Living Conditions and Family Contact in Prison: Key Factors for the Quality of Prison Life for Convicts in Serbia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47152/ziksi2023036Keywords:
prison living conditions, family contact, prison life quality, general satisfaction, convicts in SerbiaAbstract
The study analyzes the general satisfaction with the quality of prison life among two groups of convicts in Serbia: convicted persons who are in prison for the first time and persons with penological recidivism (H1), as well as the contribution of living conditions in prison and family contact, assuming that family contact contributes more to the satisfaction with the quality of prison life for convicts in Serbia than living conditions in prison (H2). The main goal of the research is to examine the significance of living conditions in Serbian prisons and maintaining family ties for convicts, considering that these basic needs are crucial for achieving a satisfactory quality of prison life and supporting successful rehabilitation processes and later social reintegration. The study was conducted on a sample of 670 participants from five correctional institutions in Serbia. The Measuring the Quality of Prison Life (MQPL) survey was applied, and hypotheses were tested using an independent samples t-test (H1) and a standard multiple linear regression (H2). Additional analyses individually explored the correlation of other MQPL dimensions with prison life satisfaction. The analysis did not result in statistically significant differences in general satisfaction with the quality of prison life between convicted persons who were in prison for the first time and persons with penological recidivism, thus rejecting H1. Regression results indicate the statistical significance of the model (F(2, 603) = 247.88, p < .001), with the individual contribution of Living Conditions in Prison being significantly higher when the percentage of variance explained by Family Contact is subtracted, thus rejecting H2. Analyses of individual MQPL dimensions show similar explanations for the percentage of variance in criteria, except for the Security dimension, which individually explains the lowest percentage (R2 = .29, F(4, 576) = 57.45, p < .001). Interpreted in the context of previous research, the results highlight the importance of living conditions in the prison context. This finding is complemented by statements from participants that vividly describe the inhumane conditions in which they live. Recommendations are provided to improve the instrument itself, and topics for future research are identified to implement practical policies that would ensure an improvement in the quality of life for convicts, not just survival.
References
Barquín, J., Cano, M. Á., & Calvo, M. D. L. Á. (2019). Treatment, reintegration, and quality of prison life: Perception by inmates. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(13), 2291–2317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19851669
Chen, M. K., & Shapiro, J. M. (2007). Do harsher prison conditions reduce recidivism? A discontinuity-based approach. American Law and Economics Review, 9(1), 1–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahm006
Clear, T. R., Cole, G. F., & Reisig, M. D. (2013). American corrections. Cengage Learning.
Dixey, R., & Woodall, J. (2012). The significance of “the visit” in an English category-B prison: Views from prisoners, prisoners’ families and prison staff. Community, Work & Family, 15(1), 29–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2011.580125
Drago, F., Galbiati, R., & Vertova, P. (2011). Prison conditions and recidivism. American Law and Economics Review, 13(1), 103–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahq024
Hairston, C. F. (1991). Family ties during imprisonment: Important to whom and for what. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 18, 87–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.1970
Ilić, B. S., Đukić, G., & Todosijević, J. (2021). Kulturološke dimenzije – Uticaj razlika i sličnosti na poslovanje u eri COVID-19. In B. Đorđević & S. Ilić (Eds.), Međunarodni simpozijum o upravljanju prirodnim resursima (pp. 169–176). Fakultet za menadžment.
Ilijić, Lj. (2013). Koliko su uslovi izvršenja zatvorske kazne daleko od evropskih standarda? In L. Kron & A. Jugović (Eds.), Kriminal, državna reakcija i harmonizacija sa evropskim standardima (pp. 317–324). Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Ilijić, Lj. (2021). Zatvorska socijalna klima: Pojam, faktori i značaj zatvorske socijalne klime. Zbornik Instituta za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja, 40(2–3), 59–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47152/ziksi202123024
Ilijić, Lj., Milićević, M., & Pavićević, O. (2020). Approaches and methods in the quality of prison life assessing: Measuring social and moral climate in prisons. In G. Nedović & F. Eminović (Eds.), Approaches and models in special education and rehabilitation: Thematic collection of international importance (pp. 85–96). University of Belgrade, Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation.
Kyprianides, A., & Easterbrook, M. J. (2020). Social factors boost well-being behind bars: The importance of individual and group ties for prisoner well-being. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 12(1), 7–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12171
Liebling, A., Hulley, S., & Crewe, B. (2012). Conceptualising and measuring the quality of prison life. In D. Gadd, S. Karstedt, & S. F. Messner (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of criminological research methods (pp. 358–372). SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268285.n24
Lykes, V. A., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2014). What predicts loneliness? Cultural difference between individualistic and collectivistic societies in Europe. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(3), 468–490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022113509881
Međedović, J., Drndarević, N., & Milićević, M. (2023). Integrating standard and network psychometrics to assess the quality of prison life in Serbia. Journal of Criminology. Advance online publication. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076231208769
Milićević, M., Ilijić, Lj., & Vujičić, N. (2023). Cross-cultural adaptation and content validity of the measuring the quality of prison life survey in Serbia [Unpublished manuscript]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241301422
Ouss, A. (2013). What works in reducing re-offending. In P. J. Cook, S. Machin, O. Marie, & G. Mastrobuoni (Eds.), Lessons from the economics of crime: What reduces offending (pp. 94–110). MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262019613.003.0008
Pettit, B., & Western, B. (2004). Mass imprisonment and the life course: Race and class inequality in US incarceration. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 151–169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900201
Tobón, S. (2022). Do better prisons reduce recidivism? Evidence from a prison construction program. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 104(6), 1256–1272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01007
Scharff-Smith, P. (2016). Prisons and human rights: Past, present and future challenges. In L. Weber, E. Fishwick, & M. Marmo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of criminology and human rights (pp. 525–535). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315679891-56
Skakavac, Z., & Trajković, N. (2019). Penal institutions in Serbia and the world: Experience and practices. Civitas, 9(2), 72–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/Civitas1902072S
Souza, K. A., & Dhami, M. K. (2010). First-time and recurrent inmates’ experiences of imprisonment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(12), 1330–1342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810379969
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright over their published works and grant the publisher a non-exclusive right to publish the article, to be identified as its first publisher in cases of reuse, and to distribute it in all forms and media. The articles will be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution International (CC BY 4.0) license, unless otherwise stated.
