The Challenges of Conducting Research on Supermax Prisons: Results From a Survey of Scholars Who Conduct Supermax Research
Date | 01 December 2018 |
DOI | 10.1177/0032885518812035 |
Published date | 01 December 2018 |
Author | Jeffrey Ian Ross,Richard Tewksbury |
Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2018
Article
The Prison Journal
2018, Vol. 98(6) 722 –737
The Challenges of
© 2018 SAGE Publications
Article reuse guidelines:
Conducting Research
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885518812035
DOI: 10.1177/0032885518812035
journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj
on Supermax Prisons:
Results From a Survey of
Scholars Who Conduct
Supermax Research
Jeffrey Ian Ross1,* and Richard Tewksbury2
Abstract
This article analyzes the challenges that investigators face when conducting
scholarly research on supermax prisons. Drawing on existing literature, as
well as results of a survey sent to researchers who have published scholarship
on supermax prisons, issues and suggestions for enhancing and growing this
specialized body of literature are summarized.
Keywords
supermax prison, correctional facility research, scholarship
Introduction
Conducting scholarly research on, in, and about correctional facilities is not
easy. Why? Numerous reasons can be advanced. First, considerable variabil-
ity exists across jails, prisons, and juvenile institutions and among the people
1University of Baltimore, MD, USA
2Arizona State University, Phoenix, USA
*The author is currently affiliated with Ruhr Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Corresponding Author:
Jeffrey Ian Ross, School of Criminal Justice, University of Baltimore, 1420 North Charles St.,
Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Email: jross@ubalt.edu
Ross and Tewksbury
723
who work and/or are housed there. Second, some types of facilities, correc-
tional workers, and inmates are more amenable to study than others. Third, if
one wishes to access these organizations and the individuals who are both
housed and work there, certain stringent protocols must be observed. Fourth,
the type of research that the investigator desires to perform is dependent on
the questions one seeks to ask and to have answered. Although these matters
can present challenges for researchers, they are not absolutes and do not have
to preclude the conduct of scholarly inquiries.
The purpose of this study is to outline the challenges experienced by
investigators conducting research on supermax prisons and what might be
done to improve this body of work. Admittedly, although supermax prisons
are interesting and important in their own right, fewer than 10% of prison-
ers are incarcerated in these types of correctional facilities.1 Why then
should we care about this type of confinement? Three explanations are
offered. To begin with, supermax facilities engender considerable political,
philosophical, and practical controversies because of the conditions of con-
finement and the resources they consume to build and operate effectively.
Additionally, at least in the United States, supermax prisons have been vig-
orously debated as secure places to transfer enemy combatant detainees
from Guantanamo Prison. And, finally, even though they incarcerate “only”
3% of inmates, that still means that more than 25,000 persons are held in
such settings. Certainly, this is a population sizable enough to merit atten-
tion. Thus, not only should an analysis of the kind presented in this article
contribute to our understanding of research on supermax prisons, but it can
also add to the sociology of knowledge in the field of criminal justice in
general and carceral studies in particular.
To address these issues and advance our understanding, we first review the
definition(s) of supermax prisons, briefly summarize the extant literature on
conducting research in correctional institutions, and then analyze the findings
from a survey administered to researchers who have worked in this area.
What Is a Supermax Prison?
Supermax prisons (also known as administrative control units, control han-
dling units, security or special handling units, and control handling units) are
a unique invention in contemporary American correctional practice. Almost
every state in the United States has a stand-alone supermax prison.2 If the
structure is not a separate institution, then it may be an annex, wing, or tier in
close proximity, and/or as part of an existing prison. However, further com-
plicating matters, there is a considerable degree of variability in the defini-
tions of supermax prisons (Kurki & Morris, 2001). For example, the National
724
The Prison Journal 98(6)
Institute of Corrections, a branch of the United States Department of Justice,
defines supermax prisons as
a stand-alone unit or part of another facility and is designated for violent or
disruptive inmates. It typically involves up to 23-hour-per-day, single-cell
confinement for an indefinite period of time. Inmates in supermax housing
have minimal contact with staff and other inmates. (As quoted by Mears, 2006,
p. i)
Neverthless, supermaxes are typified by eight characteristics3:
1. Inmates are considered “the worst of the worst” (i.e., they are or may
be: perceived or actual ongoing threats to the security of correctional
institutions; have engaged in high levels of violence behind bars,
including the repeated assault and/or murder of other inmates or cor-
rectional workers; have attempted or successfully completed an
escape; been gang leaders, heads of organized crime entities, or con-
victed political criminals, such as terrorists and spies);
2. Conditions of confinement (i.e., a single, small cell with no privacy
and minimal amenities-bed made out of concrete, a combined toilet
and wash basin, no or minimal natural light, light may be on 24 hr a
day. If there is natural light, then it is provided through a small win-
dow that may be located in a position where it is difficult for an inmate
to see out of the cell. Communication with correctional officers may
be limited to intercom contact. (There may not be mattresses, etc.);
3. Regime (i.e., inmates are locked up in their cells up to 23 hr a day,
minimal or no contact with other prisoners, and limited interaction
with correctional staff, escorted out of cell by a minimum of two cor-
rectional officers in handcuffs and leg shackles/restraints, no commis-
sary, cells are searched on a regular basis, etc.);
4. Facility location (i.e., remote location, distant from large urban cen-
ters making it difficult for loved ones, friends, news media, and legal
representatives to visit);
5. Visitation (minimal to no visitation privileges. If visits are allowed,
only no-contact visits are permitted, no conjugal visits; limited visits
by lawyers);
6. Effects on prisoners (often creates physical and psychological health
problems, weight loss, self-inflicted harm, suicide attempts, psycho-
sis, and delusions);
7. Staffing (higher correctional officer to prisoner ratio than at other cor-
rectional facilities); and
Ross and Tewksbury
725
8. Cost (because of enhanced security and staffing, supermax prisons
typically cost considerably more money to build and operate than
maximum security prisons).
Another point worth considering is that, for reasons that are not com-
pletely clear, many countries are not willing to call their prisons supermaxes,
even though they fit the abovementioned criteria (Ross, 2013). Some coun-
tries and American states have high security prisons, but they are called by
different names. It is often only after specific questions are asked about
conditions at each correctional facility, and/or a researcher has had the oppor-
tunity to visit a specific correctional institution, that one knows for sure if a
facility is indeed a supermax prison.4
Literature Review: Conducting Research on/in Correctional
Facilities
Research on correctional facilities is a common form of criminal justice
research. One outgrowth of the myriad studies on inmates, correctional staff,
facility conditions, programs, structures, management, and outcomes (e.g.,
recidivism) has been an accompanying body of scholarship addressing how
to best conduct research in carceral settings. In addition to Wacquant’s (2002)
now-dated article, “The Curious Eclipse of Prison Ethnography in the Age of
Mass Incarceration,” numerous pieces have been published on conducting
scholarly research in Anglo-American jails and prisons over the past three
decades.5 These articles and chapters focus interchangeably on the difficul-
ties of doing scholarly research in prisons; conducting research on special
populations behind bars; co-producing research with inmates; Convict
Criminological approaches to research; and the ethics of conducting research
in correctional facilities. There is also a blurring across these themes. In other
words, the authors in question often focus on more than one of these topics in
their discussions.
The Challenges of Conducting Research in Prisons
One of the earliest pieces to examine conducting research behind bars was by
Newman (1958-1959). He outlines the difficulties of gaining access and
methods to improve interviews...
To continue reading
Request your trial