Relational and moral dimensions of prison life are widely recognised as important components of prisoners’ well-being and institutional functioning. However, fewer studies have examined the relative contribution of staff–prisoner and peer relationships to overall prison climate, particularly whether these associations ‘travel’ beyond Western contexts to understudied prison systems such as Serbia. This study investigates how these relational dynamics relate to prisoners’ overall evaluations of prison climate within the five largest prisons in Serbia, while accounting for individual and institutional factors.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey included 577 prisoners (86% males, average age 39.9 years) using the Measuring the Quality of Prison Life (MQPL) survey. Most participants (75%) were held under a closed regime and had been incarcerated for more than 1 year (73%). While over half (52%) had non-violent offences, 39 percent had received at least one disciplinary measure. Hierarchical regression analyses were used to examine the predictive value of two MQPL dimensions (staff–prisoner and prisoner–prisoner relationships) on prisoners’ overall evaluation of the prison climate, controlling for individual-level characteristics, institutional conditions and prison-fixed effects.
Results
Hierarchical regression showed that adding relational dimensions increased the explained variance in prison climate from 23 to 51 percent. Staff–prisoner relationships were the strongest predictor (β = .56), while peer interactions (β = .09), regime type, and lockdown had smaller effects. Climate was rated moderately positive. Functional day-to-day staff interactions coexisted with low institutional trust and signs of social withdrawal among peers.
Conclusions
The findings suggest that prison climate theory is portable beyond Western contexts. Relational dimensions, particularly staff–prisoner relationships, retain strong associations with climate evaluations in Serbia even after accounting for structural and institutional factors. However, regime conditions and routine restrictions remain relevant boundary conditions. The Serbian case further indicates that institutional order may coexist with low trust, distinguishing functional authority from trust-based legitimacy.
AebiMFCoccoE (2024) SPACE I - 2023 – Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics: Prison Populations.Council of Europe and University of Lausanne, Strasbourg and Lausanne.
2.
AebiMFCoccoE (2025) Prisons and Prisoners in Europe 2024: Key Findings of the SPACE I Report. Council of Europe and University of Lausanne, Strasbourg and Lausanne.
3.
AutyKMLieblingA (2020) Exploring the relationship between prison social climate and reoffending. Justice Quarterly37(2): 358–381.
4.
AutyKMLieblingA (2024) What is a ‘good enough’ prison? An empirical analysis of key thresholds using prison moral quality data. European Journal of Criminology21(5): 725–753.
5.
BarquínJCanoMÁCalvoMLÁ (2019) Treatment, reintegration, and quality of prison life: Perception by inmates. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology63(13): 2291–2317.
6.
BatrićevićAPavićevićOĆopićS, et al. (2023) Quality of prison life of female prisoners in Serbia: Key challenges and areas of strength. Revija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijo74(4): 273–289.
7.
BeijersbergenKADirkzwagerAJEVan Der LaanPH, et al. (2016) A social building? Prison architecture and staff–prisoner relationships. Crime & Delinquency62(7): 843–874.
8.
BobićACPavlićevićPDHacinR (2022) Prisoners’ perception of treatment: A pilot study in Serbian prisons. Revija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijo73(4): 267–280.
9.
BosmaAQvan GinnekenEFJCSentseM, et al. (2020) Examining prisoner misconduct: A multilevel test using personal characteristics, prison climate, and prison environment. Crime and Delinquency66(4): 451–484.
10.
Calles-RubialesNIbáñez Del PradoC (2020) Influence of prisoners’ mental health on the relational climate of prisons. Revista Española de Sanidad Penitenciaria22(3): 116–125.
11.
ChongC (2013) Inmate-to-inmate: Socialization, relationships, and community among incarcerated men. Berkeley Undergraduate Journal26(2): 105–137.
12.
Council of Europe (2020) Recommendation Rec(2006)2-Rev of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the European Prison Rules Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 11 January 2006, at the 952nd Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies and Revised and Amended by the Committee of Ministers on 1 July 2020 at the 1380th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
13.
CPT – European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (2015) Living Space per Prisoner in Prison Establishments: CPT Standards (CPT/Inf (2015) 44). Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
14.
CreweB (2011) Soft power in prison: Implications for staff–prisoner relationships, liberty and legitimacy. European Journal of Criminology8(6): 455–468.
15.
CreweBLieblingAHulleyS (2015) Staff-prisoner relationships, staff professionalism, and the use of authority in public- and private-sector prisons. Law and Social Inquiry40(2): 309–344.
16.
CreweBSchlieheAPrzybylskaDA (2023) ‘It causes a lot of problems’: Relational ambiguities and dynamics between prisoners and staff in a women’s prison. European Journal of Criminology20(3): 925–946.
17.
DhamiMKAytonPLoewensteinG (2007) Adaptation to imprisonment: Indigenous or imported?Criminal Justice and Behavior34(8): 1085–1100.
18.
FelixMMMLaiY-LYangY, et al. (2023) Factors shaping inmate trust in correctional officers in Taiwan: Do procedural justice and distributive justice really matter?Journal of Criminology56(2-3): 313–334.
19.
GibsonS (2021) Social climate and hope amongst staff and prisoners in a high security male prison. The Journal of Forensic Practice23(1): 26–38.
20.
HacinR (2025) European penology or European penologies?European Journal of Criminology22(5): 715–722.
21.
HacinRMeškoG (2018) Prisoners’ perception of legitimacy of the prison staff: A qualitative study in Slovene prisons. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology62(13): 4332–4350.
22.
HacinRMeškoGAebiMF, et al. (2022) From apparent unity to diversity: Penal policies of (former) Yugoslav Republics. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice30(3–4): 329–354.
23.
HallM (2016) Relational aspects of imprisonment. In: The Lived Sentence. Springer International Publishing, pp.169–207.
24.
HigginsEMSmithJSwartzK (2022) “We keep the nightmares in their cages”: Correctional culture, identity, and the warped badge of honor. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal60(3): 429–454.
25.
IlijićLJPavićevićOMilićevićM (2024a) Well-Being in Prison: The Case of Serbia. Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research. DOI: 10.47152/PrisonLIFE.D4.1
26.
IlijićLJStevanovićIVujičićN (2024b) Departments and treatment groups at penitentiary facilities in Serbia and evaluation of prison life quality. Pravni Zapisi15(1): 272–296.
27.
IrwinJCresseyDR (1962) Thieves, convicts and the inmate culture. Social Problems10(2): 142–155.
28.
JärveläinenERantanenT (2019) Social interaction between employee and offender in supervised probationary freedom in Finland. Nordic Journal of Criminology20(2): 157–175.
29.
JovanićGPetrovićVMacanovićN (2020) Freedom deprivation in prisons of Serbia. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling17(2): 173–190.
30.
KantokoskiO (2025) The impact of the Council of Europe on conditions of detention in the Western Balkan Prisons. East European Politics and Societies: 08883254251381833. DOI: 10.1177/08883254251381833.
31.
KyprianidesAEasterbrookMJ (2020) Social factors boost well-being behind bars: The importance of individual and group ties for prisoner well-being. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being12(1): 7–29.
32.
Law on the Execution of Criminal Sanctions – LECS (2019) RS Official Gazette, No. 55/2014 & 35/2019. Republic of Serbia.
LieblingA (2011a) Distinctions and distinctiveness in the work of prison officers: Legitimacy and authority revisited. European Journal of Criminology8(6): 484–499.
35.
LieblingA (2011b) Moral performance, inhuman and degrading treatment and prison pain. Punishment & Society13(5): 530–550.
36.
LieblingAHulleySCreweB (2012) Conceptualising and measuring the quality of prison life. In: The SAGE Handbook of Criminological Research Methods. Sage Publications, pp.358–372.
37.
LieblingAJohnsenBSchmidtBE, et al. (2021) Where two ‘exceptional’ prison cultures meet: Negotiating order in a transnational prison. The British Journal of Criminology61(1): 41–60.
38.
LoganMWJonsonCLJohnsonS, et al. (2022) Agents of change or control? Correlates of positive and negative staff-inmate relationships among a sample of formerly incarcerated inmates. Corrections7(3): 175–195.
39.
MachinSSandiM (2025) Crime and education. Annual Review of Economics17(1): 241–260.
40.
Madoc-JonesIWilliamsEHughesC, et al. (2016) Prison building ‘does size still matter?’: A re-assessment. Prison Service Journal227: 4–10.
41.
MeđedovićJDrndarevićNMilićevićM (2024) Integrating standard and network psychometrics to assess the quality of prison life in Serbia. Journal of Criminology57(2): 240–256. 10.1177/26338076231208769.
42.
MilićevićM (2024) Prison study: a review of research gaps and future directions. In: MilićevićMStevanovićIIlijićLJ (eds) Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “LIFE IN PRISON: Criminological, Penological, Psychological, Sociological, Legal, Security, and Medical Issues”, Belgrade, Serbia, December 2024. Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research, pp.507–554. DOI: 10.47152/prisonlife2024.01
43.
MilićevićM (2025) Dynamics of staff–prisoner relationships: a narrative literature review. In: IlijićLJ (ed.) Prison Life Organization and Security: Criminological, Penological, Sociological, Psychological, Legal, and Security Aspects. Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research, pp.233–255. DOI: 10.47152/PrisonLIFE.D4.5.12
44.
MilićevićMGlomazićH (2025) Security matters: Predictors of self-rated prison climate in Serbian prisons. Nauka bezbednost policija30(3): 260–276. 10.5937/nabepo30-60172.
45.
MilićevićMHacinR (2025) Social climate in Serbian prisons. Revija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijo76(4): 298–315.
46.
MilićevićMIlijićLJVujičićN (2024) Cross-cultural adaptation and content validity of the measuring the quality of prison life survey in Serbia. Sage Open14(4): 21582440241301422.
47.
MollemanTLeeuwFL (2012) The influence of prison staff on inmate conditions: A multilevel approach to staff and inmate surveys. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research18(2): 217–233.
48.
MollemanTVan GinnekenEFJC (2015) A multilevel analysis of the relationship between cell sharing, staff–prisoner relationships, and prisoners’ perceptions of prison quality. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology59(10): 1029–1046.
49.
National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture – Report for 2023 (2024) Regular Annual Report of the Protector of Citizens 417–33/24 Belgrade del. no. 17227. Protector of Citizens (Ombudsman) of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
50.
National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture – Report for 2024 (2025) 417–37/2025 Belgrade del. no. 26515. Protector of Citizens (Ombudsman) of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
51.
NeubacherFLieblingAKantD (2021) Same problems, different concepts and language: What happens when prison climate research goes on a journey?European Journal of Criminology20(4): 1446–1463.
52.
NivetteA (2025) European criminology as a comparative exercise. European Journal of Criminology22(5): 730–738.
53.
OleinikA (2007) A plurality of total institutions: towards a comparative penology. Crime, Law and Social Change46(3): 161–180.
54.
PalmenHSentseMVan GinnekenEFJC, et al. (2022) The role of prison climate and work climate in understanding subjective safety among correctional staff. Criminal Justice and Behavior49(11): 1580–1599.
55.
PapeHJohnsenB (2026) Quality of prison life and physical environment: What is predictive of prisoners’ overall satisfaction with the prison?Healthcare14(3): 299.
56.
PascaudMKazemianL (2025) Adapting prison surveys to different cultural settings: Challenges and lessons. Punishment & Society28(2): 331–351.
57.
PeartSVan NiekerkLNorrisK (2024) A tale of two prisons: Investigating the social climate of small prisons using a mixed methods design. Journal of Criminology58(2): 258–274.
58.
PengSTillsonMRockettM, et al. (2026) Beyond weak ties in prison: an investigation of core support networks of incarcerated persons. Social Networks85: 89–97.
59.
PiedmontRL (2023) Inter-item correlations. In: MagginoF (ed.) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer International Publishing, pp.3577–3578.
60.
ReadingLRossGE (2020) Comparing social climate across therapeutically distinct prison wings. The Journal of Forensic Practice22(3): 185–197.
61.
RossMWDiamondPMLieblingA, et al. (2008) Measurement of prison social climate: A comparison of an inmate measure in England and the USA. Punishment & Society10(4): 447–474.
62.
RyanCBerginM (2022) Procedural justice and legitimacy in prisons: A review of extant empirical literature. Criminal Justice and Behavior49(2): 143–163.
63.
SavićMKnežićB (2019) Podrška osuđenicama: Pogled iznutra [Support for female offenders: An inside view]. Zbornik Instituta za kriminološka i Sociološka istraživanja38(3): 7–24.
64.
SchalastNRediesMCollinsM, et al. (2008) EssenCES, a short questionnaire for assessing the social climate of forensic psychiatric wards. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health18(1): 49–58.
65.
SitareniosG (2022) Short versions of tests: Best practices and potential pitfalls. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology8(3): 101–115.
66.
SkarMLokdamNLieblingA, et al. (2019) Quality of prison life, violence and mental health in Dubrava prison. International Journal of Prisoner Health15(3): 262–272.
67.
SouzaKADhamiMK (2010) First-time and recurrent inmates’ experiences of imprisonment. Criminal Justice and Behavior37(12): 1330–1342.
68.
SykesGM (2007) The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. Originally published, 1958. First Princeton Classic Edition, with a new introduction by Bruce Western and a new epilogue by the author, 2007. Princeton University Press.
69.
TabachnickBGFidellLS (2019) Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson.
70.
Van GinnekenEFJC (2022) Is cell sharing associated with wellbeing, misconduct and prison climate? Evidence from a Dutch study. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice30(1): 41–68.
71.
Van GinnekenEFJCBosmaAQPasmaA, et al. (2020) Unhappy staff, unhappy prisoners? The relation between work climate and prison climate in Dutch prisons. Kriminologie-Das Online-Journal2: 182–200.
72.
Van GinnekenEFJCNieuwbeertaP (2020) Climate consensus: A multilevel study testing assumptions about prison climate. Journal of Criminal Justice69: 101693.
73.
Van GinnekenEFJCPalmenHBosmaAQ, et al. (2018) The life in custody study: The quality of prison life in Dutch prison regimes. Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice4(4): 253–268.
74.
Van GinnekenEFJCPalmenHBosmaAQ, et al. (2019) Bearing the weight of imprisonment: The relationship between prison climate and well-being. Criminal Justice and Behavior46(10): 1385–1404.
75.
Van GinnekenEFJCWooldredgeJ (2024) Offending and victimization in prisons: New theoretical and empirical approaches. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice77: 100667.
76.
Van TiemBNieuwbeertaPAndersenSN, et al. (2025) Measuring prison climate across contexts: Lessons from administering the Prison Climate Questionnaire in the USA. European Journal of Criminology22(5): 843–874.
77.
VujičićNKarićT (2020) Procena rizika i napredovanje u tretmanu u Kazneno-popravnom zavodu u Sremskoj Mitrovici [Risk assessment and advancement in treatment in Sremska Mitrovica correctional facility]. Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu68(1): 164–185.
78.
WaiteS (2022) Imprisoned women’s experiences of trust in staff–prisoner relationships in an English Open Prison. In: The Routledge Handbook of Women’s Experiences of Criminal Justice, 1st ed.Routledge, pp.511–522.
79.
WilliamsLSGreenELWChernoffWA (2019) “There’s more to it than just a box check”: Measuring prison climate in three correctional facilities. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology63(8): 1354–1383.
80.
WorleyRM (2011) To snitch or not to snitch, that is the question: Exploring the role of inmate informants in detecting inappropriate relationships between the keeper and the kept. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology25(1–2): 79–82.
81.
WorleyRMWorleyVBLambertEG (2021) Deepening the guard-inmate divide: An exploratory analysis of the relationship between staff-inmate boundary violations and officer attitudes regarding the mistreatment of prisoners. Deviant Behavior42(4): 503–517.
