Canadian Prison Environments: A Mixed Methods Analysis

• Author: Michael Weinrath,Rosemary Ricciardelli
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00328855231154794
• Published date: 01 March 2023
• Date: 01 March 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

Canadian Prison

Environments: A Mixed

Methods Analysis

Michael Weinrath

1

and Rosemary Ricciardelli

2

Abstract

The current study uses a mixed methods approach to assess quality of prison life

in Canada’s Atlantic provincial correctional institutions. Questions from the

Measurement of the Quality of Prison Life were adapted to create scales to assess

prisoner climate dimension perceptions, with open-ended questions providing

qualitative data. Across eight prison sites, statistical analysis revealed between pri-

sondifferencesandconf‌irmed that prison sentence location did matter. The qual-

itative data emergent themes also produced several consistent concerns that

Likert responses could not capture, ranging from primary needs to service desires.

Research aff‌irms the importance of studying prison environments and supports

the use of mixed methods, as qualitative data can provide greater insight into

the lived experience of inmates and better chart change that is benef‌icial to them.

Keywords

prison climate, quality of prison life, mixed methods, MQPL, legitimacy,

procedural justice

Introduction

Better environments (social climates) are thought to be one way to improve

prison life for residents and staff, leading to safer correctional facilities and

more opportunities for rehabilitation (Auty & Liebling, 2019; Liebling &

1

University of Winnipeg, Canada

2

Memorial University, St. John’s, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Michael Weinrath, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Ave.,

Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3B2E9, Canada.

Email: m.weinrath@uwinnipeg.ca

Article

The Prison Journal

2023, Vol. 103(2) 215–238

© 2023 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00328855231154794

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Arnold, 2004). Building from the organizational psychology literature, the

prison environment (PE) has been described by scholars as an interaction

of physical, social, and emotional conditions as perceived by residents

(Liebling & Arnold, 2004; Moos, 1975). PE is most often measured by sur-

veying inmate (and sometimes staff) perceptions of order, safety, opportuni-

ties for programming, and inmate–inmate and staff–inmate relations.

Qualitative research is less often used for this purpose, and multiple or

mixed methods analysis is also infrequently applied. In the current article,

we add to the PE literature by comparing quantitative and qualitative assess-

ments from inmates residing in eight different correctional facilities in the

eastern Canadian jurisdiction of Atlantic Canada.

Combining quantitative with qualitative methods strengthens research by

expanding the theoretical scope of analysis, providing a more thorough

study of the phenomena, and offering a means to triangulate f‌indings. This

strategy also improves on the overall validity of the work by providing

context otherwise lost with strictly quantitative assessments (Creswell,

2007). Further, direct comparison of diverse institutions allows for a more

deliberate viewing of PE differences and documents why the differences

may matter to incarcerees. Our comparative research addresses an important

critique by Auty and Liebling (2019): “…limitations of existing prison effects

research is the failure to adequately distinguish between prisons which may

damage and repair”(p.359, emphasis added). Finally, the external validity

of prison climate research is enhanced by studies occurring in different juris-

dictions across the globe. To our knowledge, this is the f‌irst PE survey study

conducted in Canada that uses items from a common PE instrument, in this

case the Measurement of the Quality of Prison Life (MQPL). Our study

will provide a comparison between eight correctional facilities, illustrate

that there are differences between facilities, and show that more positive cli-

mates can be aspired to by prison off‌icials.

Prison Environments Matter

Proponents of more positive PE argue that good social climates will result in

less misconduct, better institutional compliance, more successful rehabilita-

tion, and improved mental health for individuals in correctional institutions.

Theoretically, the link between positive climates and behavior change

stems from theories that view identity change as dependent, to a large

degree, on the local climate supporting such change (Auty & Liebling,

2019; Barquin et al., 2019; Bressington et al., 2011; Liebling & Arnold,

2004). Fair and respectful treatment by staff, feelings of order and safety,

and opportunities for change are integral to facilitating transformation

216 The Prison Journal 103(2)