Is gender a factor in perceived prison officer competence?

Background The introduction of women officers into HM Prison Service raised questions regarding women's ability to perform what had traditionally been a male role. Existing research is inconclusive as to whether female prison officers are as competent as male prison officers, and whether there are gender differences in job performance. This study examined prisoners' perceptions of male and female prison officers' performance. Hypotheses The hypotheses were that overall competence and professionalism ratings would not differ for men and women officers, but that there would be differences in how men and women were perceived to perform their roles. Women were expected to be rated as more communicative, more empathic and less disciplining. Method The Prison Officer Competency Rating Scale (PORS) was designed for this study. Ratings on the PORS for male and female officers were given by 57 adult male prisoners. Results There was no significant difference in prisoners' ratings of overall competence of men and women officers. Of the PORS subscales, there were no gender differences in Discipline and Control, Communication or Empathy, but there was a significant difference in Professionalism, where prisoners rated women as more professional. Conclusion The failure to find any differences between men and women in overall job competence, or on communication, empathy and discipline, as perceived by prisoners, suggests that men and women may be performing their jobs similarly in many respects. Women were rated as more professional, and items contributing to this scale related to respecting privacy and keeping calm in difficult situations, where there may be inherent gender biases. Copyright © 2005 Whurr Publishers Ltd.

Having your day in court:judicial opportunity and tactical choice in Anti-GMO campaigns in France and the United Kingdom

Investigating the recent direct action campaigns against genetically modified crops in France and the United Kingdom, the authors set out to understand how contrasting judicial systems and cultures affect the way that activists choose to commit ostensibly illegal actions and how they negotiate the trade-offs between effectiveness and public accountability. The authors find evidence that prosecution outcomes across different judicial systems are consistent and relatively predictable and consequently argue that the concept of a “judicial opportunity structure” is useful for developing scholars’ understanding of social movement trajectories. The authors also find that these differential judicial opportunities cannot adequately account for the tactical choices made by activists with respect to the staging of covert or overt direct action; rather, explanations of tactical choice are better accounted for by movement ideas, cultures, and traditions.

Audience design in the police interview:the interactional and judicial consequences of audience orientation

Police-suspect interviews in England & Wales are a multi-audience, multi-purpose, transcontextual mode of discourse. They are conducted as part of the initial investigation into a crime, but are subsequently recontextualised through the judicial process, ultimately being presented in court as evidence against the interviewee. The communicative challenges posed by multiple future audiences are investigated by applying Bell’s (1984) audience design model to the police interview, and the resulting "poor fit" demonstrates why this context is discursively counter-intuitive to participants. Further, data analysis indicates that interviewer and interviewee, although ostensibly addressing each other, may orientate to different audiences, with potentially serious consequences. As well as providing new insight into police-suspect interview interaction, this article seeks to extend understanding of the influence of audience on interaction at the discourse level, and to contribute to the development of theoretical models for contexts with multiple or asynchronous audiences.

An analysis of police interview discourse and its role(s) in the judicial process

This study analyses the current role of police-suspect interview discourse in the England & Wales criminal justice system, with a focus on its use as evidence. A central premise is that the interview should be viewed not as an isolated and self-contained discursive event, but as one link in a chain of events which together constitute the criminal justice process. It examines: (1) the format changes undergone by interview data after the interview has taken place, and (2) how the other links in the chain – both before and after the interview – affect the interview-room interaction itself. It thus examines the police interview as a multi-format, multi-purpose and multi-audience mode of discourse. An interdisciplinary and multi-method discourse-analytic approach is taken, combining elements of conversation analysis, pragmatics, sociolinguistics and critical discourse analysis. Data from a new corpus of recent police-suspect interviews, collected for this study, are used to illustrate previously unaddressed problems with the current process, mainly in the form of two detailed case studies. Additional data are taken from the case of Dr. Harold Shipman. The analysis reveals several causes for concern, both in aspects of the interaction in the interview room, and in the subsequent treatment of interview material as evidence, especially in the light of s.34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. The implications of the findings for criminal justice are considered, along with some practical recommendations for improvements. Overall, this study demonstrates the need for increased awareness within the criminal justice system of the many linguistic factors affecting interview evidence.