This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Walters, G. D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Walters, G. D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Predicting the Disciplinary Adjustment of Maximum and Minimum Security Prison Inmates Using the Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form

Psychology Services, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas 66048, U.S.A.; Psychology Services, Federal Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 280, Fairton, New Jersey 08320, U.S.A.

Using a person-environment fit paradigm it was reasoned that the lifestyle criminal adjusts best in environments which are highly structured. In the first of two studies examining this issue, it was determined that the Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form (LCSF), a putative measure of lifestyle criminality, successfully discriminated between disciplinary and nondisciplinary inmates in a less structured situation (minimum security) but not in a more highly structured situation (maximum security). In a second study, successively sampled inmates were organized according to their scores on the LCSF and compared as to the number of disciplinary reports received within a six-month period. Results of this second study revealed that the total LCSF score predicted disciplinary problems in the minimum security facility but not in the maximum security penitentiary. These findings tend to support the validity of the LCSF, as well as the hypothesis that lifestyle criminals may have problems functioning in environments which are less than maximally structured.

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol. 35, No. 1, 63-71 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0306624X9103500106


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. G. Kroner and J. F. Mills The Accuracy of Five Risk Appraisal Instruments in Predicting Institutional Misconduct and New Convictions Criminal Justice and Behavior, August 1, 2001; 28(4): 471 - 489. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. HILLER, K. KNIGHT, and D. D. SIMPSON Risk Factors That Predict Dropout from Corrections-Based Treatment for Drug Abuse The Prison Journal, December 1, 1999; 79(4): 411 - 430. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. D. Walters Time Series and Correlational Analyses of Inmate-Initiated Assaultive Incidents in a Large Correctional System Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, June 1, 1998; 42(2): 124 - 132. [Abstract]

				G. D. WALTERS A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form Criminal Justice and Behavior, June 1, 1997; 24(2): 294 - 308. [Abstract]

				G. D. Walters Factor Structure of the Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, June 1, 1995; 39(2): 99 - 108. [Abstract] [PDF]