Law Journal Library - Skip to main content
Content Start

Click here to view short-term subscription options to access this document.

14 Law & Soc'y Rev. 931 (1979-1980)
Race, Institutional Rule Breaking, and Disciplinary Response: A Study of Discretionary Decision Making in Prison

handle is hein.journals/lwsocrw14 and id is 933 raw text is: RACE, INSTITUTIONAL RULE BREAKING,
This study attempted to construct and test a discretionary justice
model of disciplinary response to inmate rule breaking in a medium-
security prison for adult male felons (N = 182). We found, first, that
while black and white inmates were equally likely to engage in rule-
breaking activity, blacks were more likely to be officially reported for
rule infractions. Second, a prior record of official disciplinary action,
itself shown to be a product of discriminatory response, influenced
subsequent sanctioning decisions, thus amplifying the racial bias.
Third, analyses of separate models for black and white inmates
revealed the importance of prior record to be differentially imputed on
the basis of race. The study concludes with a discussion of the nature
and impact of stereotypic expectations and labeling processes in the
reaction of guards to inmate behavior.
An extensive literature focuses on the relationship
between an individual's physical (e.g., age) and social (e.g.,
demeanor) characteristics and the treatment received when
he/she comes in contact with the criminal justice system.
Generally, research has shown an operating bias on the part of
criminal justice officials toward those with certain social and
physical characteristics. Further, these people are seen as
constituting a categorical risk, and so are treated differentially
within the criminal justice system. As Hills (1971: 20) has
noted, the biases of a system of stratification are built into the
very structure and procedures of the whole law-enforcement,
judicial, and correctional system.
Although conflict theorists such as Hills believe that
differential treatment exists at all levels of the legal system, the
bulk of research on discretionary decision making has been
directed toward the police and courts (e.g., LaFave, 1965;
Skolnick, 1966; Bernstein et al., 1977; Lizotte, 1978). Yet Green
(1964) and Petersen and Friday (1975) suggest that differential
processing may be more common in those segments of the
LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW, Volume 14, Number 4 (Summer, 1980)

Already a Subscriber?

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is the world’s largest image-based and fully searchable legal and academic research database. Material contained in HeinOnline is an exact replication of the original printed product, and coverage is typically comprehensive. Contact us today for a free demo of this incredible resource.

We offer annual subscriptions to all HeinOnline collections to universities, colleges, law firms, individuals, and other institutions. To request a quote or trial, please click here.

Please note: the content in the Law Journal Library is constantly changing and some content has restrictions as required per the license. Therefore, please review the available content via the following link to ensure the material you wish to access is included in the database. For a complete list of content included in the Law Journal Library, please click here.

Learn More About the Law Journal Library (pdf)
Back To Top Jump To Bottom