THE RECENT INTRODUCTION OF STAFF PSYCHOLOGISTS IN AUSTRALIAN PRISONS HAS CAUSED TENSION AND RESENTMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PROFESSIONAL CORRECTIONS GROUPS, THE 'OFFICERS' AND THE 'ACADEMICS.' THIS REPORT ATTEMPTS TO SUMMARIZE THE REASONS WHY OFFICERS DISTRUST THE ACADEMICS AND QUESTION THE NECESSITY OF THEIR PRESENCE. THE OFFICERS' WORK HAS BEEN MADE MORE DIFFICULT BY THE PRESENCE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS WHO BREACH SECURITY REGULATIONS, CRITICIZE SECURITY STAFF, SUPPORT THE INMATES' POSITION, AND DO NOT DISPLAY ABSOLUTE ALLEGIANCE TO THE SYSTEM AND ITS REGULATIONS. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVED CONDITIONS FOR PRISONERS OFTEN MEAN THE OPPOSITE FOR THEIR GUARDS. BECAUSE OFFICERS HAVE OBSERVED THAT INMATES' VIOLENT BEHAVIOR FREQUENTLY FOLLOWS A SESSION WITH THE PSYCHOLOGIST, THEY ASK TO BE FOREWARNED SHOULD THE PSYCHOLOGIST SUSPECT TROUBLE. THE PSYCHOLOGISTS APPEAR NAIVE TO GUARDS WHO OFTEN OBSERVE PRISONER ATTEMPTS TO DECEIVE THEIR COUNSELORS. CONVERSELY, INMATES ARE MISLED BY THEIR PSYCHOLOGISTS AND OFTEN GIVE FALSE HOPE OF RELEASE. GUARDS RESENT THE NEW PSYCHOLOGICAL CRITERIA USED TO SELECT AND EVALUATE THEM. SECURITY PERSONNEL VIEW THE PSYCHOLOGICAL STAFF AS COMPETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS AND THE LIMITED FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF THE SYSTEM. SCEPTICISM EXISTS ABOUT THE VAGUENESS OF THE PSYCHOLOGISTS' WORK; ITS TERMINOLOGY AND GOALS ARE ILL DEFINED AND ITS ACHIEVEMENTS DIFFICULT TO RECOGNIZE. BECAUSE CONTINUED COOPERATION AND INFORMATION EXCHANGE BETWEEN THE TWO PROFESSIONAL CORRECTIONS GROUPS IS IMPERATIVE, PSYCHOLOGISTS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVE THAT THEY PERFORM A NECESSARY, JUSTIFIABLE FUNCTION WITHIN THE PRISON SETTING. NO REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (MRK)