Inmate Hierarchy In A Men Jail Summary

1234 Words3 Pages

In depth-analysis
Where “Old Heads” Prevail: Inmate Hierarchy in a Men’s Prison Unit

The article chosen for this analysis is “Where ‘Old Head’ Prevail: Inmate hierarchy in a men’s prison. While reading, little sentences like “prison has become a social reject warehouse” (Wacquant 2001:109) or “how are modern prison socially organized” made me want to continue reading and figure why this was being said. Plus, I have great interest in the criminal system and the article just seemed a perfect fit. Reading this article, I learned that prisons had closed their doors to researches. This is because when researched, it portrait little details of what goes on inside. Which I find surprising because a researcher would want to show evidence enough evidence …show more content…

He stated “…within chaotic social milieu can arise ‘real men’ or ‘right guys’ (Sykes & Messinger:1960). Moreover, a shocking statistic is how inmate homicide rate dropped during the period when incarceration rates rose most. After completing the reading, I did not understand the power and influence nomination in a prison unit node graph. I have never seen something of this sort and I was not able to the read it properly. Another unclear aspect was the following statistic: “…the state prison population age 55 or older grew by 400 percent, from 3 percent in 1993 to 10 percent in 2013” (Carson & Sabole:2016).

The research question posed were to empirically investigate inmate social order with an in-depth case study of a prison units’ status hierarchy (Timmermans & Tavory:2012). This research combined many different approaches. The research is explanatory, descriptive and mixed-method. Explanatory because the research identify explanation behind the …show more content…

How is causality demonstrated, if at all? Explain why or why not it is appropriate to this study. The three main attributes are age in years, time in prison as total number of years and time in units. These measurements are used in three different categories which includes nominal and ratio. The way the variables are measured in the study are with the usage of nominal and ratio., Inmate hierarchy, Status attributions and Status correlates. The three main In the inmate hierarchy section The objective of the study was to interview as much of the units’ inmate population as possible. The main procedures were interviews and survey instruments such as using computer assisted personal interviews. The idea of computer was to build a trusted relationship with the inmates. Another procedure was by word of mouth and having direct conversation with the inmates’. Data was collected in different ways for this study. It was mainly collected narrative and social network data from 133 male inmates in Pennsylvania medium security prison. In specific, prison custody level 2. Then for each category, there were different methods. Qualitative narratives on the sources of status was collected which the results showed older inmates were clear leaders. Status attribution results were inputting in computer. Status correlations used different additional variables. Lastly, inmate hierarchy results were collected from inmates who were asked about other inmates, a nomination process. Once all survey

Open Document