This article examines the relationships between prison structure, researcher access to prisons, and scholarship about prisons. Drawing on the author’s own work over more than 10 years as a prison educator, legal advocate, and prison researcher, as well as on the scholarship of other prison researchers throughout the social sciences, the article argues that prisons resist scrutiny at two stages. First, prisons are structurally and bureaucratically closed off from research; second, prison researchers are emotionally disconnected from their work. These two layers of obfuscation maintain the prison as a social “black site”: physically located outside of our communities, invisible to the public and the researcher alike. In an effort to overcome these barriers, this article outlines a mixed method, collaborative approach to prison research and discusses the ethical and emotional challenges of this approach. By identifying the major obstacles to meaningful prison research, as well as some possible strategies to overcoming these obstacles, this article seeks to make such work more feasible for investigators in many disciplines.
ArriolaK. R. J. (2006). Debunking the myth of the safe haven. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 137-148.
3.
AshtonP.PetterutiA. (2011). Gaming the system: How the political strategies of private prison companies promote ineffective incarceration policies. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.
4.
BookspanS. (1991). A germ of goodness: The California state prison system, 1851-1944. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
5.
BostonJ. (2004). The Prison Litigation Reform Act. New York, NY: Legal Aid Society, Prisoners’ Rights Project.
6.
BosworthM. (1999). Engendering resistance: Agency and power in women’s prisons. Alder-shot, UK: Ashgate Press.
7.
BurnsR. (2012, December28). Supermax showdown: AFSCME wants Illinois’ tamms correctional center to stay open. Activists want it closed. In These Times. Retrieved from http://inthesetimes.com/article/14302/supermax_showdown
8.
ByrneM. W. (2005). Conducting research as a visiting scientist in a women’s prison. Journal of Professional Nursing, 21, 223-230.
9.
CarrollL. (1974). Hacks, blacks and cons: Race relations in a maximum security prison. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
10.
CarsonA.SabolW. (2012, December). Prisoners in 2011 (NCJ 239808). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
11.
ConoverT. (2001). Newjack: Guarding Sing Sing. New York, NY: Random House. (Original work published 2000)
FallonR. H. (2006). Judicially manageable standards and constitutional meaning. Harvard Law Review, 119, 1274-1332.
17.
FarmerP. (2003). Pathologies of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18.
FeeleyM. M.RubinE. L. (1998). Judicial policy making and the modern state: How the courts reformed America’s prisons. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
FeeleyM. M.SimonJ. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30, 449-474.
20.
FeldmanM.BellJ.BergerM. (2003). Gaining access: A practical and theoretical guide for qualitative researchers. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
21.
FoxK. A.ZambranaK.LaneJ. (2011). Getting in (and staying in) when everyone else wants to get out: Ten lessons learned from conducting research with inmates. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22, 304-327.
22.
FriedmannA.PetrellaC. (2012). Press release: Organizations urge US Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to reintroduce Private Prison Information Act. Brattleboro, VT: Human Rights Defense Center. Retrieved from http://humanrightsdefensecenter.org/displayNews.aspx?ID=530
23.
GilliganJ. (1996). Violence: Our deadly epidemic and its causes. New York, NY: Grosset/Putnam.
24.
GilmoreR. W. (2007). Golden Gulag: Prisons, surplus, crisis, and opposition in globalizing California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
GlazeL. E.ParksE. (2012, November). Correctional populations in the United States, 2011 (NCJ239972). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
26.
GoodmanP. (2008). “It’s just Black, White, or Hispanic”: An observational study of racializing moves in California’s segregated prison reception centers. Law & Society Review, 42, 735-770.
27.
GoodmanP. (2011). From “observation dude” to “an observational study”: Gaining access and conducting research inside a paramilitary organization. Canadian Journal of Law & Society, 26, 599-605.
28.
HaneyC. (1997). Psychology and the limits to prison pain: Confronting the coming crisis in Eighth Amendment Law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 499-552.
29.
IrwinJ. (1970). The Felon. Berkeley: University of California Press.
30.
JacobsJ. B. (1977). Stateville: The penitentiary in mass society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
JennessV. (2010). From policy to prisoners to people: A “soft mixed methods” approach to studying transgender prisoners. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 517-533.
32.
JewkesY. (2012). Autoethnography and emotion as intellectual resources: Doing prison research differently. Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 63-75.
33.
KimS. (2011, December9). Letter to Chad Powell, records access officer, New York state department of corrections and community supervision. New York: New York Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from http://www.boxedinny.org/library/
34.
KupersT. (1999). Prison madness: The mental health crisis behind bars and what we must do about it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35.
LaneJ.TurnerS.FloresC. (2004). Researcher-practitioner collaboration in corrections: Overcoming hurdles for successful partnerships. Criminal Justice Review, 29, 97-114.
LotkeE.WagnerP. (2005). The modern American penal system: Prisoners of the census: Electoral and financial consequences of counting prisoners where they go, not where they come from. Pace Law Review, 24, 587-607.
39.
LynchM. (1998). Waste managers? The new penology, crime fighting, and parole agent identity. Law & Society Review, 32, 839-870.
40.
LynchM. (2001). The disposal of inmate #85271: Notes on a routine execution (SaratAustinEwickPatricia Eds.). Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 20, 3-34.
41.
LynchM. (2010). Sunbelt Justice: Arizona and the transformation of American punishment. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
42.
Madrid v. Gomez, 889 F. Supp. 1146 (1995).
43.
MarquartJ. W. (1986). Doing research in prison: The strengths and weaknesses of full participation as a guard. Justice Quarterly, 3, 15-32.
44.
PageJ. (2011). The toughest beat. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
45.
PhelpsM. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the punitive era: The gap between rhetoric and reality in US prison programs. Law & Society Review, 45, 33-68.
46.
ReiterK. (2009). Experimentation on prisoners: Persistent dilemmas in rights and regulations. California Law Review, 97, 501-566.
47.
ReiterK. (2012a). Parole, snitch, or die: California’s supermax prisons and prisoners, 1987-2007. Punishment & Society, 14, 530-563.
48.
ReiterK. (2012b). The most restrictive alternative: A litigation history of solitary confinement in US prisons, 1960-2006. Studies in Law, Politics and Society, 57, 69-123.
49.
RhodesL. (2001). Toward an anthropology of prisons. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 65-83.
50.
RhodesL. (2004). Total confinement: Madness and reason in the maximum security prison. Berkeley: University of California Press.
ShayG. (2010). Ad law incarcerated. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 14, 329-394.
55.
SimonJ. (2000). The “society of captives” in the era of hyper- incarceration. Theoretical Criminology, 4, 285-308.
56.
SparksR. (2002). Out of the digger: The warrior’s honour and the guilty observer. Ethnography, 3, 556-581.
57.
SpohnC. C. (2009). How do judges decide? The search for fairness and justice in punishment. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
58.
StephanJ. J. (2008, October). Census of state and federal correctional facilities, 2005 (NCJ 222182). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
59.
StürupG. K. (1968). Treating the untreatable: Chronic criminals at Herstedvester. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.
60.
ThompsonH. A. (2010). Why mass incarceration matters: Rethinking crisis, decline, and transformation in postwar American history. The Journal of American History, 97, 703-734.
61.
WacquantL. (2002). The curious eclipse of prison ethnography in the age of mass incarceration. Ethnography, 3, 371-398.
62.
WaldramJ. B. (2009, January4-5). Challenges of prison ethnography. Anthropology News, 50(1), 4-5.
63.
WaldramJ. B. (2012). Hound pound narrative: Sexual offender habilitation and the anthropology of therapeutic intervention. Berkeley: University of California Press.
