A New Instrument to Measure Prison Climate: The Psychometric Quality of the Prison Climate Questionnaire

• DOI: 10.1177/0032885520916819
• Published date: 01 June 2020
• Author: Karin A. Beijersbergen,Amanda J. Pasma,Paul Nieuwbeerta,Hanneke Palmen,Anouk Q. Bosma,Esther van Ginneken
• Date: 01 June 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520916819

The Prison Journal

2020, Vol. 100(3) 355 –380

© 2020 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0032885520916819

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Article

A New Instrument to

Measure Prison Climate:

The Psychometric

Quality of the Prison

Climate Questionnaire

Anouk Q. Bosma1, Esther van Ginneken1,

Hanneke Palmen1, Amanda J. Pasma1,

Karin A. Beijersbergen2,

and Paul Nieuwbeerta1

Abstract

Various survey measures have been developed to assess prison climate. Because

these instruments have shortcomings, the Prison Climate Questionnaire

(PCQ) was developed to measure prison climate and its related domains across

a broad prison population. In this article, the instrument and its psychometric

qualities are presented. Results show that the PCQ’s factor structure,

reliability, and validity were in all aspects satisfactory. It was concluded that

the PCQ is a promising instrument that can be used to measure and monitor

individuals’ perceptions on the quality of prison life.

Keywords

prison, quality of life, prison climate, psychometric quality, Prison Climate

Questionnaire

1Leiden University, The Netherlands

2Ministry of Justice and Security, The Hague, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author:

Esther van Ginneken, Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, Leiden University,

Steenschuur 25, 2311 ES Leiden, The Netherlands.

Email: e.f.j.c.van.ginneken@law.leidenuniv.nl

916819TPJXXX10.1177/0032885520916819The Prison JournalBosma et al.

research-article2020

356 The Prison Journal 100(3)

Introduction

Many countries face challenges in maintaining safe and stimulating prison

environments, particularly under conditions of severe overcrowding and bud-

get constraints. However, creating a positive environment is not an easy task.

A prison is a complex system, made up by people of various psychological,

social, and cultural backgrounds, who interact in a highly restricted and, to a

certain extent, deprived environment (Wenk & Moos, 1972).

Although challenging, improving the quality of prison life may be benefi-

cial in many ways. A large number of studies have emphasized the impor-

tance of prison climate in relation to staff and resident satisfaction (Rossberg

& Friis, 2004), individuals’ adjustment to confinement, such as the incidence

of physical and verbal misconduct (Camp et al., 2003; Long et al., 2011),

mental health problems (Beijersbergen et al., 2014; Gover et al., 2000;

Wooldredge, 1999), and suicide rates (Huey & McNulty, 2005; Liebling,

2011). Other research has documented that a stimulating prison environment

can increase a person’s readiness and motivation to engage in rehabilitation

efforts (Day et al., 2011; Long et al., 2011), and perhaps can even result in

more positive postrelease outcomes (Beijersbergen et al., 2016; Schubert

et al., 2012).

There are a number of existent survey measures to assess the subjective

(or experienced) prison climate. A recent systematic review (Tonkin, 2016)

revealed that 12 prison climate questionnaires have been developed. Examples

of some well-known and frequently used prisoner surveys are the Correctional

Institutions Environment Scale (CIES; Moos, 1974), the Measuring the

Quality of Prison Life (MQPL; Liebling, 2004), and the Essen Climate

Evaluation Scheme (EssenCES; Schalast et al., 2008)—for a complete over-

view, see Tonkin (2016).

Based on reviews of existing instruments (Boone et al., 2016; Tonkin,

2016), there are a number of issues that should be noted. First, research has

indicated that most questionnaires were not of sufficient quality. For instance,

the psychometric quality of the CIES is questionable, particularly in terms of

reliability, internal consistency, and the proposed factor structure (Tonkin,

2016). In addition, there is little evidence of the psychometric properties of

the MQPL (Hulley et al., 2012), which can partly be explained by the

researchers’ intention to use it as a complement to qualitative research rather

than a purely quantitative assessment of prison climate. Second, not all

instruments can be applied to the general and broad prison population. For

example, the EssenCES (Schalast et al., 2008), an instrument that stands out

as the one that received consistent support regarding its psychometric quali-

ties (Tonkin, 2016), was designed to measure social climate in forensic health