Participant and Program Characteristics: Correlates of Substance Abuse Treatment Participation and Prison Misconducts

• Author: JoAnn Lee,Faye S. Taxman,Liana R. Taylor
• Date: 01 January 2019
• Published date: 01 January 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/0032885518814704
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885518814704

The Prison Journal

2019, Vol. 99(1) 3 –25

© 2018 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0032885518814704

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Article

Participant and Program

Characteristics:

Correlates of Substance

Abuse Treatment

Participation and Prison

Misconducts

Liana R. Taylor1, JoAnn Lee2,

and Faye S. Taxman2

Abstract

Despite the prevalence of substance dependence in incarcerated populations

and the correlation between substance use and crime, only 11% receive

substance abuse treatment, even as treatment participation may help reduce

institutional misbehavior and postrelease recidivism. The current research

examined the influence of individual and program factors on substance abuse

treatment participation and prison misconducts in a state prison system.

Based on analyses of administrative data from 2012 to 2015 and program

data, the findings support previous research documenting participant

characteristics as predictors of misconducts. In addition, program training

requirements significantly predicted misconducts. Implications and research

recommendations are discussed.

Keywords

substance abuse treatment, prison misconducts, participant characteristics

1Texas A&M University–Central Texas, Killeen, USA

2George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Liana R. Taylor, Department of Social Sciences, Texas A&M University–Central Texas, 1001

Leadership Place, Killeen, TX 76549, USA.

Email: liana.taylor@tamuct.edu

814704TPJXXX10.1177/0032885518814704The Prison JournalTaylor et al.

research-article2018

4 The Prison Journal 99(1)

Introduction

Approximately 2.2 million adults were incarcerated in the United States in

2016 (Carson, 2018). In addition, the National Center on Addiction and

Substance Abuse (CASA; 2010) has estimated 65% of inmates meet the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV;

American Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria for substance dependence.

Yet, only 11% receive any treatment for substance abuse (National CASA,

2010). Due to the strong correlation between substance use and crime, CASA

recommends an increase in treatment among inmates (National CASA,

2010). Furthermore, research suggests participation in treatment could help

to reduce institutional misbehavior (Dietz, O’Connell, & Scarpitti, 2003;

Langan & Pelissier, 2001), which has been previously reported as an indica-

tor for postrelease reoffending (Cochran, Mears, Bales, & Stewart, 2014).

The current study was an examination of whether individual and program

factors are correlated with substance abuse treatment participation and prison

misconducts in a state prison system.

Prison-Based Drug Treatment

This research focused on two drug treatment modalities: therapeutic com-

munities (TCs) and outpatient programs (OPs). TCs are a common modality

used in prisons (Belenko & Peugh, 1998), and “outpatient treatment” is a

broad term that includes different types of programs such as drug education,

counseling, and methadone-maintenance (Taxman, Perdoni, & Harrison,

2007), many of which are provided in prison-based substance abuse treat-

ment (Mitchell, Wilson, & MacKenzie, 2012).

TCs

TCs provide residential substance abuse treatment to participants. Unlike tra-

ditional residential treatment, TCs use the community as the treatment method.

The programs have a hierarchical structure in which participants enter the pro-

gram at the lowest level and move up in status and responsibilities as they

demonstrate treatment progress. All participants and staff form the community

are responsible for modeling “right behavior.” TCs incorporate Bandura’s

(1977) social learning model (which states individuals learn behavior through

observation, modeling, and imitation of others’ behavior), and everyone in the

community is held accountable for their actions. If an individual is not behav-

ing/thinking pro-socially, the community provides “pull-ups,” in which the

person stands before the community and is confronted for their behavior/