditions: A multilevel approach to staff and inmate surveys. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 18, 217-233.
46.
MoonB.MaxwellS. R. (2004). Assessing the correctional orientation of corrections officers in South Korea. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, 729-743.
47.
NelissenP. P. (2000). Resocialisatie en detentie: Een onderzoek naar de houdingen van gedetineerden en gevangenispersoneel ten aanzien van de voorbereiding van de terugkeer in de samenleving [Rehabilitation and imprisonment: A study on attitudes of prisoners and prison staff on the preparation of return to society]. Maastricht, The Netherlands: University Maastricht.
48.
PaboojianA.TeskeR. H. C. (1997). Pre-service correctional officers: What do they think about treatment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 425-433.
49.
PaternosterR.BrameR.BachmanR.ShermanL. W. (1997). Do fair procedures matter? The effect of procedural justice on spouse assault. Law & Society Review, 31, 163-204.
50.
PhelanJ.StueveA.LinkB. G.MooreR. E. (1995). Education, social liberalism and conservatism: Attitudes toward homeless people. American Sociological Review, 60, 126-140.
SnijdersT. A. B.BoskerR. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London, England: Sage.
53.
SparksJ. R.BottomsA. E. (1995). Legitimacy and order in prisons. British Journal of Sociology, 46, 45-62.
54.
SprottJ. B.GreeneC. (2010). Trust and confidence in the courts. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 269-289.
55.
SunshineJ.TylerT. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37, 513-547.
56.
TaitS. (2011). A typology of prison officer approaches to care. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 440-454.
57.
TewksburyR.MustaineE. E. (2008). Correctional orientations of prison staff. The Prison Journal, 88, 207-233.
58.
ThibautJ.WalkerL. (1975). Procedural justice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
59.
TylerT. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
60.
TylerT. R. (2001). Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and minority group members want from the law and legal institutions. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 215-235.
61.
Van der BroekT. C.MollemanT. (2012). Tevredenheid van gevangenispersoneel in 2011. Een verdieping in personele en inrichtingspecifieke kenmerken [Prison staff satisfaction 2011. A study on staff and prison characteristics].The Hague, The Netherlands: Research and Documentation Centre of the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice.
62.
Van VoorhisP.CullenF. T.LinkB. G.Travis WolfeN. (1991). The impact of race and gender on correctional officers’ orientation to the integrated environment. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 28, 472-500.
63.
WhiteheadJ. T.LindquistC. A. (1989). Determinants of correctional officers’ professional orientation. Justice Quarterly, 6, 69-87.
64.
WrightK. N.BronsteinL. (2007). Creating decent prisons: A serendipitous finding about prison hospice. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 44, 1-16.
