Institutional Aggression

The Importation Model (Irwin & Cressey 1962)

- Prisoners bring their own social histories and traits with them into prison and this influences behaviour.
- They have a 'ready made' way of behaving and bring it into the institution.
- Race and age affects behaviour - young, non-whites are more likely to be aggressive in prison.
- Kane and Janus suggest that this is because groups become disenfranchised from mainstream society's norms.

Irwin and Cressey identified 3 prisoner subculture categories:

1) The Criminal or Thief Subculture (values inherent in professional their, trustworthy to fellow criminals.)
2) The Convict Subculture (raised in prison system, seek position of power, influence and information within institution. Most likely to turn aggression to cope.)
3) The Conventional/Straight Subculture (one time offenders, not part of criminal subculture before entering prison, identify more with prison staff, tend not to be aggressive in prison.)

Supported by:
• Mills, Kroner & Weeks
• Harer and Steffensmeier
• Delis 
• Poole and Regale


The Deprivation Model (Sykes) 

Situational factors must influence prison behaviour, this involves organisational factors like leadership, management, physical factors (security, resources) and staff characteristics, (gender, race etc.) 

Aggression occurs as a result of internal factors within the prison setting and its due to the environment. Aggressive behaviours originates in the deprivations they experience (e.g. lack of relationships).

Sykes's outlines five deprivations - 

1) Deprivation of liberty - prisoners cannot live in the world like normal people and have to experience loss of civil rights, and loss of identity.
2) Deprivation of autonomy - no power or choice. Everything is controlled.
3) Deprivation of goods and services - no material possessions.
4) Deprivation of heterosexual relationships - no companionship - reduce self-worth
5) Deprivation of security - fear for own safety

Supported by:
• Richards
• McCorkle


Real life application - 

Abu Ghraib

Behaviours at Abu Ghraib were result of:

• Status and power - soldiers had little power so asserted it over prisoners.
• Revenge and retaliation - hurting/killing fellow US soldiers
• Deindividuation and helplessness

However, the institutional aggression may come from the individuals, not the institution itself.

Dehumanisation and genocide

If the target group is dehumanised, they are seen as unworthy of moral consideration and disposable. In the Rwansan genocide, the influential Hutu-controlled 'hate' radio station encouraged listeners to murder their Tutsi neighbours by referring to them as 'cockroaches'. Examples like this can also be found in world war II.