LOOK WHO'S TALKING: THE SNITCHING PARADOX IN A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF PRISONERS

被引:6
|
作者
Pyrooz, David C. [1 ]
Mitchell, Meghan M. [2 ]
Moule, Richard K. [3 ]
Decker, Scott H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Colorado, Dept Sociol, 483 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
[2] Univ Cent Florida, Dept Criminal Justice, Orlando, FL 32816 USA
[3] Univ S Florida, Dept Criminol, Tampa, FL 33620 USA
[4] Arizona State Univ, Sch Criminol & Criminal Justice, Phoenix, AZ USA
来源
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY | 2021年 / 61卷 / 04期
关键词
snitching; prison; convict code; norms; survey research; LEGAL CYNICISM; QUALITATIVE EXAMINATION; INMATE CODE; DEVIANCE; CULTURE; SOCIETY; GANGS; ERA;
D O I
10.1093/bjc/azaa103
中图分类号
DF [法律]; D9 [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Snitching refers to conveying inside and potentially incriminating information about others to authorities. In contrast to prior criminological accounts of snitching, which rely on small and purposive samples, we used a probability sample of 802 male prisoners in Texas to study the status, prevalence, acceptability and correlates of snitching. We arrive at several key quantitative findings. First, snitches are positioned at the bottom of the inmate hierarchy. Second, snitching is a rare behaviour (7.6 per cent) and even rarer identity (1.8 per cent), consistent with a snitching paradox. Third, about three-fourths of respondents endorsed contingencies where snitching was permissible, primarily those involving personal ties, self-protection, or violence prevention. Finally, characteristics such as age, civic engagement, education, gang status, and arrest and imprisonment history were associated with either snitching identity, behaviour, or contingencies. Snitching is a persistent feature of social life, yet violates a sacred norm central to many criminological theories, necessitating continued inquiry into its content, enforcement and consequences.
引用
收藏
页码:1145 / 1167
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Signal transduction by oxidants: Look who's talking
    Mossman, BT
    FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2000, 28 (09) : 1315 - 1316
  • [22] Look Who's Talking FGFs and BMPs in the Proepicardium
    Svensson, Eric C.
    CIRCULATION RESEARCH, 2009, 105 (05) : 406 - 407
  • [23] Look Who's Talking: Active Speaker Detection in the Wild
    Kim, You Jin
    Heo, Hee-Soo
    Choe, Soyeon
    Chung, Soo-Whan
    Kwon, Yoohwan
    Lee, Bong-Jin
    Kwon, Youngki
    Chung, Joon Son
    INTERSPEECH 2021, 2021, : 3675 - 3679
  • [24] Look Who's Talking! Islamic Discourse in the Chechen Wars
    Radnitz, Scott
    NATIONALITIES PAPERS-THE JOURNAL OF NATIONALISM AND ETHNICITY, 2006, 34 (02): : 237 - 256
  • [25] Look Who's Talking: Conscience, Complicity, and Compelled Speech
    Hill, B. Jessie
    INDIANA LAW JOURNAL, 2022, 97 (03) : 914 - 938
  • [26] Look who's talking - Authenticating service access points
    Hohl, A
    Lowis, L
    Zugenmaier, A
    SECURITY IN PERVASIVE COMPUTING, PROCEEDINGS, 2005, 3450 : 151 - 162
  • [27] Editorial: Look who's talking: Dialogues with beta cells
    Tellez, Noelia
    Rojas, Anabel
    Gasa, Rosa
    FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2023, 13
  • [28] Look Who's Talking: Deregulated Signaling in Colorectal Cancer
    Abba, Mohammed
    Laufs, Stephanie
    Aghajany, Monireh
    Korn, Bernhard
    Benner, Axel
    Allgayer, Heike
    CANCER GENOMICS & PROTEOMICS, 2012, 9 (01) : 15 - 25
  • [29] Look who's talking: Parliamentary debate in the European Union
    Slapin, Jonathan B.
    Proksch, Sven-Oliver
    EUROPEAN UNION POLITICS, 2010, 11 (03) : 333 - 357
  • [30] Look who's looking!: Perspective and the paradox of postdramatic subjectivity
    Bleeker, M
    THEATRE RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2004, 29 (01) : 29 - 41