The Use of Restrictive Housing on Gang and Non-Gang Affiliated Inmates in U.S. Prisons: Findings from a National Survey of Correctional Agencies

References

• American Corrections Association. (2014). Standards committee meeting minutes. Presented at the ACA Winter Conference, Tampa, FL. Retrieved from http://www.aca.org/ACA_PROD_IMIS/Docs/Standards%20and%20Accreditation/SC%20Minutes_Tampa_Jan2014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Barrows, J., & Huff, C. R. (2009). Gangs and public policy: Constructing and deconstructing gang databases. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(4), 675–703. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2009.00585.x
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartel, S., Guilmette, C., Kalb, J., Li, D., Nuni, J., Porter, D. E., & Resnik, J. (2015). The ASCA-Liman 2014 national survey of administrative segregation in prison. New Haven, CT: The Liman Program, Yale Law School and the Association of State Correctional Administrators.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, A. J. (2015). Use of restrictive housing in U.S. prisons and jails, 2011–12 (No. NCJ 249209). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/urhuspj1112.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Burman, M. L. (2012). Resocializing and repairing homies within the Texas prison system: A case study on security threat group management, administrative segregation, prison gang renunciation and safety for all. The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, H. D., Griffin, O. H., & Johnson, W. W. (2013). What makes you the “worst of the worst?” An examination of state policies defining supermaximum confinement. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24(6), 676–694. doi:10.1177/0887403412465715
   Google Scholar
• Camp, G. M., & Camp, C. G. (1985). Prison gangs their extent, nature, and impact on prisons. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/99458NCJRS.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Carson, E. A. (2016). Prisoners in 2015. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Chammah, M. (2016). How to get out of solitary — one step at a time. The Marshall Project. Retrieved from https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/01/07/how-to-get-out-of-solitary-one-step-at-a-time
   Google Scholar
• Cochran, J. C., Toman, E. L., Mears, D. P., & Bales, W. D. (2018). Solitary confinement as punishment: Examining in-prison sanctioning disparities. Justice Quarterly, 35(3), 341–381. doi:10.1080/07418825.2017.1308541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crouch, B. M., & Marquart, J. W. (1989). An appeal to justice: Litigated reform of Texas prisons. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• DiIulio, J. J. (1987). Governing prisons. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, D. R. (2002). Arizona department of corrections: Security threat group (STG) program evaluation. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Fleisher, M. S., & Decker, S. H. (2001). Going home, staying home. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), 65–77.
   Google Scholar
• Fong, R. S. (1990). The organizational structure of prison gangs: A Texas case study. Federal Probation, 54(1), 36–44.
   Google Scholar
• Fong, R. S., & Buentello, S. (1991). The detection of prison gang development: An empirical assessment. Federal Probation, 55(1), 66–70.
   Google Scholar
• Frost, N. A., & Monteiro, C. E. (2016). Administrative segregation in U.S. prisons. In M. Garcia (Ed.), Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions (pp. 1–47). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Gaes, G. G., Wallace, S., Gilman, E., Klein-Saffran, J., & Suppa, S. (2002). The influence of prison gang affiliation on violence and other prison misconduct. The Prison Journal, 82(3), 359–385. doi:10.1177/003288550208200304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia M. (Ed.).(2016). Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Ghafar, M. (2017). Exiting solitary confinement: A survey of state correctional policies. UCLA Law Review, 64, 508–547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin, M. L. (2007). Prison gang policy and recidivism: Short-term management benefits, long-term consequences. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(2), 223–230. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00430.x
   Google Scholar
• Griffin, M. L., & Hepburn, J. R. (2006). The effect of gang affiliation on violent misconduct among inmates during the early years of confinement. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33(4), 419–466. doi:10.1177/0093854806288038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haney, C. (2018). The psychological effects of solitary confinement: A systematic critique. Crime and Justice, 47(1), 365–416. doi:10.1086/696041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haney, C., & Lynch, M. (1997). Regulating prisons of the future: A psychological analysis of supermax and solitary confinement. NYU Review of Law & Social Change, 23, 477–570.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, P. M., & Beck, A. J. (2003). Prisoners in 2002. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/abstractdb/AbstractDBDetails.aspx?id=200248
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. London, UK: The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved from www.handbook.cochrane.org
   Google Scholar
• Hill, C. (2009). Gangs/security threat groups. Corrections Compendium, 34(1), 23–37.
   Google Scholar
• Hinds, M., & Butler, J. (2015). Solitary confinement: Can the courts get inmates out of the hole. Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties, 11, 331–372.
   Google Scholar
• Huebner, B. M. (2003). Administrative determinants of inmate violence: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352(02)00218-0 doi:10.1016/S0047-2352(02)00218-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, T., & Wilson, D. J. (2004). Bureau of Justice Statistics reentry trends in the U.S.: Highlights, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/reentry/reentry.cfm
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, G., Riegel, S., Morales, T., & Waldorf, D. (1993). Change in prison culture: Prison gangs and the case of the Pepsi generation. Social Problems, 40(3), 398–409. doi:10.1525/sp.1993.40.3.03x0085g
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, J. B. (2001). Focusing on prison gangs. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), vi–vii.
   Google Scholar
• Kapoor, R. (2016). Mental health effects of restrictive housing. In Robert Trestman (Ed.), Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions (pp. 199–232). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• King, R. D. (1999). The rise and rise of supermax: An American solution in search of a problem?. Punishment & Society, 1(2), 163–186. doi:10.1177/14624749922227766
   Google Scholar
• Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (2006). Street gang patterns and policies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knox, G. W., & Tromanhauser, E. D. (1991). Gangs and their control in adult correctional institutions. The Prison Journal, 71(2), 15–22. doi:10.1177/003288559107100203
   Google Scholar
• Kurki, L., & Morris, N. (2001). The purposes, practices, and problems of supermax prisons. Crime and Justice, 28, 385–424. doi:10.1086/652214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labrecque, R. M. (2015a). Effect of solitary confinement on institutional misconduct: A longitudinal evaluation. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=271153
   Google Scholar
• Labrecque, R. M. (2015b). October). Who ends up in administrative segregation? A meta-analytic review. Presented at the National Institute of Justice Topical Working Group on the Use of Administrative Segregation in the United States, Arlington, VA.
   Google Scholar
• Labrecque, R. M. (2016). The use of administrative segregation and its function in the institutional setting. In Maria Garcia (Ed.), Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions (pp. 117–164). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Labrecque, R. M., & Smith, P. (2017). Reducing institutional disorder: Using the inmate risk assessment for segregation placement to triage treatment services at the front end of prison sentences. Crime & Delinquency, Online First, 65, 3–25. doi:10.1177/0011128717748946
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., & Jacobs, R. (2012). Maps: Solitary confinement, state by state. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/map-solitary-confinement-states
   Google Scholar
• Li, C. (2013). Little’s test of missing completely at random. The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata, 13(4), 795–809. doi:10.1177/1536867X1301300407
   Google Scholar
• Lin, J. (2017). Program evaluation in the context of supervision regime change: Motivational interviewing in Colorado. Justice Quarterly, 0(0), 1–24. doi:10.1080/07418825.2017.1367027
   Google Scholar
• Little, R. J. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(404), 1198–1202. doi:10.1080/01621459.1988.10478722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mears, D. P. (2005). Evaluating the effectiveness of supermax prisons. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=233437
   Google Scholar
• Mears, D. P., & Bales, W. D. (2009). Supermax Incarceration and Recidivism*. Criminology, 47(4), 1131–1166. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00171.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mears, D. P., & Reisig, M. D. (2006). The theory and practice of supermax prisons. Punishment & Society, 8(1), 33–57. doi:10.1177/1462474506059139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mears, D. P., & Watson, J. (2006). Towards a fair and balanced assessment of supermax prisons. Justice Quarterly, 23(2), 232–270. doi:10.1080/07418820600688867
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, R. D., Gendreau, P., Smith, P., Gray, A. L., Labrecque, R. M., MacLean, N., … Mill, J. F. (2016). Quantitative syntheses of the effects of administrative segregation on inmates’ well-being. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, doi:10.1037/law0000089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naday, A., Freilich, J. D., & Mellow, J. (2008). The elusive data on supermax confinement. The Prison Journal, 88(1), 69–93. doi:10.1177/0032885507310978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute of Corrections (1997). Supermax housing: A survey of current practice. Longmont, CO: National Institute of Corrections.
   Google Scholar
• Obama, B. (2016). Why we must rethink solitary confinement. Washington Post, Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/barack-obama-why-we-must-rethink-solitary-confinement/2016/01/25/29a361f2-c384-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html
   Google Scholar
• Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prendergast, A. (2014). August 21). After the murder of Tom Clements, can Colorado’s prison system rehabilitate itself? Retrieved August 2, 2017, from http://www.westword.com/news/after-the-murder-of-tom-clements-can-colorados-prison-system-rehabilitate-itself-5125050
   Google Scholar
• Pyrooz, D. C. (2016). Gang affiliation and restrictive housing in U.S. prisons. In M. Garcia (Ed.), Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions (pp. 117–164). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Pyrooz, D. C., & Decker, S. H. 2020. Competing for control: Gangs and the social order of prisons. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pyrooz, D. C., Gartner, N., & Smith, M. M. (2017). Consequences of incarceration for gang membership: A longitudinal study of serious offenders in Philadelphia and Phoenix. Criminology, 55(2), 273–306. doi:10.1111/1745-9125.12135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyrooz, D. C., & Mitchell, M. M. (2019). The hardest time: Gang members in total institutions. In B. M. Huebner & N. A. Frost (Eds.), The collateral consequences of sentencing and punishment decisions. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Raemisch, R. (2018, January 20). Why we ended long-term solitary confinement in Colorado. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/12/opinion/solitary-confinement-colorado-prison.html
   Google Scholar
• Ralph, P. H., & Marquart, J. W. (1991). Gang violence in Texas prisons. The Prison Journal, 71(2), 38–49. doi:10.1177/003288559107100205
   Google Scholar
• Reiter, K. A. (2016). 23/7: Pelican bay prison and the rise of long-term solitary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruiz, V. E. 503 F.Supp. 1265 (1980). (United States District Court, S. D. Texas, Houston Division
   Google Scholar
• Sheldon, R. G. (1991). A comparison of gang members and non-gang members in a prison setting. The Prison Journal, 71(2), 50–60. doi:10.1177/003288559107100206
   Google Scholar
• Skarbek, D. (2014). The social order of the underworld: How prison gangs govern the American penal system. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, P., Gendreau, P., & Labrecque, R. M. (2015). The impact of solitary confinement on inmate behavior: A meta-analytic review. Presented at the North American Correctional and Criminal Justice, Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved from http://media.wix.com/ugd/7fc458_2efc5654e7ea4d27a9d45a64f331fec5.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Steiner, B., Butler, H. D., & Ellison, J. M. (2014). Causes and correlates of prison inmate misconduct: A systematic review of the evidence. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(6), 462–470. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2014.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiner, B., & Cain, C. M. (2016). The relationship between inmate misconduct, institutional violence, and administrative segregation: A systematic review of the evidence. In Maria Garcia (Ed.), Restrictive housing in the U.S. issues, challenges, and future directions (pp. 165–197). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Tachiki, S. N. (1995). Indeterminate sentences in supermax prisons based upon alleged gang affiliations: A reexamination of procedural protection and a proposal for greater procedural requirements. California Law Review, 83(4), 1115–1149. doi:10.2307/3480899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toch, H. (2007). Sequestering gang members, burning witches, and subverting due process. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(2), 274–288. doi:10.1177/0093854806296663
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trulson, C. R., Marquart, J. W., & Kawucha, S. K. (2006). Gang suppression and institutional control. Corrections Today, 68(2), 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Vigil, D. A. (2006). Classification and security threat group management. Corrections Today, 68(2), 32–34.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, D. A., & Werlich, T. G. (2003). Alcatraz and Marion: Evaluating super-maximum custody. Punishment & Society, 5(1), 53–75. doi:10.1177/1462474503005001295
   Google Scholar
• Winterdyk, J., & Ruddell, R. (2010). Managing prison gangs: Results from a survey of U.S. prison systems. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 730–736. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.04.047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar