The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Applications of interpersonal circumplex and complementarity theory to staff‐prisoner relationships
Abstract
Purpose The current study aims to examine staff‐prisoner relationships through an exploration of interpersonal style. It was predicted that the interpersonal style of prison officers would impact on their perception of their ability to work with prisoners, dependent on the specific interpersonal style of prisoners. Design/methodology/approach Prison officers (n=128) completed a measure of interpersonal style (Check List of Interpersonal Transactions‐Revised: CLOIT‐R) and a series of eight vignettes designed to assess their perceived ability to positively engage with prisoners of differing interpersonal styles. Findings Prison officers with a friendly interpersonal style were found to be positive about their perceived ability to work with all prisoners whereas hostile prison officers were negative. Dominant officers were found to be positive about their perceived ability to work with submissive prisoners, whilst submissive officers were not positive in their judgments about working with dominant prisoners. Research limitations/implications The results are discussed with regards to issues of role assignment within forensic settings and the application of interpersonal theory. The study highlights the need to examine a range of factors in order to understand the interpersonal relationships experienced between staff and prisoners. Future research could examine relationships between the attitudes that prison officers hold towards prisoners and rehabilitation and interpersonal beha…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Role duality could manifest as a lack of prisoner empathy needed for mindfulness interventions, particularly if prisoners have personal conflicts.
“Other potential issues include problems of role duality (Zur, 2015), which could manifest as a lack of prisoner empathy needed for MIs (Gredecki and Ireland, 2012), particularly if they have personal conflicts (Barry, 2020).”
From Group-based mindfulness interventions in prisons: a selective critical review (2024) · cites this paper as Gredecki and Ireland, 2012
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Abrahamson, E. (2004), Change Without Pain, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
- Blackburn, R. (1998), “Criminality and the interpersonal circle in mentally disordered offenders”, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 155‐76. · DOI
- Crawley, E. (2004b), “Emotion and performance: prison officers and the presentation of self in prisons”, Punishment and Society, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 411‐27. · DOI
- Gurtman, M.B. (1991), “Evaluating the interpersonalness of personality scales” (in Kiesler, D.J. (1996), Contemporary Interpersonal Theory and Research: Personality, psychopathology and psychotherapy, Wiley, Chichester). · DOI
- Haney, C., Banks, C. and Zimbardo, R. (1973), “Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison”, Interpersonal Journal of Criminology and Penology, Vol. 1, pp. 69‐72. · DOI
- Johnson, R. and Price, S. (1981), “The complete correctional officer: human services and the human environment of prison”, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 343‐73. · DOI
- Kiesler, D.J. (1983), “The 1982 interpersonal circle: a taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions”, Psychological Review, Vol. 90, pp. 185‐214. · DOI
- Kiesler, D.J. (1984), Check List of Psychotherapy Transactions (CLOPT) and Check List of Interpersonal Transactions (CLOIT), Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
- Kiesler, D.J. (1987), Check List of Psychotherapy Transactions‐Revised (CLOPT‐R) and Check List of Interpersonal Transactions‐Revised (CLOIT‐R), Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
- Kiesler, D.J. (1996), Contemporary Interpersonal Theory and Research: Personality, Psychopathology and Psychotherapy, Wiley, Chichester.
- Leary, T. (1957), Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality, Ronald Press, New York, NY.
- Liebling, A. and Price, D. (1998), “An exploration of staff‐prisoner relationships at HMP Whitemoor”, Prison Service Research Report, Institute of Criminology, Cambridge.
- Lievens, F., Decaester, C., Coetsier, P. and Geirnaert, J. (2001), “Organisational attractiveness for prospective applicants: a person‐organisation fit perspective”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 81‐108. · DOI
- Poole, E.D. and Regoli, R.M. (1980), “Role stress, custody orientation and disciplinary actions”, Criminology, Vol. 18, pp. 215‐27. · DOI
- Sparks, R., Bottoms, A.E. and Hay, W. (1996), Prisons and the Problem of Order, Clarendon Press, Oxford. · DOI
- Taylor, P. and Gast, L. (2000), “That's the way to do it: pro‐social modelling”, The New Therapist, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 34‐9.
- Vandenabeele, W., Hondeghem, A., Maesschalck, J. and Depre, R. (2004), “Values and motivation in public administration: public service motivation in an international comparative perspective”, paper presented at the EGPA Conference, Ljubljana.
- Carson, R.C. (1996), “Seamlessness in personality and its derangements”, Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 66, pp. 240‐7. · DOI
- Foa, U.G. (1961), “Convergences in the analysis of the structure of interpersonal behaviour” (in Kiesler, D.J. (1996), Contemporary Interpersonal Theory and Research: Personality, Psychopathology and Psychotherapy, Wiley, Chichester).
- Hogan, M. (1971), “A study of authoritarianism, job satisfaction, and personal and social characteristics of prison guards and guard applicants in Tennessee”, unpublished Master's thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.
- Lucas, J.R. (1980), On Justice, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Group-based mindfulness interventions in prisons: a selective critical review
Harding-White, M. F., Mojtahedi, D., & Carson, J. (2024) · The Journal of Forensic Practice · doi:10.1108/jfp-10-2022-0054 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Gredecki, N., & Ireland, J. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Lancashire (GB)
- ORCID
- Ireland, Jane L.
- Venue
- The British Journal of Forensic Practice
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2012-08-03
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 180-191
- ISSN
- 1463-6646 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1985432092
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The British Journal of Forensic Practice (publishedVersion)
- CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
- Keywords
- prison officers, interpersonal style, interpersonal circumplex, complementarity principle, role assignment, prison staff training, forensic settings
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
