Public Acceptability of Prisoners’ Access and Use of Digital Technologies in the UK

• Date: 01 March 2022
• Author: Lee Hadlington,Victoria Knight
• Published date: 01 March 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/00328855221079290
• Subject Matter: Articles

Public Acceptability of

Prisoners’Access and

Use of Digital

Technologies in the UK

Lee Hadlington

1

and Victoria Knight

2

Abstract

The incarcerated are subject to digital inequalities whereby the distribution

of Information Communication Technology (ICT) access, uptake, and skills is

restricted by strict regulations to control use. Using the Attitudes toward

Digital Technology in Secure Environments (ATD-ISE) scale, 237 participants

were surveyed to assess public opinion regarding access and implementation

of digital technology in prisons. We observed there is a potential opportu-

nity to inform and educate the public on the value of enhancing digital liter-

acy in correctional facilities for the benef‌it of rehabilitative outcomes.

Keywords

prison, digital technology access, public opinion, digital divide

Introduction

People and their Relationships with Technology

Technology is not neutral. It impacts our social, psychological, economic, and

political lives and contexts. As a result, our perceptions and attitudes towards

1

Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

2

De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

Corresponding Author:

Victoria Knight, De Montfort University, The Gateway, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK.

Email: vknight@dm.ac.uk

Article

The Prison Journal

2022, Vol. 102(2) 237–255

© 2022 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00328855221079290

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

its use inform us about the value placed on technology in varying contexts

such as economic, cultural, social, and personal (See Helsper, 2012). The

reach of technology is now extensive, resulting in transformations in our

homes, schools, hospitals, and workplaces. As a consequence, our attitudes

towards technology are diverse and complex. For example, parents seek to

restrict, supervise, and limit access for their children. Some workplaces

even restrict employees’access to the Internet, and tight security measures

are built into educational settings. These practices are linked to attitudes of

use, and so risk is managed to reduce harm particularly for ‘vulnerable’

groups. These technological restrictions apply acutely to our prisons

(Knight, 2015).

According to experts on digital inequality (Selwyn, 2004), our beliefs and

values about technology are complex and woven (or not) into our everyday

lives. The manner in which organizations and policy makers respond to tech-

nology contributes to how we talk about or ‘frame’technology within popular

and policy discourses. In many respects, these discourses can polarize the

manner in which we understand technology –that it is good for us (optimist)

OR it is bad for us (skeptic). The following section provides the context for

technology within prison settings, discussing concepts that have particular

resonance for people in prison.

Context of Digitization in Prisons

Small pockets of digitization in carceral settings are evolving, with some serv-

ices for imprisoned individuals becoming established, such as self-service

kiosks, email, and video conferencing (Knight, 2015). The advent of

COVID-19 has brought an increased demand for digital services, such as

video calls as a result of strict social-distancing policies (Knight, 2020).

However, these developments remain small and localized (See Mann,

2017). Molleman and van Os (2016) global survey of prison services outlines

the signif‌icant digital disparities across most jurisdictions. The authors found

that most areas use technology for information management systems.

Unsurprisingly, prisoners’use of technology is still very restricted to those

countries in developed areas. Development is slow, and the penal digital rev-

olution is slowly unfolding and is certainly uneven. The reasons for these dis-

parities are complex and present a number of challenges for prison managers

and policy makers. Further, such challenges are also deeply rooted in con-

cerns of how prison digitization initiatives, interventions, and their invest-

ments are perceived by the public. With many jurisdictions’experiencing

growth in prison populations that typically presents a range of complex

238 The Prison Journal 102(2)