Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
9
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
Within the theoretical ambit of the Differential Association Theory propounded by Edwin Sutherland, this study
provides empirical insight into the surge in the incidence of recidivism due to certain factors within the correctional
facilities that increase chances ofnegative criminal association.The study therefore examined the link between
criminal association and recidivism using selected prisons in Rivers State, Nigeria. To achieve this aim, data were
sourced from the fieldusing questionnaire and Key Persons Interviews (KPIs).To analyze the data, disruptive and
inferential statistics along with the thematic method were used.The result shows that criminal association occasioned
by overcrowding and lack of proper separation of the different categories of inmates within the selected correctional
facilitiesis responsiblefor recidivism. However, there is need to investigateother causes as criminal association alone
may not be significant enough to birth reoffending. Based on the findings, the study recommends that there should
beadequateseparationof inmates and provision of more facilitiesto preclude indiscriminate confinement of inmates
that may lead to recidivism.
KEYWORDS
Association, Criminal, Recidivism, Criminal Association, Rivers State.
Research Article
CRIMINAL ASSOCIATION AND RECIDIVISM IN SELECTED PRISONS IN
RIVERS STATE
Submission Date:
July 11, 2022,
Accepted Date:
July 18, 2022,
Published Date:
July 24, 2022
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/ijlc/Volume02Issue07-02
Ene Warikiente Robert
PhD, Department of Sociology & Anthropology, Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, Federal University
Otuoke, Bayelsa State, Nigeria
Otodo Ifeanyichukwu
PhD, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa
State, Nigeria
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ijlc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
10
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
INTRODUCTION
Correctional facilities serve the purpose of making
people or inmates penitent and this done by ensuring
that opportunities are provided for the inmatesto
contemplate their crime and endeavour to go through
the reformative process so as to become better
persons in the society after completing their term. This
is perhaps why it became necessary to categorise and
separate prisoners depending on the gravity of crime
in order to prevent any negative influence that may
arise through the frequency of communication
between those with less grievous offences and
hardened criminals (Clare & Krammer, 1976 cited in
Dambazau, 2011). This is built on the notion that
keeping all categories of prisoners in close proximity to
each other is likely to make physical and social
contamination possible (Clare & Krammer, 1976 cited
in Dambazau, 2011). Therefore, the correctional centre,
represent a confined environment within the criminal
justice system tunnel where criminals are sent for a
period of time to go through correctional processes in
order to become better citizens (Obioha, 2002;
Iwarimie-Jaja & Raimi, 2019).
Therefore, there are basic social and cultural
characteristics that are present in correctional centres
and other similar institutions, which do not exist in the
larger society. The prison environment with its
different culture and way of life embodies a complete
design capable of changing the attitudes of individual
members for better or for worse depending on their
personal
experiences,
social
networks
and
associations. The lifestyle in the correctional centres
creates the means and forms for the adjustment
processes of the inmates. Its culture is unique and
consists of all kinds of reorientation of values and
internalizations. (Obioha, 1995).
However, Obioha (1995) is of the opinion that in most
cases, the correctional facilities have not lived up to
expectation as they have rather become places where
inmates
are
further
criminalized
instead
of
rehabilitating
them.
Sutherland’s
Differential
Association Theory provides a possible insight into
what transpires within the wallsof correctional
facilities making it a possible for relepse to occur quite
easily.According to Sutherland, criminal behavior is
imbibed in the same way as law-abiding behavior. He
argued that, this learning activity is possible through
interactions with others, by a method of
communication
within
intimate
groups.
The
implication is that, just as one can be socialized in good
behavior by communicating with people who have
good behaviour, so also bad behavior can be gained or
learned through the same process of socialization
(Thomas & Paul, 2010). Hence, it can be inferred that in
a situation where new convicts are confined together
with hardened criminals there will be a criminal
learning among them resulting in recidivism.In light of
the foregoing, this study tries to examine the
relationship between criminal association and
recidivism in selected correctional facilities in Rivers
State, Nigeria.
Statement of Problem
Globally, correctional facilities are established not just
to serves as institutions where people are punished for
their crime, but also as places for ensuring that people
become positively transformed into better persons in
order for them to be reintegrated into society.
However, despite long years of investment in prison
reforms in Nigeria, genuine reformation of inmates has
not been successful when we consider the fact that
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
11
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
there are still numerous cases of recidivism the
country’s correctional centres.
The above concern has served as a huge source of
attraction for several researchers with the aim of
explaining the causes of rising incidences of recidivism.
For instance, while Igbo and Ugwuoke (2003) has
argued that the problem is linked to the public’s
continuous stigmatization of ex-convicts, Ugwuoke
(2010) seems to believe that the challenge of recidivism
is associated with the unhealthy correctional system
that promotes the spread and exchange of criminal
influences and ideas in the country. On their own part,
Chenube (2011) and Tenibiaje (2013) contends that
recidivism is often triggered by alcohol and drug abuse,
as well as poor education and influence of peers. Some
other drivers of recidivism that have been identified by
past scholars include marital challenges, the number of
siblings / children, lowsocio-economic status, negative
ethnicity, family background, prison sentences and the
type of crime (Abrifor, Atare &Muoghotu, 2012). In
addition, Mayers (1984) believes that unemployment is
a factor that increases recidivism, Eisenberg(1985)
indicts low level of education as a major causal factor,
Raimi and Bieh (2009) indict low entrepreneurship
level as a major enabler, while, Ugwuoke (2013) sees
low level of resettlement and reintegration of ex-
convicts as the reason for recidivism.
Although the studies highlighted above have increased
knowledge onthe issue of recidivism, a closer
examination reveals that they nevertheless focused
more on factors outside the correctional facilities or
institutions. Hence, very little is still known about
internal factors that increase the chances of the
occurrence of recidivism in Nigerian prisons. As a
result, study is aimed at examining the nexus between
criminal association and recidivism in selected
correctional facilities in Rivers State, Nigeria.
Specifically, the study will attempt to; 1) Unravel the
existence of criminal subculture among in mate
clusters leading to recidivism; 2) Examine how gang
membership
of
inmates’
promotion
criminal
association resulting to recidivism and; 3) Provide an
understanding of criminal association by peer groups
and recidivism.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Criminal Sub-Culture
Research has revealed that having antisocial
companions increases the likelihood of misconduct.
Criminal
justice
administrators,
especially
orthodontists (prison chiefs), are not magicians. You
can strip off a criminal's title, property, identity, or
power, but you can't do covert actions that could
inherently "cause a crime". The number of people who
were imprisoned, released, re-detained, and detained
suggests that a criminal subculture exists in prison and
implicitly causes re-offending. Because people in free
societies have internalized the norms and values of
their societies, detainees have tried to maintain the
traditional prison rules and regulations as much as
possible, yet have been able to access the “We are
working to assimilate the inmate code. However,
because the value of inmates' subcultural codes does
not always match both official correctional centres and
mainstream social value, prisoners are subject to the
rules of voluntary inmates, technically known as the
'inmate code'. "Prisonization" in the criminal literature
that requires coordination, readjustment, and strict
compliance with regulations. In addition, what is
considered unacceptable by the outside world is
encouraged and rewarded by prison subcultures that
spread inside the walls of the entire facility.
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
12
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
According to Giddens (2006), the living environment of
correctional centres tends to drive the wedge between
prisoners and the outside world. They cannot align
their behavior with social norms. Prisoners need to be
in harmony with a completely different environment
from the "outside", and the habits and attitudes they
learn in correctional centre are often the exact
opposite of what they should get. The same source
further added that these debilitated prisoners had a
grudge against ordinary citizens, learned to accept
violence normally, and gained contact with
experienced criminals to maintain when released. He
claimed that he had the potential to gain previously
unknown criminal skills. For this reason, correctional
centres are sometimes called "criminal colleges."
Based on this, Chukwumerije (2012) states that one of
the criteria for judging the effectiveness of the prison
system and its reform capacity is the number of
prisoners who stay outside the prison walls after
completing prison conditions. I guess there is.
Unfortunately, the aforementioned situation has
hindered the rehabilitation of prisoners. In prisoners'
codes or "prisonizations" internalized by prisoners
while in correctional centre, they pass successful
reform and reintegration to prevent further crime and
consequent reconviction (recidivism) It is difficult or
impossible. Prison subcultures are always the opposite
of the official and ideal purpose of imprisonment.
Prepares and strengthens inmates for a generally
accepted culture of correctional centres and societies
by not teaching all the good aspects of correctional
centre and social norms and values. According to
Iwarimie-Jaja (2003), this process allows new inmates
to live according to the beliefs of prisoner status by
adapting to the conditions and influencing factors that
breed and deepen criminals and antisocial cultures.
Begins when learning the subject of criminal ideology
in the prison community.
Clearly, the concept of subculture has been
perpetuated by a major group of correctional centres.
New inmates learn the major group criminal culture
they join and associate in correctional centre. New
prisoners develop a severe degree of criminal offense
during imprisonment as they continue to associate
with key groups in correctional centres. Some major
groups of correctional centres are working on a
subculture of violence. This group teaches members to
accept violence as a legitimate means of performing
other criminal acts. In addition to using violence, key
groups teach members that they are active in
perpetuating crime. Prison subcultures influence most
inmates to be recidivists (Iwarimie-Jaja, 2003). Critically
valued prisoners form a subculture in correctional
centre as a survival mechanism that alleviates the "pain
of imprisonment" and thereby adapts to the ennui
prison environment. They engage in this extraordinary
behavior and enable them to adapt to inhabitable
Nigerian correctional centres. Unfortunately, this
development in our correctional centres rather
underlies both the "star" (amateur or first time
criminal) and the experienced criminal in the criminal
tradition, Take the time to become a “repeater”.
Gang Membership
Several studies have also shown that gang
membership identified as members of security threat
groups is clearly associated with rule violations
(Tewksbury, Connor, & Denney, 2014). Therefore,
researchers have observed that the first step in the
process of solving this challenge involves identifying
groups of criminals who are at high risk of recidivism.
This is because identifying characteristics that capture
a combination of risk factors improves the
effectiveness of classification and risk management
(West, Sabol, & Greenman, 2010).
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
13
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
However, according to Varano, Huebner, and Bynum
(2011), gang affiliation is apparently responsible for
recidivism, but other factors may be involved in both
gang membership and recidivism. Therefore, when
explaining recidivism based on gang membership,
distinguish between prisoners with street gang
connections (Varano, Huebner, and Bynum, 2011) and
prisoners who only belong to prison gangs is needed.
This separation can greatly help create a more effective
oversight and service strategy after release.
In a cohort study of prisoners trapped in Nebraska,
gang members involved in the study were
characterized by young people, less likely to have high
school diplomas, and having marriages and children
compared to non-gang counterparts (Krienert &
Fleisher, 2001). Their findings also show that gang
members have been involved criminally in the past. For
example, gang members have reported earlier arrests,
reduced education, reduced commitment to legal
employment, increased drug use, and increased prior
arrests than non-gang members. Gang members have
a similar number of prior beliefs when compared to
non-gang members, despite being young overall.
Combining these results with well-documented
findings on recidivism, Dooley, Alan, and David (2014)
suggest that gang members are more likely to
encounter higher failure rates than unrelated members
and conclude. A review of the gang literature provides
a rationale for why gang membership itself produces
these effects (California Department of Corrections,
2011). These high level of failure could be an
explanation to why they recidivate as a response to the
society that does not help them succeed.
Other research reports have indicated that in addition
to conflicts with other gangs, gang members are
involved in a disproportionate amount of nonviolent
and violent criminal activities (Decker & Van, 2015; Huff,
2016). It is also noted that many of these gang
members are eventually convicted and imprisoned.
Notwithstanding
the
incarceration,
they
are
responsible for approximately one-quarter to a half of
all the management problems encountered in the
correctional centres (Knox, 2009; Nafekh and Stys,
2014) and more likely than non-gang members to be
involved in prison violence.
It is also observed that majority of gang affiliated
offenders will eventually re-enter society where they
most of the time will again become a concern to public
safety. It is not overemphasis to say that, it is germane
to reduce gang violence both inside prisons and in the
community. It has been a continuous research on the
intersections of guns, gangs, and drugs and their
effects on offending, particularly at the aggregation
level, mainly about murder. McGarrell et al. (2006)
suggests that individual-level intervention for high-risk
criminals can reduce the overall crime rate. In fact,
researchers who have been associated to the
Ceasefire, have regularly attributed the dramatic
decline in youthful homicides in Boston in the 1990s,
directly to the program (Braga, 2003), still, the
conclusions by the wider research community on the
effectiveness of these programmes have been mixed
(Rosenfeld et al., 2005).
Peer Group
It is a known fact that peer group influence is also
another powerful predictor of recidivism as could be
seen in the doctrine of the Sutherland Differential
Association theory. Although the pressure seems to be
more pronounced on youngsters in a group setting
than relatively older peers or those perceived to be
smart and clever, there exists a trajectory of criminal
learning and symbiotic relationship among these social
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
14
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
actors (McGuire, 2009). Tenibiaje (2013) asserts that
direct behavioural learning through modeling and
imitation is the potent factor in group influence. The
effect that peer group pressure may exert on
experimentation and other manifestations of growing
independence of youths are cases in points on criminal
behaviour and recidivism.
Crime researchers like Beaver, Shutt, Boutwell,
Ratchford, Roberts and Barness (2008) have argued
that spending much time with family or friends who
engage in criminal behaviour is also a stronger risk
factor for offending and reoffending. Moreover,
family and marital challenges are equally strong risk
factors for constant violation of conventional rules and
regulations as well as recidivism. This is because family
members are often primarily responsible for providing
housing, financial support and emotional support not
only to the law-abiding members but also their
relatives who are ex-convicts. But when these
expected mutual care and supports are substituted for
discrimination
and
stigmatization,
post-prison
rehabilitation, integration and adaptation may be
difficult. Consequently, the chances of such
stigmatized released inmates to relapse into the act
that initially took them to the correctional centre are
indeed very high (Leschied, Chiodo, Nowicki and
Rodger, 2008).
This is why the reintegration question has drawn a
great deal of attention from criminology and criminal
justice researchers. Each year more than 675,000
prisoners are released into a community ill-equipped
and unprepared to consolidate the reformation
process. When these released inmates are not well
welcomed and helped to settle, their criminal gangs
will be the next alternative for survival (West, Sabol, &
Greenman, 2010).
Even when substantial resources have been directed at
this small subgroup of offenders, few researchers are
interested in the timing and Incidence of recidivism in
a sample of high-risk men after being released from
correctional centre. Therefore, it is particularly
important to understand the long-term consequences
of this population. Almost all criminals in jail are
released, and most occur within three years of entry
(Hughes et al., 2001). Failure to consider the needs of
offenders returning to the community may undermine
the ultimate effectiveness of deterrence and
incapacitation-based justice policy.
Theoretical Framework
This study is anchored on the Differential Association
Theory. Differential-related theory was first presented
by Sutherland in 1939, but has been modified several
times. Two fundamental elements of Sutherland's
theory are that the learning process itself and the
learning content are important for understanding
criminal
activity
(cited
in
Sutherland,
1949,
Introduction to Criminology, 2003). Learning is defined
as "habits and knowledge that develop as a result of an
individual's experience in entering and adapting to the
environment" (Vold & Bernard, 1986). Sutherland
considered "crime" as politically defined (cited in 2003,
Introduction to Criminology). Nine hypotheses that
identify the processes in which a person is involved in
criminal activity form the basis of differential
association theory (Sutherland, 1949).
Sutherland hypothesized that criminal activity was
learned in intimate social groups, but that these groups
might not be delinquent, and that criminal activity was
acquired through such contacts (Sutherland, 1949;
Ekpenyong, Raimi & Ekpenyong, 2012). Criminal
behavior is primarily learnt from close associates such
as family and peers; through associations with people
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
15
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
approval of illegal behavior, individuals may learn to
become criminal themselves (Introduction to
Criminology, 2003). This learnt behavior includes both
the technical skills necessary to commit criminal acts
and attitudes which are non-conformist and thus
conducive to criminal activities (Hollin, 2002) .It is
important to note that Sutherland did not assume that
all individuals who come into contact with criminals will
become criminal themselves, though critics such as
Vold suggested this.The core proposition of
differential association theory is that an excess of
criminogenic “definitions,” as opposed to conformist
“definitions”, are conducive to criminal to criminality;
alone is not enough to incite criminal behavior
(Introduction to Criminology, 2003; Ogadi, Raimi &
Nwachukwu, 2012) .As Sutherland states, `` Though
criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and
values, it is not explained by those general needs and
values since non-criminal behavour is an expression of
the same needs and values ”(Sutherland, 1947 cited in
Introduction to Criminology, 2003).
Sutherland and his associate Cressey reject the
psychological assumption that criminals were
somehow different to law abiding citizens; instead
they suggested learning how to commit crimes is the
same as learning any other behavior (as cited in
Introduction to Criminology, 2003). Underlying
assumption of differential theory is that crime is
“normal”, rather than “pathological”, as it is learned
the same way as all other behaviors.Differential
association theory may be reduced to the notion that
individuals engage in criminal activities because they
have associated with and absorbed pro-criminal
definitions with greater frequency, duration, priority
and intensity than with anti-criminal definitions
(Sutherland, 1949 cited in Introduction to Criminology,
2003). Within the framework of this theory,
correctional centres in Nigeria contend with
overcrowding resulting in indiscriminate confinement
of criminals of different backgrounds. This gives room
for interaction among inmates to the extent of
exposing them to even the hardened criminals. In this
way inmates associate with, learn and absorbed pro-
criminal tendencies with greater frequency, duration,
priority and intensity than with anti-criminal
definitions.
And
when,
the
reformation
or
rehabilitation facilities and efforts in correctional
centres are not sufficient to neutralize the influence
from such setting, it leads to more propensity of
inmates to relapse into criminality thereby frustrating
the
cardinal
objectives
of
reformation
and
rehabilitation.
METHODOLOGY
The study area is all correctional facilities located
inRivers State, Nigeria. Based on this, the correctional
facilities selected for the study are Port Harcourt
Correctional centre, Degema Correctional centre and
Ahoada correctional centre. Given the records made
available in the researcher, the total population of
recidivists in the three correctional facilities is 727.
Drawing from this, a sample size of 393 recidivistswas
determined using the Taro Yamane formula. However,
for interview purpose, 15 staff across the three
prisonswere
purposively
sampled.The
Key
PersonInterview (KPI) was deployed to elicit
information from the 15 interview respondents while
the questionnaire method was used to gather data
from the 393 recidivists. Consequently, a total of 361
questionnaire wereretrieved from the respondents.
Descriptive statistics (frequency and percentage) and
inferential (First-Order Correlations)were used to
analyse the data to test for a relationship between
criminal association and recidivism.The results derived
from the KPIs were analysed using the thematic
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
16
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
method. This helped to provide supportive information
for the quantitative data.
RESULTS
Table 1: Criminal Associations in the Correctional Centres
Items
A
D
UNC
x
S.D.
S.E
.
Remarks
There is any criminal/deviant
sub-culture among the inmates
263
72.9%
71
19.7%
27
7.5%
1.35
0.614
0.032 Disagreed
It is a must for all inmates to be
involved in term of association
with the criminal sub-culture
52
14.4%
275
76.2%
34
9.4%
1.95
0.955
0.026 Disagreed
There is a concrete structure in
terms of norms, expected
behaviour and role
expectations in the criminal
sub-culture of the inmates
110
30.5%
218
60.4%
33
9.1%
1.79
0.593
0.031 Disagreed
There are any tangible benefits
of associating with the criminal
sub-culture in the correctional
centre
116
32.1%
199
55.1%
46
12.7%
1.81
0.642
0.034 Disagreed
Your re-imprisonment is in any
way connected to the desire to
fellowship with
inmates/colleagues
83
23.0%
233
64.5%
45
12.5%
1.89
0.587
0.031 Disagreed
Your re-imprisonment can be
traced to the company of
friends you kept in the
previous imprisonment
165
45.7%
174
48.2%
22
6.1%
1.60
0.602
0.032 Disagreed
There is a link with the crime
you committed that led to your
imprisonment and the social
vices internalized in your
previous imprisonment
278
77.0%
60
16.6%
23
6.4%
1.29
0.579
0.030 Disagreed
Your re-imprisonment was in
any way influenced by friends
or persons you related with
during the previous
incarceration
52
14.4%
286
79.2%
23
6.4%
1.92
0.449 0.024 Disagreed
Weighted mean = 1.70, Min = 1, Max = 3, N = 361
Source: Fieldwork, 2019
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
17
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Key: A = Agree, D = Disagree, UNC = Uncertain,
x
= Means, S.D. = Std. Deviation, S.E. = Std. Error of Mean
Table 1 shows the nature of criminal associations in the
correctional centres. The statements were rated in a
scale of three values. Responses were rated as A =
Agreed, D = Disagreed, and UNC = Uncertain. Values
were awarded to the options as D=1, A=3 and U=2,
giving rise to 1+3+2=6. The mean score was 2 (6/3=2);
hence, by merging the score, analysis indicated that
any mean score 2 and above connotes that
respondents “agreed” to the variable statement, while
any mean score below 2 indicated that respondents
“disagreed” to the variable statement. However,
noted that statements in negations were reversed
during analysis for proper results. The Remarks shown
in table 4.4 reveals the overall opinion of the
respondents (either they agreed or disagreed to the
statement).
Table 2:
First-Order Partial Correlation Analysis showing the Relationship between Criminal Associations in
Correctional centres and Recidivism with Prison Type Controlled
Variables
Mean
Std.
Dev.
N
Df
r
r
2
P-
value
Re-
mark
Control
Variable:
Prison
Type
Criminal
Associations
Recidivism
13.60
25.68
1.101
4.861
361
358
.019
0.0004
.718
Not
Sig.
Zero-Order (Pearson) correlation between prison facilities & recidivism = .015; p=.779
*Sig. at p<0.05 level (2-tailed);Source: Fieldwork, 2019
Table 2 presents the first-order partial correlation
analysis showing the relationship between criminal
association and recidivism with prison type controlled.
The zero-order (Pearson) correlation analysis had
earlier been used to analysis the variables under study
and found not to be significant (r = .015 n=361, P(.779)
<0.05), however suitable is the first-order partial
correlation analysis after subjecting the variables to
linearity and collinearity diagnoses. The results show
that “it is a must for all inmates to be involved in term
of association with the criminal sub-culture”
x
(
1.95)
was ranked highest by the mean score rating and was
followed in succession by “your re-imprisonment can
be traced to the company of friends you kept in the
previous imprisonment “
x
(
1.92), “your re-
imprisonment is in any way connected to the desire to
fellowship with inmates/colleagues”
x
(
1.89),
“there are any tangible benefits of associating with the
criminal sub-culture in the prison”
x
(
1.81), “there is
a concrete structure in terms of norms, expected
behaviour and role expectations in the criminal sub-
culture of the inmates”
x
(
1.79), “your re-
imprisonment can be traced to the company of friends
you kept in the previous imprisonment”
x
(
1.60),
“there is any criminal/deviant sub-culture among the
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
18
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
inmates”
x
(
1.35), while the least was “there is a link
with the crime you committed that led to your
imprisonment and the social vices internalized in your
previous imprisonment”
x
(
1.29).
DISCUSSION
This study seeks to unravel the link between criminal
association and recidivism. The study used descriptive
statistic to analyse data collected from three selected
prisons in Rivers State. The analysis indicatesa
situation where the qualitative findings shed more
lights
on
the
quantitative
points.
A
key
personinterview conducted with one of the staff of the
correctional centre revealed that correctional centres
do not exist without some sort of association. He
noted that the kind of association or interaction that
exists particularly among inmates in the correctional
centre remains an utmost interest not just to the
government or prison officials but also to members of
the public. The interviewee revealed that originally, the
correctional centre should present an opportunity for
character reformation and re-direction, especially to
inmates who have embraced criminality or became
entangled in deviant behaviours. In his words:
Prisons do
not
exist
without some sort of
association... The kind of
association
that
exist
among inmates in the
prison remains of utmost
interest not just to the
government
or
prison
officials but to members of
the
public
as
well...
Originally,
the
prison
should
present
an
opportunity for character
reformation
and
re-
direction to those who
have embraced criminality
or gotten entangled in
deviant
behaviours
(KPI/Superintendent
of
Prison (SP)/Degema/2019)
The above indicates that prisons are meant to provide
inmates with opportunities to be fully corrected and
rehabilitated so that recidivism is curtailed. It signifies
the importance of character examination during
interaction with inmates to prevent criminal
association among prisoners. An interview conducted
with a staff of the correctional centre reveals that
there should be an arrangement where inmates with
aberrant behaviours are redirected to become
conformist to reduce recidivism. The interviewee
stated:
The prison should be an
arrangement where those with
aberrant
behaviours
or
mindsets
are
skillfully
redirected to become socially
acceptable or conformist...
This will help to reduce
recidivism
(Assistant
Superintendent
of
Prison
(ASP)/Port
Harcourt
Prison/2019)
The above shows that there is a need to adequately
monitor inmates to know their behaviours and
probably separate inmates with notorious criminal
association from others with non-criminal association
for proper orientation, correction and rehabilitation to
prevent negative interaction among inmates.
On the other hand, the result from the first-order
partial correlation also shows that there is no
significant relationship between criminal association in
correctional centres and recidivism despite controlling
for prison type (r = .019, n= 361, P(.718) > 0.05). The
result inferred that the relationship between criminal
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
19
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
association and recidivism was not directly mediated
by prison type. The positive direction of the correlation
analysis, though not significant indicates that inmates
with higher criminal association scores had higher
recidivism scores. Also, when the prison type was
controlled in the first-order partial correlation analysis,
the positive correlation became stronger (r = .019)
compare to zero-order (Pearson) correlation (r= .015),
though not significant for both zero-order (Pearson)
(p=.779) and first-order partial correlation (p=718). This
finding slightly deviates from Iwarimie-Jaja (2003)’s
study that prison subculture influences most inmates
to become recidivists.
By implication, the results from the first-order partial
correlation analysis shows that criminal association
positively predict recidivism by 1.9%, while other
variables not included in the analysis may have
accounted for the remaining percent, however not
significant. This suggests that there was need to
subject the variables to higher statistics with other
variables inputted to further examine strength of
criminal association in predicting recidivism. But for the
moment, the study acceptthat there is no significant
relationship between criminal associations and
recidivism in the study correctional centres until
further analysis proved otherwise. This finding
contradicts Tewksbury, Connor and Denney (2014) that
gang membership of criminal association, which is
being identified as member of a security threat group,
is positively associated with rule violations.
The qualitative findings revealed the reason why
correlation
between criminal association
and
recidivism is positive, though not significant. It signifies
need for further analysis to clarify deviation between
qualitative and quantitative interviews and signals
important aspect of research interest. The findings
depict porous nature of correctional centres and how
unsupervised state of criminals’ association led to
recidivism among inmates. The interviews conducted
show that uncontrolled criminal associations in
correctional centres has made inmates to use
imprisonment as avenue to secretly re-strategize ways
to re-engage in criminal activities after release from
prison. This finding supports Varano, Huebner, and
Bynum (2011) that in outward appearance, gang
affiliation is source of recidivism, yet, it might be of
other factors are responsible for both gang
membership and recidivism.
CONCLUSION
The Findings of the research revealed that although,
criminal association exists within the prison wall and it
is a contributive factor of recidivism, criminal
association alone is not strong enough to cause
recidivism. This suggests that there are arrays of other
factors that work to influence reoffending, hence
suggesting the need for more research to unravel
other causal factors of recidivism.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this study, it was
recommended that:
Establishment of More Prisons
: Given that
overpopulation is a major reason for adverse criminal
association and by extension recidivism, there is need
for the establishment of more correctional facilities in
the country. A situation whereby the prisons are
currently lacking far beyond their capacity will
obviously reduce the impact of any rehabilitation or
reformation efforts. This can be achieved through
partnerships
with
relevant
international
and
indigenous organizations that fund correctional
facilities across the world such as the International
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
20
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Corrections and Prisons Association (ICPA), National
Institute of Corrections, the World Bank’s programme
on Correction and Rehabilitation among others.
Adequatestratification or separationof Inmates
:
There is every need to ensure an adequate separation
of inmates based on the degree of crime commission
or offence.This will go a long way to reduce the degree
of contact that a prisoner with a lesser offence can
have with one with a higher offence. By extension, it
will reduce the level of criminal association in the
correctional facilities.
The Role of the Judiciary
: In addition to the above,
there is every need for the judiciary toensure that cases
brought to the courts are speedily attended to in order
to avoid undue piling up of cases. This will ensure that
those with lesser offences are not kept in the
correctional facilities for too long thereby reducing the
problem of overpopulation.
REFERENCES
1.
Abrifor, C.A., Atere, A.A., & Muoghalu, C.O. (2012).
Gender differences, trend and
pattern
of
recidivism among inmates in selected Nigeria
prisons. European Scientific Journal, 8(24), 25-44
2.
Awopetu, R.G. (2014). An assessment of prison
overcrowding in Nigeria: Implications
for
rehabilitation, reformation and reintegration
of inmates. IOSR Journal of Humanities And
Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 19 (3), 21-26.
3.
Beaver, K. M., Shutt, J. E., Boutwell, B. B.,
Ratchford, M., Roberts, K., & Barness, J. C.
(2008). Genetic and environmental influences
on levels of self-control and
delinquent
peer affiliation: Results from a longitudinal sample
of adolescent twins.
Criminal Justice and
Behaviour, 36, 41-60.
4.
Braga, A. (2003) Serious youth gun offenders and
the epidemic of youth violence in Boston.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology 19, 33-54.
5.
California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation
(2011).
Operations
Manual.
Sacramento, CA: California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation
6.
Chenube, O. (2011). A survey of alcohol
vulnerability of male prison prisons inmates in
Nigeria. Gender and Behaviour, 9(2), 4298-
4306.
7.
Chukwumerije,
U.
(2012).
Explanatory
memorandum on amendment of prison act.
Available
online
at:
http://www.Senatorchukwumerije/id63html.
8.
Dambazau, A. B. (2011). Criminology and criminal
justice (4thed.). Ibadan: Spectrum Books.
9.
Ekpenyong, N.S, Raimi, L.& Ekpenyong, A.S (2012).
Urban poverty and juvenile delinquency in Nigeria:
Through the lens of Port Harcourt remand home
inmates.
Research on Humanities and Social
Sciences, 2
(8), 127-132, 2012.
10.
Decker, S.H., & Van, B.W. (2015). Life in the gang:
Family, friends, and violence.
New
York:
Cambridge University Press.
11.
Dooley, B.D., Alan, S. & David, S. (2014). The effect
of prison gang membership on
recidivism.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(2), 267-275.
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
21
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
12.
Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology (5th ed.). United
Kingdom: Policy Press.
13.
Hollin, CR (2002). Criminological psychology. In M,
Maguire, R. Morgan & Reiner
(Eds.), The
Oxford handbook of criminology, (3rd ed. Pp. 144-
174). Oxford
University Press, New York.
14.
Huff, R. (2016). Comparing the criminal behavior
of
youth
gangs
and
at-risk
youths:
Research in Brief. Washington, DC: US
Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice.
15.
Hughes, T., Wilson D., & Beck A. (2001). Trends in
state parole, 1990-2000. Bureau of Justice
Statistics Special Report. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs.
16.
Introduction to Criminology (2003). An appraisal
of differential association theory. Retrieved
March
4,
2020,
from
https:/www.jcu.edu.au_data/assets/pdf
17.
Iwarimie-Jaja, D. (2003). Criminology: the study of
crime (3rd ed.). Owerri: Springfield
Publishers.
18.
Iwarimie-Jaja, D. &Raimi, L. (2019). The criminal
justice system as enablement for social order in
Nigeria.
The Nigerian Journal of Sociology &
Anthropology
,
Journal
of
the
Nigerian
Anthropological and Sociological Association
(NASA), 17
(1), 70-84.
19.
Knox, G.W. (2009). An introduction to gangs (5th
ed.). Peotone, Illinois: New
Chicago
School Press Inc.
20.
Krienert, J.L. & Fleisher, M.S. (2001). Gang
membership as a proxy for social deficiencies:
A study of Nebraska Inmates. Corrections
Management
Quarterly,
5(1), 47-58.
21.
Leschied, A. Chiodo, D., Nowicki, E. & Rodger, S.
(2008). Childhood predictors of adult
criminality: A meta-analysis drawn from the
prospective longitudinal literature.
Canadian
Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 50,
435-
467.
22.
McGarrell, E. F., Steven, C., Jeremy, W., & Nicholas,
C. (2006). Reducing homicide
through
a
'lever-pulling' strategy. Justice Quarterly 23 (2),
214-31.
23.
McGuire, J. (2009). What works: Reducing
reoffending, guidelines from research and
practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
24.
Nafekh, M. & Stys, Y. (2014). A profile and
examination of gang affiliation within the
federally sentenced
offender
population.
Ottawa, ON: Research Branch, Correctional
Service of Canada.
25.
Nigeria Press Release (2018, March 9). Nigeria:
New Cameroon arrivals update. UNHCR.
P. 1
26.
Obioha E.E. (1995). Prison culture in Nigeria: A
study of life within Agodi Prison community,
Ibadan. M.Sc Dissertation, Unpublished. Ibadan:
Department of
Sociology,
University
of
Ibadan.
Volume 02 Issue 07-2022
22
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
07
Pages:
09-22
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.489
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
27.
Obioha E.E. (2002). Punishment in Society. In: U.C.
Isiugo-
Abanihe,
A.N.
Isamah,
&
O.
Adesina (Eds.). Currents and Perspectives in
Sociology (pp. 367-379). Lagos: Malthouse
Press Limited,
28.
Ogadi, C., Raimi, L., & Nwachukwu, J. K. (2012).
Environmental
degradation,
conflict
and
criminality in the Niger Delta: A conceptual and
empirical discourse.
Knowledge Review: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, NAFAK, 24
(1), 157-163,
April, 2012.
29.
Raimi,L. & Bieh, N. N. (2009). Entrepreneurship
education and human capital development:
Lessons from a Nigerian university.
African Journal
of Educational Research and Development (AJERD),
3
(2), 208-218,November,
2009,
Conference
Edition
,
Port Harcourt
.
30.
Rosenfeld, R., Bray, T., & Egley, A. (2005).
Facilitating violence: A comparison of
gang
motivated, gang-affiliated, and nongang youth
homicides. Journal of
Quantitative
Criminology, 15, 495-516.
31.
Sutherland, E.H (1949), White Collar Crime. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
32.
Tenibiaje, D.J. (2013). Educational attainment and
peer
group
influence
as
predictors
of
recidivism. International Review of Social
Sciences and Humanities, 5(1):
30-37.
33.
Tewksbury, R., Connor, D.P., & Denney, A.S.
(2014). Disciplinary infractions behind
bars:
An exploration of importation and deprivation
theories. Criminal Justice Review, 39, 201-218.
34.
Thomas, A.B. & Paul, K.A. (2010). Differential
association theory and juvenile delinquency in
Ghana's capital city - Accra: The case of Ghana
Borstal Institute. International
Journal
of
Sociology and Anthropology, 2(9), 198-205
35.
Ugwuoke, K, A. (2013). Released from prison and
reintegration of prisoners: a case study of
Akwa-Ibom.
An
unpublished
MSc
Thesis
submitted to the Postgraduate
School,
University of Uyo, Nigeria.
36.
Ugwuoke, C. U. (2010). Criminology: Explaining
crime in the Nigerian context.
Nsukka:
Great AP Publishers.
37.
Varano, S.P., Huebner, B.M., & Bynum, T.S. (2011).
Correlates
and
consequences
of
pre-
incarceration
gang
involvement
among
incarcerated
youthful
felons.
Journal
of
Criminal Justice, 39(1), 30-38.
38.
Vold, G. B., & Bernard, T. J. (1986). Theoretical
Criminology (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press.
39.
West, H.C., Sabol, W.J., & Greenman, S.J. (2010).
Prisoners in 2009. Washington
DC: Bureau of
Justice Statistics.
