Dispositional & Situational Explanations of Aggression in Prisons

• A dispositional explanation of aggression is one which assumes that people are individuals with specific personality traits, likes/dislikes, skills, personal history, attitudes, beliefs etc.
• A common adage is, ‘How someone does anything is how they do everything’: in other words people do not neatly compartmentalise their behaviours to fit each specific situation, rather they influence and act on social contexts according to their disposition
• Offenders who are imprisoned are, after all, individuals who will enter prison with a distinct set of personality traits, just as they would any situation which is explained by the importation model (Irwin & Cressey, 1962) i.e. offenders ‘import’ (bring in) their personality to the prison and engage in behaviours in line with their personality (including their past experiences)
• The importation model assumes that if an individual enters a prison with a history of violent and abusive behaviour then this will be seen in their behaviour inside the prison i.e. they are simply adhering to what is for them a set of personal norms

Offenders do not leave their personality at the door when they enter prison.

• A situational explanation is one which assumes that the external environment plays a significant role in determining behaviour
• Situational explanations draw from a person’s experience, culture, upbringing, education, lifestyle etc.
• A situational explanation of aggression in prisons uses the deprivation model (Sykes, 1958) to explain the effects of a harsh environment on aggressive behaviour
• The deprivation model assumes that prisons are stressful environments in which bullying, abuse, depression, isolation and distance from loved-ones and material comforts all combine to promote aggression
• Situational explanations have some relevance to the frustration-aggression hypothesis i.e. it is frustrating to be obstructed from pursuing one’s daily activities, to be locked up for hours on end, to have to endure the company of others without any personal choice, to have no heterosexual contact in the matter and such frustrations may easily fuel aggressive behaviour
• A key situational factor which contributes to aggressive behaviour in prisons is that of overcrowding as this exacerbates the negative effects of prison life and may link to the idea of de-individuation as a factor in aggression (e.g. loss of self-awareness and identity in a crowd)

Research which investigates institutional aggression in the context of prisons

• DeLisi et al. (2011) - From a sample of 2,520 male offenders it was found that family background/upbringing was a strong influence on dispositional aggression and rule-breaking within the prison
• Cao et al. (1997) - Individual characteristics of offenders e.g. race and gender are critical factors in determining how each offender will respond to prison life which supports the importation model 
• Cunningham et al. (2010) found that 35 prison homicides in Texas could be explained via the deprivation model e.g. fights about possessions, homosexual relationships, drugs
• Megargee (1977) - a longitudinal study conducted over three years which found that overcrowding was a key determinant of aggressive behaviour in male youth-offender institutions

Evaluation of institutional aggression in the context of prisons

Strengths

• Both the importation and deprivation models have been supported by a body of research and by real-world examples of overcrowding in prisons leading to prison riots 
• Both models have good application to possible interventions and therapies which could be used to make life less difficult for both prisoners and prison staff e.g. social skills training, anger management, more space per prisoner

Weaknesses

• Neither theory really accounts for biological factors as an explanation of aggression in prisons e.g. high levels of testosterone, cortisol and adrenaline
• Some research has challenged the assumptions of the deprivation model e.g. Hensley et al. (2002) found that when prisoners were allowed heterosexual intimacy with their partners on a prison visit it did not result in a reduction in their aggressive behaviour

Link to Issues & Debates:

There is both culture and gender bias in much of the research on this topic: the bulk of prison-based research uses samples taken from individualistic cultures such as the USA which means that there is a lack of cultural relativism i.e. different cultures may respond differently to incarceration. Similarly, although some research using female offenders does exist (e.g. Steiner & Wooldredge, 2009) the bulk of research uses male prisoner samples which means it may be prone to beta bias (i.e. the assumption that males and females will respond in the same way to being in prison).