Criminology Criminal Psychology Psychology in Prison

Criminology

Criminal Psychology Psychology in Prison

Criminal Investigation & Forensic Psychology Module 14: Psychology in Prison Role Name Affiliation Principal Dr. G. S Bajpai NLU, Delhi Investigator Paper Dr. Navin Ambedkar Coordinator Kumar College (DU) Content Vanita Sondhi Vivekananda writer/Author College (DU) Content Reviewer

Language Editor

Description of module Subject Name Criminology Paper Criminal Psychology/ Criminal name/Unit Investigation & Forensic Psychology Module Psychology in Prison name/title Module id 14

Pre-requisites Student should have basic understanding of counselling principles

Objectives The objective of this module is to understand how psychological principles can be applied in the prison. It also examines the intervention methods applied by prison psychologists to reduce recidivism. Keywords Psychology in prison, Objective classification systems, Psychological problems, Recidivism, Cognitive approaches, Reasoning and Rehabilitation, Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it, Healthy Relationship Programme, Chromis

Content:

1. Introduction 2. Learning outcomes 3. Classification of inmates 4. Prison Conditions in India 5. Experiences of prisoners 6. Psychological problems of prisoners 7. Reducing Recidivism 7.1 Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R) 7.2 Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) 7.3 Healthy Relationship Programme 7.4 Chromis 8. Summary

1. Introduction

Psychologists working in prisons apply psychological principles within a correctional setting to deal with a complex web of problems. The main function of sentencing an offender to prison is to protect society by removing the criminal from the streets and punishing him for his acts. This function is referred to as the function of ‘incapacitation’. This function seems to be in sync with the image of a prisoner who is seen as cold, abusive, harsh and dangerous. However, for a psychologist even prisoners need to be treated humanely, need to reformed and re-integrated with society. Prison psychologists not only help inmates adjust to prison life but also aid in their rehabilitation. Many of these inmates are released and become a part of normal society. Psychologists try to develop intervention programmes that help inmates assimilate into the normal world. These interventions offer support to inmates in dealing with a wide range of psychological disturbances including anger and impulse problems, psychopathic tendencies, social deviance etc. In doing so, they try to promote a safe and healthy environment within the prisons. 2. Learning outcomes By the end of the module students will be able to:

1. Identify issues pertinent to the psychology of prison. 2. Understand the role of psychologists working in the prison 3. Describe classification of inmates and the benefits of an objective classification system 4. Understand the effects of the prison environment 5. Discuss the problems of recidivism and ways of reducing it

3. Classification of inmates

In order to improve management of prisons and reduce recidivism it is important that scientific classification systems be used. These classification systems categorize inmates based on a number of factors so that they can be assigned to an appropriate institution, housing area, work assignment and program. During the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth centuries, segregation of prisoners in the United States was based on factors such as age (adult versus juvenile), gender (male versus female), number of offenses (first versus repeat), and special needs (mentally ill). Some classifications simply

occurred on the basis of how much space was available. These early classification systems were based on subjective criteria that often produced unreliable results. In these earlier systems, inmates were classified with the aim of deciding the “appropriate” form of punishment. This led to a number of negative consequences including prejudice, personal favouritism, inadequate documentation etc. These ‘subjective classifications’ were subsequently discarded in much of the western world because of the many problems associated with them. Over the years marked progress has been made in these classification systems. Gradually reform and rehabilitation of prison inmates became important goals and ‘objective classification systems’ became more popular. These systems use risk scales that assess the prison inmate on a number of factors such as criminal history and current offense, and also demographic and social factors. Other factors that are also assessed in risk scales include age, gender, criminal history, prior parole, offense type, sentence length, history of drug abuse, employment history, marital status, and number of dependents (Bonta, Bogue, Crowley, and Motiuk 2001). Each factor is then given points on the basis of risk so that an aggregate score is obtained. In many cases the analyst can adjust the score if the obtained score is seen as under representing or over representing the risk posed by the prison inmate. Though this may reduce the overall objectivity but it makes the system more robust provided the analyst has been given proper training and guidelines (Buchanan, Whitlow, and Austin 1986). Such objective classification systems not only help in the management of the prisons but also help in assessing needs for intervention and rehabilitation. In India, there is hardly any emphasis on the use of the objective systems of classification of the prisoners. At present, prison inmates lodged in Indian jails are identified as convicts, undertrials and detenues. A convict is “a person found guilty of a crime and sentenced by a court” or “a person serving a sentence in prison” while an undertrial is a person who is currently on trial in a court of law. Age is another basis for categorization. ‘Adolescent prisoner’ is not less than 18 years, but not more than 21 years of age; ‘adult prisoner’ is any prisoner who is more than 21 years of age, juvenile delinquents are all juveniles below the age group of 18 years and are prosecuted and punished according to the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000. Other parameters include gender, nationality, mental health; nature of offence; number of times offence committed; length of imprisonment; and socio-economic status (A, B or C or I, II, or III). There are numerous instances when many of these prisoners are kept in the same prison. For e.g. the terms “prison” and “jail” are used interchangeably in India (though worldwide ‘jails’ are designed to hold inmates for a shorter duration and ‘prisons’ for a longer duration), perhaps reflecting the fact that no significant effort is made to separate ‘undertrials’ from ‘convicts even though as per a decision of the Supreme Court of India, it is mandatory to keep them separate (Asia Watch,1991). 4. Prison Conditions in India

The horrific conditions of Indian prisons are well-known and have now even stopped making news. Many of the prison structures are old and falling apart. There is overcrowding in the small prison cells. According to the National Crime Records Bureau’s (NCRB) ‘Prison Statistics India’, 2015 (Available online at Prison Statistics India 2015, NCRB. http://ncrb.nic.in/StatPublications/PSI/Prison2015/PrisonStat2015.htm; retrieved 15th August, 2017), many of India’s prisons are overcrowded. Maximum overcrowding was reported in district jails (131.1%) followed by central jails (116.4%) in 2015. Besides the problem of overcrowding, a very large percentage of prisoners are undertrials. According to the same report, sixty-seven percent of the people in Indian jails are undertrials – those awaiting trials but not convicted of crime. There is criminal activity inside the prisons and quite a few of the prison staff are corrupt. For the economically disadvantaged, even basic human amenities like clean toilets, and fans in the extreme summers are not available. For those having money to bribe the police staff; mobile phones, liquor and drugs are easily available. Torture in lockups and prisons is common. For women who are detained by the police, rape is another danger.

5. Experiences of prisoners

The experiences of prisoners may vary depending upon the type of prison, the kind of punishment, personality types and expectations. However, life in a prison for most offenders is very difficult and can lead to depression, anxiety and a host of other negative emotions. As soon as the offender is sent to the prison, his or her property is listed by the officer and kept into safe keeping. A few items can be kept in his cell. He is then given a prison number and may often be identified by it. This is just the beginning of a life where his personal identity will be taken away and just a number will identify him. Adapting to prison life can be a very difficult process. As stated above, there is overcrowding, lack of basic amenities such as clean toilets, loud noises and little privacy. Even the food is bland and tasteless. Time perception may get distorted as hours may feel like days and nothing positive occupies the mind. Daily routines are fixed by the prison regime and days may be the same. Harassment and abuse are not so uncommon in many prisons. There are differences in the social environments of prisons and this may also affect the experiences of prisoners. According to Moos (1973), environments too like individuals have ‘personalities’. He has also tried to measure these environments and developed a number of scales to assess them. The Correctional Institutions Environment Scale (CIES) developed by Moos measures social climates of correctional environments (Moos, 1987). According to Moos (1987), the social climate of a prison can be described in terms of three broad dimensions: ‘Relationship-Oriented’ (‘involvement’, ‘support’, and ‘expressiveness’), ‘Personal Development’ (‘autonomy’, ‘practical orientation’, and ‘personal problem orientation’), and ‘System Maintenance and System Change’ (‘order and organization’, ‘program clarity’, and ‘staff control’). A profile can also be obtained on the 9 scales and this profile reflects the orientation of the setting. Hence some settings may be higher on one dimension while others may be lower on the same dimension. In a study by Langdon, Cosgrave, and Tranah (2004), it was found that residents’ and staff members’ perceptions of the social climate of a medium-security facility for youth was quite varied, with youth having a more negative perception than the staff. Moreover, youth offenders who stayed in open custody units that were less restrictive as compared to the more restrictive, secure-custody units had a more positive perception of the social climate in terms of autonomy and support. Day and Marion (2016) support the notion of a person–environment fit with criminals. For instance, offenders exhibiting strong needs to work toward self-improvement may have a better adjustment in a setting that is oriented toward Personal Development, whereas residents exhibit high levels of structure and staff control may be adjust better to a facility that is oriented toward System Maintenance and System Change. The social climate also consists of the roles and relationships between the prison inmates and the staff members. The Stanford prison simulation by Zimbardo (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973) was a classic experiment that demonstrated how roles could influence behaviours. Twenty one healthy male volunteers were randomly assigned to one of two roles: a mock prisoner or a mock guard. Over the next few days, what was demonstrated in this experiment was most shocking. Some participants who played the roles of the guards became increasingly authoritarian and abusive. The participants who played the role of prisoners became more passive, and experienced depression and angry outbursts. Six days later the simulation had to be halted because of the deleterious outcomes although originally the experiment was planned for 14 days. The experiment was a strong demonstration of the power imbalance in a prison and the abuse that may follow. Hence the dynamics between the prisoners and the guards have an important role in the experiences of the inmates. The results indicated that the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was more due to situational factors (i.e. power imbalance of the social environment in prisons) rather than the personalities of the guards. The demands of the prison system require that the prisoner gives up his or her freedom and lives according to the rules, regulations and routines of the prison system. When the offender completes the sentences and enters the outside world once again, s/he may have a difficult time adjusting to the outside

world. The taboo of being a past offender may limit choices and make adjustment to the real world very painful. Another problem of imprisonment is that it may lead to hypervigilance or a state of high alertness. Being hyper alert is essential for survival in the prison as there are threats and personal risks. Any sign of weakness may be grabbed by other offenders and lead to dangerous situations. While some prisoners develop a mask of being ‘hard and cruel’ to survive, others may withdraw and live in isolation. Still, others detach themselves, do not trust anyone and exhibit emotional indifference. Many of the offenders re-experience their childhood traumas once again. The childhood memories of abuse, violence, lack of freedom, and harsh punishments are recalled and the traumas re-experienced. Gradually, many of the prisoners develop low self-esteems and experience many negative emotions. 6. Psychological problems of prisoners

The effects of the stressful prison life can be debilitating and can lead to numerous psychological problems. Many of the prisoners may be suffering from some psychological disorder even before they enter the prison. For e.g. one such disorder is antisocial personality disorder (APD). The diagnosis of APD has long been controversial. The criteria for it seem to change with each and every new edition of the DSM. DSM 1V states that individuals (at least 18 yrs) with APD are aggressive or destructive and are involved in breaking laws or theft. A survey of a randomly selected sample of prisoners in England and Wales, found that the prevalence of any personality disorder was 78% for male remand, 64% for male sentenced and 50% for female prisoners (Singleton et al., 1998). Another review of 62 studies within western countries reported APD to be prevalent in 65% of offenders (Fazel & Danesh, 2002). Prison life itself is so stressful that it can lead to a number of psychological disorders. Many studies indicate a high prevalence of psychological problems in prisoners. For e.g. Gunn, Robertson, Dell, and Way (1978) tried to assess the psychiatric morbidity of more than 600 prisoners in two English prisons. The results indicated a very high prevalence rate with 20 and 30 percent of the prisoners experiencing severe psychological problems. Almost half of the diagnosed cases suffered from depression; one third suffered from anxiety disorders; and drug and alcohol problems were quite common. Other studies indicate that they lacked basic social skills, were unable to manage their anger, and impulse control (McGuire & Priestly, 1985). A high percentage of inmates have serious substance abuse problems with an estimated 47% being actively involved in drugs, (Innes, 1988). More recent studies too indicate that the prevalence of psychiatric disorders is 5 to 10 times higher in the prison population as compared to the general population (WHO, 2008). A study covering 62 prison studies with more than 23,000 prisoners worldwide found a high prevalence of various disorders ranging from mild to severe. The study found that 3.7 % of all male and 4% of all female prisoners had a psychotic disorder, 10 % of all male and 12% of all female prisoners suffered from major depression, and 47 % had antisocial personality disorder (Fazel & Danesh, 2000). In another study by Fazel, Xenitidis, and Powell (2008), ten relevant surveys between 1988 and 1997 were identified from different countries (Australia, Dubai, England and Wales, New Zealand, and the USA). This included a large sample of 11,969 prisoners (mean age: 29 years; 92% male; 23% violent offenders). The results indicated that typically 0.5–1.5% of prisoners were diagnosed with intellectual disabilities. Prisoners with intellectual disabilities make up a vulnerable population which are at an increased risk mental illness and victimization (Glaser & Deane, 1999; Noble & Conley, 1992). One Indian study reported the prevalence of psychiatric disorders as 33%. Psychotic, depressive, and anxiety disorders were seen in 6.7%, 16.1%, and 8.5% prisoners respectively. 58.8% had history of drug abuse/dependence prior to imprisonment (Kumar and Daria, 2013). However, it is important to note that the above studies have been conducted in different countries with different kinds of prison systems, different types of prisoners and different methodologies. Different criteria may also have been used for diagnosis. Hence, it is difficult to compare the results of one study with that of another. Reducing Recidivism

The concept of ‘recidivism’ is central to understanding the criminal justice system. Recidivism occurs when a person commits a crime again despite having been punished before. One of the main goals of the criminal justice system is to reduce recidivism but in fact longer sentences may increase the probability of recidivism (Griffiths & Cunningham, 2000). One reason is that the climate within a prison is not helpful to the inmate in making personal changes that can lead to reduced recidivism. However, psychologists are trying to develop intervention programmes that in fact lead to such personal changes so as to reduce recidivism. Andrews and Bonta (1994) have given a list of factors that may increase recidivism rates. Firstly, offenders may lack the skills required for holding a job and therefore have to resort to crime to support themselves. Secondly, many of them are school dropouts. They therefore lack the social skills that are learnt in schools such as conflict resolution, empathy, and team building. Thirdly, they often belong to dysfunctional families where they do not get much family support. Many of them are addicted to alcohol and drugs and may commit crimes to procure them. They also tend to have anti-social attitudes such as anti-authority, or racist. In addition, they may be aggressive, impulsive and lack empathy. Many programmes have been developed that are aimed at reducing recidivism. Many of these programmes are based on the concept of ‘therapeutic communities’ (Jones, 1953). The core goal of these communities is to encourage a holistic living that lead to a healthier, more adaptive style of living. Personal responsibility is encouraged and peer group sharing is the key to promote social and psychological change. Therapeutic communities are based on the ‘living learning’ experience in which the participants join together and are a part of an intensive therapeutic community. One example of a prison-based therapeutic community is the 12-month ‘Stay’n Out program’ for male and female prisoners with substance abuse problems (Lipton, 1998). The program consists of three stages: (a) induction, (b) treatment, and (c) consolidation of treatment gains and re-entry into the community. Many intervention programmes based on cognitive approaches have been developed as well. Convicts. Two people can be faced with similar situations, but because they think and perceive these situations in different ways, they have very different reactions to them. The cognitive behavioral approach encourages the client to become aware of these thoughts and beliefs and, if proven to be maladaptive, work to develop a more adaptive pattern of thought and response. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is a structured, and time-limited approach with a typical course of CBT having approximately 16 sessions, in which clients are seen on a weekly or biweekly basis. Cognitive approaches have contributed heavily in the development of ‘offender behaviour programmes’. ‘Offending behaviour programmes’ are psychological interventions with the primary aim of reducing recidivism by directly targeting various psychological factors such as maladaptive cognitions. They are based on cognitive-behavioural principles and try to encourage participants to try out new more adaptive ways of thinking and behaving. They involve group discussions, role plays, and various games. Usually eight to ten prisoners participate in a group. They often provide psycho- education and are quite flexible in their approach. Many of the programs described below have been developed in UK, USA and Canada but are operational in many countries all around the world. 7.1 Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R) Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R) is one such program based on the cognitive behavioral approach that was originally developed for use with the Canadian offender population, and has since been implemented in a range of countries. It aims to change patterns of thinking and cognition associated with criminal behaviour so as to develop improved problem‐solving and interpersonal skills. This programme tries to teach the following skills:

 Lateral thinking: This is the ability to solve a problem by looking at it in a new way. One such way includes understanding another person’s perspective and improving cognitive empathy.  Social and interpersonal skills: This includes conflict resolution skills, assertiveness training, and social perspective training.

 Values education: This attempts to help offenders develop socially adaptive values.  Cognitive and behavioral skills: This consists of reframing negative and dangerous cognitions, so as to change maladaptive behaviors.  Critical thinking skills

7.2 Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) programme is designed to reduce aggression in individuals. It is used for male offenders above 18 years old and lasts for 24 sessions. There are three main stages of CALM: (1) Cognitive awareness: Whenever a person experiences anger, there are certain thoughts that precede the anger. People who experience a lot of anger tend to focus on negative thoughts and ignore the positive. They also tend to take things personally and have high expectations of themselves and others. CALM is so designed that it helps individuals to become aware of these “hot thoughts” that precede anger. Examples of such thoughts include: “he is always trying to humiliate me”, “she is deliberately trying to ignore me” etc. At this stage, the person is also instructed to write an “anger diary” where the person records the situations that cause anger, thoughts preceding the anger and the reactions to this anger. (2) Skills acquisition: The focus here is to modify irrational expectations that trigger anger. Individuals are taught to prepare, cope and reflect on the provocation that triggers anger in them. They are also taught relaxation techniques, calming self-talk, problem solving skills, and assertiveness skills. (3) Application practice: The person now needs to practice these skills first imaginally and then in role play situations. A hierarchy of such situations can be constructed from the person’s “anger diary” and the person proceeds from the least anger provoking situation to the most anger provoking situation. 7.3 Healthy Relationship Programme This is a program developed for men who have been violent and abusive in domestic settings. The goal of such a program is to end this violence and abuse so that healthy relationships can be developed. Two versions of this program exist: the moderate intensity programme for men assessed as having a moderate risk/moderate need profile and the high intensity programme designed for high risk/high need offenders The Healthy Relationship Programme specifically aims at the following:  Awareness of the effects of abusive behaviour on victims  Teaching specific skills so that the person can respond in a non-abusive manner  Teaching how to change abusive beliefs  Teaching how to empathise with his or her victim  Teaching how to identify high-risk situations and managing them in the future 7.4 Chromis Treatment of individuals with psychopathic traits is highly challenging and the evidence is mixed whether such programmes are effective (e.g., Salekin, 2002). Despite these challenges, a team within the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) for England and Wales with inputs from international experts invested heavily in the treatment of such individuals. This programme called ‘Chromis’ aims to reduce violence in high risk offenders displaying psychopathic traits. Laskey, (2015) has presented an evaluation of the Chromis programme. Tew and Atkinson, (2013) too have presented many important insights vis-à-vis the programme. One of the main challenges facing the

implementation of this programme is that many of these individuals find such interventions “patronising, boring, and irrelevant” (Tew and Atkinson, 2013). To overcome this challenge, novel and stimulating materials are used in the sessions. The developers focus on the principle of “strategy of choices’ which acknowledges that participants are free to choose whether or not they want to obey rules and whatever choice they will make will be respected. However, choosing not to participate or choosing to behave in a violent manner has consequences which are made clear. Chromis is ‘approach focused’ in that the emphasis is on how the participant would like his life to be and also attempts to be very collaborative (Tew and Atkinson, 2013). According to Tew and Atkinson (2013), the programme consist of various sessions. In the first session, the ‘Strategy of choices’ is introduced to the participants so that respectful and transparent therapeutic relationships are maintained. Following the introductory session the 3 separate components are gradually introduced. The first component is ‘motivation and engagement’ which focuses on understanding the needs of the offenders and how they usually satisfy them. It uses the ‘Good Lives Model’ to identify underlying themes for each participant. The model tries to equip individuals with the tools to live more fulfilling lives and to develop skills and capabilities that satisfy their life values in socially acceptable ways (Ward and Brown, 2004). This model therefore does not lead participants to abandon their core needs and values but to satisfy them differently. The second component consists of cognitive skills (Creative Thinking, Problem Solving, Handling Conflict). Chromis focuses on those skills that that are found to be lacking in the participants and which relate to their risk of violence (e.g., impulse control, interpersonal problem solving). The tasks used in this component are challenging, and stimulating, so that the participants find them very engaging. The third and last component is the schema therapy component which is delivered in 3 stages: formulation, change, and generalisation, practice and maintenance The schema therapy component is based on cognitive behavioral therapy and aims to reduce violence and other harmful (including self-harming) behaviors by trying to change distorted schemas. It makes use of behavioral experiments to test new beliefs and skills. Once adaptive schemas have been learned, participants are encouraged to try them out in ‘safe’ environments. Chromis is dependent on the needs of the individual progress but may range between two-and-a-half to three years. Thus, many programmes are being run to reduce recidivism in the Western world. These programmes need to be delivered by multidisciplinary teams, members of whom are highly specialized. Treatment schedules are flexible and tailored to suit the needs of the prisoners. The treatment sessions may be conducted in individual or group sessions or both. In Tihar Prison India, meditation session are conducted to improve self-control and increase self-reflection but there is little available data on how effective these programmes are. However, it seems that simply exposing the offenders to workshops or sessions may not really reduce reoffending. It is more important to target specific offender needs such as deaddiction, education and employability to reduce recidivism. For offenders coming from dysfunctional families, it is important that they be taught interpersonal and parenting skills. Pro-social modelling training may also be quite effective in changing maladaptive patterns of behaviours. Summary

Psychologists working in the prison deal with a large number of problems associated with prison life. For any prison to function effectively objective classification systems need to be developed. Such objective classification systems not only help in the management of the prisons but also help in assessing needs for rehabilitation and reducing recidivism. The experiences of prisoners may vary depending upon the type of prison, the kind of punishment, personality types and expectations. There are differences in the social environments of prisons as well and this may also affect the experiences of prisoners. According to Moos (1987), the social climate of a prison can be described in terms of three broad dimensions: ‘Relationship-Oriented’ (‘involvement’, ‘support’, and ‘expressiveness’), ‘Personal Development’ (‘autonomy’, ‘practical orientation’, and ‘personal problem orientation’), and ‘System Maintenance and System Change’ (‘order and organization’, ‘program clarity’, and ‘staff control’). The social climate also consists of the roles and relationships between the prison inmates and the staff members. The Stanford prison simulation by Zimbardo (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973) was a

classic experiment that demonstrated how roles could influence behaviours. However, life in a prison for most offenders is very difficult and can lead to depression, anxiety and a host of other negative emotions. Many programmes have been developed that are aimed at rehabilitation and reducing recidivism. Some of these programmes are based on the concept of ‘therapeutic communities’ (Jones, 1953). Intervention programmes based on cognitive approaches have been developed as well. These include Reasoning and Rehabilitation, Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it, Healthy Relationship Programme and Chromis.

References Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. The psychology of criminal conduct. Cincinnati: Anderson. 1994. Bonta, J., B. Bogue, M. Crowley, and L. Motiuk. Implementing offender classification systems: lessons learned. In G.A. Bernfeld, D.P. Farrington, and A.W. Leschied (eds.) Offender Rehabilitation in Practice: Implementing and Evaluating Effective Programs. Chichester, NY: J. Wiley and Sons. 2001. Buchanan, R.A., Whitlow, K.L., & Austin, J. National evaluation of objective prison classification systems: The current state of the art. Crime and Delinquency, 32, (1986), 272-290. Day, D.M. and Marion, S. B. “Applying Social Psychology to the Criminal Justice System” in Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems edited by J. A. Gruman, F. Schneider, and L. Coutts, Sage publications, 2016, p. 245-272. Fazel, S., & Danesh, J. Serious mental disorder in 23 000 prisoners: a systematic review of 62 surveys. Lancet, 359, (2002), 545−550. Fazel, S., Xenitidis, K., & Powell, J. The prevalence of intellectual disabilities among 12,000 prisoners - a systematic review. International Journal of Law Psychiatry, 31(4), (2008), 369-73. Glaser, W., & Deane, K. Normalisation in an abnormal world: a study of prisoners with an intellectual disability. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43, (1999), 338−356. Griffiths C.T., Cunningham A. Canadian Corrections. ITP Nelson; Toronto. 2000. Gunn, J., Robertson, G., Dell, S. & Way, C. Psychiatric aspects of imprisonment. New York; Academic Press. 1978. Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology & Penology, 1, (1973). 69–97. Innes, C. Drug Use and Crime. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report (NCJ111940). US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. 1988. Jones, M. Therapeutic community: A new treatment method in psychiatry. New York: Basic Books. 1953. Kumar, V., and Daria, U. Psychiatric morbidity in prisoners. Indian J Psychiatry. 55(4), (2013). 366– 370.

Langdon, P. E., Cosgrave, N., & Tranah, T. Social climate within an adolescent medium-secure facility. International journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48, (2004), 504- 515. Laskey, P. An evaluation of the Chromis programme: treatment for psychopathic offenders. In: University of Cumbria Applied Psychology Third Annual Student Conference, April 2015, Carlisle, UK. (Unpublished). 2015. Downloaded from: http://insight.cumbria.ac.uk/2642/ Lipton, D. S. Treatment for drug-abusing offenders during correctional supervision: A nationwide overview. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 26, (1998), 1-45. Maguire, M., Grubin. D., Losel, F., & Raynor, P. What works and the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel: An insider perspective. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 37-58. 20I0. doi: 10.1177/1748895809352651 McGuire, J., & Priestley, P. Offending behavior. New York: St. Martin's Press. 1985. Moos, R. A. Correctional Institutions Environment Scale Manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. 1987. Moos, R.H. Conceptualizations of human environments. American Psychologist, 1973, 28. 652-64. Noble, J., & Conley, R. Towards an epidemiology of relevant attributes. In R. Conley, R. Luckasson, & G. Bouthilet (Eds.), The criminal justice system and mental retardation: defendants and victims. Baltimore: Paul Brookes. 1992. Salekin, R. Psychopathy and therapeutic pessimism: Clinical lore or clinical reality? Clinical Psychology Review, 22(1), (2002), 79–112. Singleton N, Meltzer H, & Gatward R. Psychiatric morbidity among prisoners in England and Wales. Stationary Office, London. 1998.

Tew, J. & Atkinson, R. The Chromis programme: From conception to evaluation. Manuscript submitted for publication. 2011. Ward, T. and Brown, M. "The Good Lives Model and conceptual issues in offender rehabilitation." Psychology, Crime & Law. 10, (2004), 243-257. World Health Organization. Background Paper for Trencín Statement on Prisons and Mental Health. Slovakia: WHO Publication. 2008.