Predictors of Job Stress Among Southern Correctional Staff

• Author: Matthew C. Leone,Eric G. Lambert,David May,Linda D. Keena,Stacy H. Haynes
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403419829211
• Published date: 01 March 2020
• Date: 01 March 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403419829211

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2020, Vol. 31(2) 309 –331

© The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0887403419829211

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

Predictors of Job Stress

Among Southern

Correctional Staff

Eric G. Lambert1, Linda D. Keena2, Stacy H. Haynes3,

David May3, and Matthew C. Leone1

Abstract

Job stress is a problem in corrections. Although the very nature of correctional work

is stressful, workplace variables also contribute to correctional staff job stress. The job

demands-resource model holds that job demands increase negative outcomes (e.g., job

stress) and decrease positive outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction), whereas job resources

help increase positive outcomes and decrease negative outcomes. An ordinary least

squares regression analysis of self-reported survey data from 322 staff at a Southern

prison indicated that input into decision-making and quality supervision had statistically

significant negative effects on job stress, whereas role overload and fear of victimization

had significant positive effects. Instrumental communication, views of training, and role

clarity all had nonsignificant associations with stress from the job in the multivariate

analysis. The results partially supported the job demands-resources model; however,

the specific work environment variables varied in terms of their statistical significance.

Correctional administrators need to be aware of the contribution that workplace

variables have on job stress and make changes to reduce staff job stress.

Keywords

job stress, job demands-resource model, correctional staff, Southern correctional staff

The operation of a safe, secure, and humane prison is a major responsibility, and staff

play a vital role in that process. More than US$70 billion spent annually on U.S. pris-

ons, and staffing typically accounts for between 70% and 80% of a prison’s operating

1The University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA

2The University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA

3Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, USA

Corresponding Author:

Eric G. Lambert, Department of Criminal Justice, The University of Nevada, Reno, AB601D, Mail Stop

0214, 1664 North Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557, USA.

Email: ericlambert@unr.edu

829211CJPXXX10.1177/0887403419829211Criminal Justice Policy ReviewLambert et al.

research-article2019

310 Criminal Justice Policy Review 31(2)

budget (Camp & Gaes, 2002; Kincade, 2016; Tewksbury & Higgins, 2006). These per-

centages translate to annual expenditures of US$49 to US$56 billion for correctional

staff alone. An estimated 475,000 individuals are employed in the more than 1,800 U.S.

state and federal prisons, which hold approximately 1.5 million adult inmates (Bureau

of Labor Statistics, 2016; Stephen, 2008). Staff, however, not only have an impact on

the operations and functioning of the prison, but the reciprocal is also true—the prison

workplace also affects the staff.

The correctional workplace is unique. It involves confining and controlling large

numbers of individuals against their will, using only a small number of specially

trained staff (Liebling & Arnold, 2004). Armstrong and Griffin (2004) contended that

“few other organizations are charged with the central task of supervising and securing

an unwilling and potentially violent population” (p. 577). In light of their importance

and cost, it is no surprise that there has been a growth in research focusing on correc-

tional staff. A significant number of these research projects have specifically examined

the factors that contribute to the job stress experienced by these staff. While a com-

pletely unstressed staff may not be realistic, an overly stressed staff can lead to a

poorly run prison, and efforts must be made to manage staff job stress to maximize the

efficiency and effectiveness of the facility.

Job stress is typically defined as feelings of work-related psychological hardness, ten-

sion, frustration, and distress (Blevins, Cullen, Frank, Sundt, & Holmes, 2006; Cullen,

Link, Wolfe, & Frank, 1985; Grossi, Keil, & Vito, 1996; Higgins, Tewksbury, & Denney,

2013). A major reason for exploring the predictors of job stress has been the harmful

physical and psychological effects job stress has over time. Job stress has been associ-

ated with job burnout, lower commitment to the organization, reduced satisfaction from

the job, greater risk of substance abuse, higher physical and mental health problems,

diminished life satisfaction, poor work performance, more work absences, and increased

chances of death (Cheek & Howard, 1984; Cheek & Miller, 1983; Dowden & Tellier,

2004; Finn, 1998; Stack & Tsoudis, 1997). The suicide rate of correctional staff is 39%

higher than that of the general population (Kochanek, Murphy, & Xu, 2015). Moreover,

correctional staff have an average life expectancy of 59 years, 16 years shorter than the

U.S. average of 75 years, or approximately one-fifth shorter than normal. Prolonged job

stress is considered one of the major reasons for this decreased life span (Tracy, 2004;

Woodruff, 1993). In light of the documented damaging effects of prolonged stress, more

research is needed to identify and confirm the factors that may raise or lower job stress

for correctional staff. Although past studies have examined the predictors of correctional

staff job stress, there remains a need for additional research.

The current study surveyed staff at a large prison in the southern United States to

examine stress-related themes derived from prior studies of correctional worker stress.

Due to the paucity of research in this area, replication of these past findings becomes

critical (Easley, Madden, & Gray, 2013), because there is always the chance that single

findings are due to random chance. In addition, examining how work environment

variables are associated with job stress across a broad range of institutions is necessary

to determine whether their predictive value is universal, or simply unique to specific

locations or types of correctional facilities.