Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJoy Price Modified over 8 years ago
1
Female Inmates Compared to College Students: Psychological Outcomes and Parenting Factors Miranda Dempewolf, Cliff McKinney, Kia Asberg, & Kimberly Renk Mississippi State University Southeastern Psychological Association 2015 Participants 44 female inmates (ages 19-25 years) M = 22.18 years, SD = 2.00 Caucasian (47.7%), African American (34.1%), Hispanic (15.9%) 350 female college students (ages 18-25 years) M = 19.58, SD = 1.80 Caucasian (74.6%), African American (6.3%), Hispanic (10.6%), Asian (1.1%) Measures All Participants: Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI; Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979) Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES-II; Olson, Bell, & Portner, (1992) Developmental Timetables for Adolescence (DTA; Dekovic, Noom, & Meeus, 1997) Inmates Only: Adult Self Report (ASR; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2003) College Students Only: Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996) Manifest Anxiety Scale (MAS; Taylor, 1953) Procedure Inmates voluntarily completed the measures listed above with a researcher present in the housing unit. As per correctional department regulations, inmates were not compensated. College students completed the measures at a data collection session led by a researcher in either a classroom or lab setting and were compensated with course credit for participation. The current study examined the psychological outcomes, such as depression and anxiety, in female inmates and female college students. We considered parental factors such as warmth, expectations, family cohesion, and family adaptability. Method Figure 1: Paternal personal expectation scores for inmates were higher (later) than for college students; while the reverse was found for maternal personal expectations. Results Some of our hypotheses were supported by the the results of the MANOVA, which indicate that inmates scored lower on maternal warmth and family adaptability, scored higher on affective and anxiety problems, and reported earlier maternal and paternal socioinstitutional expectations than did college students. We found that maternal warmth is especially high in college females compared to inmates, suggesting the importance of a healthy and loving relationship with a mother figure for adjustment as an emerging adult. Discussion Abstract Introduction Emerging adulthood (18-29 years) is a pivotal point in development and social behavior. At this age, numerous relationships and environments change for the individual, and personal choices can massively influence life course. This age group appears to be at the highest risk of psychiatric illness (Kessler, Chiu, Demler, Merikangas, & Walters, 2005) and comprises about 29% of the US inmate population (Guerino, Harrison, & Sabol, 2012). Identified parenting risk factors for incarceration include parental alcohol and drug abuse, parental incarceration, poverty, young motherhood, serious marital discord, maternal depression, inadequate supervision, and harsh and erratic discipline (Widom & White, 1997; Loeber, & Farrington, 1998). Predictive childhood factors include precocious sexual behavior, substance use, living with antisocial parents, and gang membership ; (Loeber, & Farrington, 1998). For incarcerated women, the predominate health risks are psychiatric illness and psychological distress (Fogel, 1993). Apparent family factors for negative psychological outcomes include unbalanced cohesion and adaptability (Olson, & Gorall, 2003) We hypothesized that, when compared to female college students, female inmates would report lower parental warmth, higher parental overprotection, later expectations, lower family cohesion and adaptability, and higher anxiety and depression. Figure 2: Maternal warmth scores were significantly higher for college students than for inmates, while paternal warmth scores did not significantly differ between the two groups. Results (cont’d) Figure 3: Inmates scored significantly higher on affective problems and anxiety than did college students. Figure 4: Inmates scored significantly lower on family adaptability than did college students.
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.