Implications of Different Outcome Measures for an Understanding of Inmate Misconduct

Benjamin Steiner, John Wooldredge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

59 Scopus citations


Quantitative studies geared toward understanding differences among prison inmates in their odds of committing rule infractions have grown over the last decade but with little consistency in the models examined, especially regarding the types of rule violations examined. These differences have, in turn, contributed to an increasingly complex picture of inmate misconduct that appears counterproductive for both theory and practice. The study described here was designed to assess the ramifications of examining different outcome measures for quantitative analyses of the subject. Findings revealed that three of the nine models examined produced unique information regarding the effects of various inmate predictors, including the models of physical assaults (on inmates and/or staff), drug/alcohol use, and other nonviolent misconduct. Analyses also uncovered several new substantive findings on the topic. Findings are discussed in light of their relevance for practice as well as theories of inmate behavior.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1234-1262
Number of pages29
JournalCrime and Delinquency
Issue number8
StatePublished - Dec 2013


  • inmate misconduct
  • inmates
  • prison
  • rule infractions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Implications of Different Outcome Measures for an Understanding of Inmate Misconduct'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this