Institutional Aggression

Institutional Aggression

1. aggression in prisons

   • PATERLINE + PETERSON 1999: deprivation model
     • characteristic and situation of the prison itself
       • suggests the 'deprivation' that inmates experience in terms of losses of freedom, personal space, home comforts, personal security etc, increases levels of anxiety and stress in inmates, which in turn may lead to increased levels of aggression. A desire to rebel against the frustrations of deprivation may also be expressed as aggression towards staff and other inmates
         • EVIDENCE
           • MC CORKLE ET AL 1995
             • found that the following factors significantly increased peer aggression levels:
               • overcrowding
               • lack of privacy
               • lack of activity
         • PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
           • changing prison environments based on this theory could potentially lower aggression levels
             • e.g. in HPM Woodhill overcrowding was reduced, temperature was regulated, and music was played, which led to a vast reduction in aggression levels
         • GENDER BIAS
           • studies concentrate mainly on male prisoners, ignoring the fact that female offenders often develop strong bonds in prison
   • IRWIN + CRESSEY 1962: importation model
     • suggests violence and aggression is not a product of the institution itself, but rather a product of a prisoner's characteristics and social histories which predispose them toward interpersonal violence within prison. Prisoners are not 'blank slates'. They 'import' the normative systems they developed on the outside world in to prison. Pre-prison gang membership tends to be exacerbated in prison
       • EVIDENCE
         • KELLER + WANG 2005
           • found that prison violence and assaults on staff are more likely to occur in high-security prisons, supporting the idea that the inmates had bought their violent behaviour into the institution with them
         • ALLENDER + MARCELL 2003
           • found that gang membership lends to increased levels of aggression and violence due to deindividuation, conformity and obedience, and are more likely to account for higher-level offences
           • EVALUATION
             • DELISI 2004
               • study of over 800 male inmates
                 • found no evidence of a relationship between previous gang members and misconduct within prison
                 • GENDER BIAS
     • MC CORKLE ET AL 1995
       • criticised the model as it gives no practical suggestions for how to drecrease violence in prisons (unlike the deprivation model)

2. aggression between groups: genocide

   • 'institution' may refer to a whole section of society, defined by ethnicity, religion, or another significant factor
     • dehumanisation
       • inhibitions about killing fellow humans decrease if the target group is dehumanised in a way that removes moral constraints and labels them as worthless animals
         • e.g. the attempted genocide of Tutsi by Hutu extremists in Rwanda in 1994, killing over 800,000 people
     • STAUB 1999
       • suggested that dehumanisation, obedience to authority, and a lack of bystander intervention can enhance the process of genocide