Are Inmates With Military Backgrounds “Army Strong?”

• Author: Matthew William Logan,Paul-Philippe Pare
• Published date: 01 October 2017
• Date: 01 October 2017
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403415623033
• Subject Matter: Articles for Special Issue

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2017, Vol. 28(8) 814 –841

© The Author(s) 2016

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0887403415623033

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Articles for Special Issue

Are Inmates With Military

Backgrounds “Army Strong?”

Matthew William Logan1 and Paul-Philippe Pare2

Abstract

We use data from the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities

2004 to examine the relationship between prior military service and misbehavior for

a nationally representative sample of incarcerated inmates. Our regression analyses,

based on 18,185 respondents across 326 prisons, suggest that inmates with military

backgrounds tend to fare better than others across 12 negative prison outcomes. In

contrast, we do not find much support for the argument—implied by violentization

and other theories—that inmates with military backgrounds fare worse than others,

with the exception of high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and

violent victimization. Supplementary analyses also show conditional patterns based

on exposure to combat as well as honorable versus dishonorable discharge.

Keywords

prison, military, inmate assaults

Introduction

Many individuals with military backgrounds will experience incarceration over their

life course (Freeman & Roca, 2001; Sherman, Sautter, Jackson, Lyons, & Han, 2006;

White, Mulvey, Fox, & Choate, 2012), but there is very limited research on how they

experience incarceration. On one hand, military service is often promoted as a difficult

but ultimately positive experience by military institutions and the government—a pro-

fessional and personal growth challenge that makes ordinary people “Army Strong,”

based on a specific framing of this argument (U.S. Army, 2014). It is therefore

1California State University, San Bernardino, USA

2University of Western Ontario, London, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Matthew William Logan, California State University, San Bernardino, 5500 University Avenue, San

Bernardino, CA 92407, USA.

Email: matthew.logan@csusb.edu

623033CJPXXX10.1177/0887403415623033Criminal Justice Policy ReviewLogan and Pare

research-article2016

Logan and Pare 815

plausible that military service serves as a protective factor that helps inmates adjust

and adapt to incarceration, assuming that military training provided them with disci-

pline, character, and the skills to adapt to a regimented institution like prison (Bennett,

1954; Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2011; Willbach, 1948). On the other hand, military

service is seen by many scholars and commentators as both traumatizing and dehu-

manizing (Athens & Ulmer, 2003; Kaylor, King, & King, 1987). According to this

view, the military rarely makes one “Army Strong,” and is more likely to leave ex-

soldiers and veterans with physical and psychological scars. Thus, the military experi-

ence might make some people weaker, not stronger, and may be a risk factor for a

variety of negative outcomes for prison inmates—as the literature on post-traumatic

stress disorder (PTSD), violentization theory (Athens & Ulmer, 2003), and social

learning (Akers, 1998; Castle & Hensley, 2002; Wyatt & Gal, 1990) suggests.

The aim of the current study is to examine how inmates who come from military

backgrounds experience prison life relative to inmates with no military experience,

based on these two competing perspectives. Examining the prison experience of

inmates with military backgrounds is important for at least two reasons with respect to

prison research and policy. The first reason is that a number of veterans return from

tours of duty having sustained both physical and psychological trauma—the latter of

which often manifests in various forms of mental illness, such as PTSD, which has

been associated with an increased risk of negative life outcomes, including incarcera-

tion (Accordino, Porter, & Morse, 2001; National Drug Court Institute, 2012). In the

same way, incarcerated veterans tend to come from different social and demographic

backgrounds from other inmates (Dabbs & Morris, 1990). According to Noonan and

Mumola (2007), for example, inmates with military backgrounds residing in state pris-

ons were, on average, older and better educated than nonveteran inmates (see also

Armor & Sackett, 2004). Importantly, such characteristics have been linked to reduced

stress and prosocial adaptation in the prison setting (Benson & Cullen, 1988; Clemmer,

1958; Irwin, 1970; Porporino & Zamble, 1984; Wooldredge, 1999). By assessing the

prison experience of veterans compared with nonveteran inmates, then, correctional

officials and staff members may be better able to develop actuarial assessments to

identify those who are at an elevated risk of experiencing negative prison outcomes,

such as victimization and institutional misconduct, and respond with appropriate inter-

vention programs. Indeed, the classification of risk is important to the overall func-

tioning of correctional facilities, and past research has documented a positive

association between custody levels and aggregate levels of institutional misconduct

among inmates (Andrews & Bonta, 2014; Camp, Gaes, Langan, & Saylor, 2003;

Worrall & Morris, 2011).

The second reason has to do with the fact that prisons, in general, are closed sys-

tems, where the relationships and interactions between staff and inmates are less trans-

parent than other areas of the criminal justice system. Although the experience of

incarcerated veterans has received attention, much of it is based on either descriptive

or anecdotal accounts (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004; National Drug Court

Institute, 2012). Conversely, the empirical literature on the experience of incarcerated

veterans is scant at best, where military service is designated as a control variable in