Attitudinal schemas and academy training receptivity: a quasi-experimental study of prison officers

IF 1.8 2区社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY

Journal of Experimental Criminology Pub Date : 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1007/s11292-023-09604-7

Alexander L. Burton, Cheryl Lero Jonson, William T. Miller, Jiayi Wang

{"title":"Attitudinal schemas and academy training receptivity: a quasi-experimental study of prison officers","authors":"Alexander L. Burton, Cheryl Lero Jonson, William T. Miller, Jiayi Wang","doi":"10.1007/s11292-023-09604-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to assess whether the receptivity of prison officers toward academy training differs based on their views of rehabilitation and punitiveness. </p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>Using the potential outcomes framework, we quasi-experimentally examine the role of newly-hired officers’ (<i>N</i> = 519) rehabilitative and punitive attitudes on post-training self-efficacy in performing the occupational duties of a prison officer. Linear regression models are estimated to examine the effects of the two attitudes on the confidence to perform the job of a prison officer.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Results indicate that officers espousing greater rehabilitative views leave academy training with greater confidence in completing all roles associated with the job, while officers holding stronger punitive views leave with substantially less confidence.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>There are substantial differences in what rehabilitative-oriented prison officers get out of academy training versus punitively oriented officers.</p>","PeriodicalId":47684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","volume":"101 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-023-09604-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to assess whether the receptivity of prison officers toward academy training differs based on their views of rehabilitation and punitiveness.

Methods

Using the potential outcomes framework, we quasi-experimentally examine the role of newly-hired officers’ (N = 519) rehabilitative and punitive attitudes on post-training self-efficacy in performing the occupational duties of a prison officer. Linear regression models are estimated to examine the effects of the two attitudes on the confidence to perform the job of a prison officer.

Results

Results indicate that officers espousing greater rehabilitative views leave academy training with greater confidence in completing all roles associated with the job, while officers holding stronger punitive views leave with substantially less confidence.

Conclusions

There are substantial differences in what rehabilitative-oriented prison officers get out of academy training versus punitively oriented officers.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

态度模式与接受学院培训：对监狱官员的准实验研究

目的本研究旨在评估监狱官员对学院培训的接受程度是否因其对改造和惩罚的看法而有所不同。方法利用潜在结果框架，我们以准实验的方式考察了新录用警官（519 人）的改造和惩罚态度对培训后履行狱警职业职责的自我效能感的影响。通过线性回归模型的估计，考察了这两种态度对狱警工作信心的影响。结果结果表明，支持更多康复观点的狱警在离开学院培训时，对完成与工作相关的所有角色有更大的信心，而持有更强惩罚观点的狱警在离开时，信心则大大降低。结论以康复为导向的狱警与以惩罚为导向的狱警在学院培训中的收获存在很大差异。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Experimental Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

6.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Experimental Criminology focuses on high quality experimental and quasi-experimental research in the advancement of criminological theory and/or the development of evidence based crime and justice policy. The journal is also committed to the advancement of the science of systematic reviews and experimental methods in criminology and criminal justice. The journal seeks empirical papers on experimental and quasi-experimental studies, systematic reviews on substantive criminological and criminal justice issues, and methodological papers on experimentation and systematic review. The journal encourages submissions from scholars in the broad array of scientific disciplines that are concerned with criminology as well as crime and justice problems.