U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Prison Riots - A Corrections' Nightmare Since 1774

NCJ Number
91660
Journal
Prison Journal Volume: 63 Issue: 1 Dated: (Spring/Summer 1983) Pages: 32-46
Author(s)
S D Dillingham; R H Montgomery
Date Published
1983
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This paper provides an overview of some of the major costs, causes, and preventive/diagnostic measures associated with prison disturbances.
Abstract
From 1900 through the early 1980's, about 300 or more prison riots have occurred, and the magnitude and dangerousness of more recent riots have increased with the crowded conditions in most State correctional facilities. The costs of such riots may include loss of life, psychological damage, property loss, and loss of work time. Fox (1971), Smith (1973), and Smelser (1973) have suggested three causative theories to explain prison riots. Fox theorizes that prison riots are like time bombs detonated by spontaneous events, while Smith argues that prison riots result from unresolved conflicts. Smelser identifies conditions in sequence that must be present to increase the probability of a riot. The conditions are structural conduciveness, strain or tension, growth or spread of a generalized belief, precipitation factors, mobilization and organization for action, and operation of mechanisms of social control. These three approaches may be viewed as supplementary rather than mutually exclusive. Recent studies have also shown that both inmates and staff share many percetions about factors underlying riotous behavior and that both groups are willing to make concessions to overcome these perceived problems. Research into riots reveals three major procedures that can help prevent riots: inmate grievance mechanisms to facilitate the hearing of inmate complaints, the use of inmate councils to serve as a vehicle for inmate communication with prison officials, and the use of an attitudinal survey instrument that will permit inmates to communicate their concerns. Twenty-one footnotes are listed.