No promises, but I'm willing to listen and tell what I hear: Conducting qualitative research among prison inmates and staff

Prison Journal

Volumn 84, Issue 4 SUPPL., 2004, Pages

  Patenaude, Allan L ^a,b  

^a WESTMINSTER COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK   (United States)

Author keywords

Access; Confidentiality; Honesty; Inmates; Prisons; Qualitative research; Rapport; Reciprocity; Staff

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044247240     PISSN: 00328855     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0032885504269898     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. American Correctional Association. (1996). Preventing and managing riots and disturbances. Lanham, MD: American Correctional Association.
2. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. New York: Ballantine.
3. Becker, H. S. (1967). Whose side are we on? Social Problems, 14(3), 234-247.
4. Berg, B. L. (1998). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
5. Carroll, L. (1999). Lawful order: A case study of correctional crisis and reform. New York: Garland.
6. Colvin, M. (1992). The penitentiary in crisis: From accommodation to riot in New Mexico. Albany: State University of New York Press.
7. Conover, T. (2000). New Jack: Guarding Sing Sing. New York: Random House.
8. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 1-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Eriksen, T. H. (1995). Small places, large issues: An introduction to social and cultural anthropology. London: Pluto Press.
11. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
12. Golden, J. W. (2000). Overcrowding in the Pulaski County Jail (Technical report submitted to the Pulaski County Sheriff's Office). Little Rock: University of Arkansas at Little Rock
13. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14. Hughes, E. C. (1960). Introduction: The place of field work in social science. In B. H. Junker (Ed.), Field work: An introduction to the social sciences (pp. x-xv). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Jackson, B. (1987). Fieldwork. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
16. Jurik, N. C. (1985). Individual and organizational determinants of correctional officer attitudes towards inmates. Criminology, 23(3), 523-539.
17. Larivière, M., & Robinson, D. (1996). Attitudes of federal correctional officers towards offenders. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service of Canada. Retrieved July 11, 2000, from www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/ r44/r44e.shtml
18. LaRossa, R., Bennett, L. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1981). Ethical dilemmas in qualitative family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43(2), 303-313.
19. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Liebling, A. (2001). Whose side are we on? Theory, practice, and allegiances in prisons research. British Journal of Criminology, 41(3), 472-484.
21. Marquart, J. W. (1986). Doing research in prison: The strengths and weaknesses of full participation as a guard. Justice Quarterly, 3(1), 15-32.
22. Miller, J. M., & Tewksbury, R. (2001). Extreme methods: Innovative approaches to social science research. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
23. Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24. Morris, L. L. (1987). How to communicate evaluation findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Patenaude, A. L. (2000). "We know the problems, now we're looking for answers." Arkansas Correctional Retention Study Phase II - Results and analysis of the focus group interviews (Technical Report No. 3). Little Rock: Department of Correction and the Department of Criminal Justice, University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
26. Patenaude, A. L. (2001). Analysis of issues affecting correctional officer retention within the Arkansas Department of Correction. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), 48-66.
27. Patenaude, A. L., & Laufersweiler-Dwyer, D. (2001). Arkansas Comprehensive Substance Abuse Treatment Program: Process evaluation of the modified therapeutic community (Tucker Unit). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
28. Patton, M. Q. (1986). Utilization-focused evaluation (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
30. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. (2001). Pennsylvania Department of Corrections research policy Retrieved July 26,2001, from www.cor.state.pa.us/ DOC%20Research%20Policy.pdf
31. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, (n.d.a). About submitting a research proposal. Retrieved July 26, 2001, from www.cor.state.pa.us/ AboutSubmittingResearch.pdf
32. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, (n.d.b). Research approval request form. Retrieved July 26, 2001, from www.cor.state.pa.us/ Research%20Policy%20Approval%20Request%20Form.pdf
33. Posavac, E. J., & Carey, R. C. (1997). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34. Punch, M. (1986). The politics and ethics in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
35. Punch, M. (1998). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 156-184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36. Robinson, D., Simourd, L., & Porporino, F. J. (1990). Research on staff commitment: A discussion paper. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service of Canada. Retrieved July 11, 2000, from www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r44/ r44e.shtml
37. Rolland, M. (1997). Descent into madness: An inmate's experience of the New Mexico State Prison riot. Cincinnati, OH: Andersen.
38. Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40. Sabatier, P. A. (1993). Policy change over a decade or more. In P. A. Sabatier & H. C. Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 13-39). Boulder, CO: Westview.
41. Sonenschein, D. (2001). On having one's research seized. In J. Miller & R. Tewksbury (Eds.), Extreme methods: Innovative approaches to social science research (pp. 209-215). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
42. Taylor, R. D. (1994). Research methods in criminal justice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
43. U.S. Bureau of Prisons. (1999). Program statement on research. Retrieved July 26, 2001, from www.bop.gov/progstat/1070_07.html
44. Vidich, A. J., & Lyman, S. M. (1994). Qualitative methods: Their history in sociology and anthropology. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 23-59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Welsh, W.N. and Zajac, G. (2004). Building an Effective Research Partnership Between a University and a State Correctional Agency: Assessment of Drug Treatment in Pennsylvania Prisons,The Prison Journal 84(2): 143-170.
46. Wright, K. N., & W. G. Saylor. (1992). A comparison of perceptions of the work environment between minority and non-minority employees of the Federal Prison System. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 63-71.