Understanding the Experience of House Arrest with Electronic Monitoring: An Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Data

• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X00441008
• Author: Brian K. Payne,Randy R. Gainey
• Published date: 01 February 2000
• Date: 01 February 2000
• Subject Matter: Journal Article

InternationalJournalofOffenderTherapy and Comparative Criminology

HouseArrestWithElectronicMonitoring

Understanding the Experience

of House Arrest With Electronic

Monitoring: An Analysis of

Quantitative and Qualitative Data

Randy R. Gainey

Brian K. Payne

Abstract: In this article, the authors use both qualitative and quantitative methods to investi-

gate the experiences of offenderson house arrest with electronic monitoring. The data suggest

that offenders, for the most part, do not view house arrest with electronicmonitoring as par-

ticularly problematic, and most cite positive aspects of their programin comparison to jail.

However, some aspects of the sanction are seen as more punitive than others, and there is

importantvariationinhowpunitiveoffendersview the sanction. With few exceptions, however,

offenders’perceptions were not stronglycorrelated with social and demographic characteris-

tics.The findings are discussed in terms of their implications forcriminaljusticepolicy regard-

ing this alternative sanction.

Researchon how convicted offenders experience their sanction canbe justified on

intellectual, public interest, philosophical, and policy-related grounds. First,

inquiryinto almost any subject canbe justified on purely intellectualgrounds, and

researchershavebeen interested in the experiencesof thosein total institutions for

some time (see Goffman, 1961; Sykes, 1958). Indeed, Rafter (1998) has recently

argued that prison films are popular, at least in part, because theylet viewers into

“the real world” of the convictedoffender. That is, whether the portrayal of prison

life resembles reality is irrelevant. Rather,viewers are fascinated and entertained

by what they perceive to be the hidden reality of prison life.

In terms of public interest, the media and public officials often portray inmates

as “monsters” who need to be separated from society at all costs (Lombardo,

1981). This process by which the public develops inaccurate perceptions of

offenders has been called the “convict bogey” syndrome (Allen & Simonsen,

1986, p. 53). The existence of these sorts of misguided perceptions makes it diffi-

cult to convince the public that alternative sanctions, such as house arrest with

electronic monitoring, are useful for offenders whose portrayal in the media “is

usually far out of proportion to the real danger they present” (Allen & Simonsen,

p. 53). Understanding the realities of alternative sanctions will contribute to the

intellectual understanding of community-based sanctions.

International Journal of Offender Therapy and ComparativeCriminology, 44(1), 2000 84-96

2000 Sage Publications, Inc.

84