37? the value systems of incarcerated embezzlers: …/67531/metadc330949/... · criminological...
TRANSCRIPT
-
3 7 ?
/Vg/c/
THE VALUE SYSTEMS OF INCARCERATED EMBEZZLERS: THE
IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICE AND VALUE
CLARIFICATION PROGRAMS FOR CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
North Texas State University in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
Michael Welch, M.A., M.S.
Denton, Texas
August, 1987
-
Welch, Michael, The Value Rvstams of Incarcerated
Embezzlers: The Implications for Sociological Practice and
Value Clarification Pm^rami for Correctional Institutions.
Doctor of Philosophy (Sociology), August, 1987, 178 pp., 12
tables, references, 62 titles.
An empirical investigation at a southwestern minimum
security federal correctional institution was designed to
assess the value systems of incarcerated embezzlers (N = 31)
as they compared to a matched offender control group (N =
31). Based on their responses on the Rokeach Value Survey
(RVS). no statistically significant differences between
these groups were found. Therefore, this finding suggested
that these embezzlers possessed similar value systems held
by those inmates convicted of other crimes.
When the responses of the embezzler sample were
combined with their matched offender control group, a few
differences were revealed between the combined inmate group
and the general population norms (National Opinion Research
Center [N0RC3» Rokeach, 1968, 1973). Simple comparisons of
the composite medians of the male inmate group and the NORC
showed differences on the following survey items: "a world
at peace," "equality," and "national security." Among the
items which demonstrated differences between the female
prison group and the NORC were "an exciting life," "wisdom,"
"independent," "intellectual," "logical," "a world at
-
peace," and "national security." The findings provided
partial support for Cochrane's (1971) conclusions that
prisoners are self-centered, and place low importance on
those values which do not have immediate or personal
relevance. However, because many of the inmates' responses
emulated the NORC data, it was concluded that their value
systems resembled the general population more than other
prison populations.
In addition to the empirical analyses, this project
addressed the practical implications of value systems
research by proposing value clarification programs for
correctional institutions. The selection of value
clarification programs was inspired by the implications of
the emerging perspective of sociological practice.
Sociological practice was described as it relates to these
programs as well as to sociology in the larger context.
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
LIST OF TABLES . . . .
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Definitions of Terms Basic Assumptions Review of Related Literature Values The Rokeach Value Survey Value Clarification The Embezzler Significance of the Study
II. METHOD 18
Hypotheses Male Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group
Female Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group
Fort Worth Male Inmates Versus the NORC Sample
Fort Worth Female Inmates Versus the NORC Sample
Scope Instrument The Sample Research Design Procedures for Analysis of Data and Testing of Hypotheses
Summary
III. RESULTS 30
Subjects Procedure Data Analysis
iii
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS—CONTINUED
Page
The Testing of the Hypotheses Interpretation Further Analyses Additional Analyses Summary
IV. DISCUSSION 63
Summary of the Findings Methodological Considerations Implications Sociological Practice Value Clarification Conclusions
APPENDICES 83
REFERENCES 171
xv
-
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Composition of Embezzlers at Forth Worth . . . 31
2. Composition of Non-Embezzler Matched Control Group (Fort Worth) 32
3. Composition of Samples 33
4. Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Terminal) 44
5. Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Instrumental) 45
6. Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Terminal) 46
7. Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Instrumental) 47
8. Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Terminal Value . 50
9. Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Instrumental Value 51
10. Frequency Distributions of Education 56
11. Frequency Distributions of Religion 58
12. Frequency Distributions for Income 60
v
-
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter is presented to introduce the study of
value systems and embezzlers by stating the research
problem, the purpose of the study, the definition of
research terms, and the basic assumptions. Furthermore, a
review of the literature relating to value systems and
embezzlers is included.
This author examined the social psychology of
embezzlers insofar as it related to their value systems, and
this study was designed to address some basic research
issues. First, it was recognized that traditional
criminological theories fail to provide a cogent
understanding of embezzlement. In light of this, there is a
dearth of recent studies on the embezzler despite a recent
trend to incarcerate white-collar criminals. Second, the
Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) (Rokeach, 1968), an instrument
which measures value systems, has been applied to numerous
populations. However, few studies have focused on the
criminal population, and this author has not found an
application of the RVS to white-collar offenders. Third,
assuming that criminality was related to the inmates' value
systems, the task of this research was to extend value
-
systems research to the development of value clarification
programs for correctional institutions. Therefore, the
examination of the inmates' value systems has direct
theoretical and practical implications.
Statement of the Problem
The study addressed the following research questions:
(1) Are the value systems of incarcerated offenders
different from those of the general population, and if so,
how? (2) Are the value systems of the incarcerated
embezzlers different from those of other offenders who are
incarcerated for crimes other than embezzlement, and if so,
how? Considering these potential differences, can a related
intervention strategy be introduced in correctional
institutions to remedy antisocial behavior?
Purpose of the Study
The ultimate purpose of this investigation was to
replicate the value system research of Cochrane (1971) who
employed the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) and found
significant differences between inmates and the general
population. This author hypothesized similar findings and
should these results be replicated, they should provide
adequate reason to propose the development of value
clarification programs for inmates. The development of such
interventions was recommended by Cochrane, who maintained
that a value-oriented strategy may reduce anti—social
behavior. In essence, this study was designed to continue
-
the value systems research of Cochrane and to explore its
practical implications.
Definitions of Terms
The following terms have restricted meaning and thus
were in this investigation as follows:
1. Value: "an enduring belief that a specific mode of
conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially
preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or
end-state of existence" (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5).
2. Value System: "an enduring organization of beliefs
concerning preferable modes of conduct or end-states of
existence along a continuum of relative importance"
(Rokeach, 1973, p. 5).
3. Rokeach Value Survey (RVS): an "instrument [which]
assesses a respondent's hierarchical arrangement of two
kinds of values: instrumental and terminal. Instrumental
values refer to preferable modes of conduct; terminal values
refer to preferable end-states of existence" (Robinson &
Shaver, 1973, p. 547).
4. Value Clarification: the organization of various
exercises designed to assist individuals in re-examining
their value systems. It rests on the assumption that value
systems are dynamic and capable of being restructured
(Kirschenbaum, 1977).
-
Embezzlers: those offenders "who use a position of
trust to appropriate company assets for their own personal
use" (Coleman, 1985, p. 81). In this study, the embezzlers
represented four categories of embezzlement: "Bank,"
Postal, Benefit Plan," and "Other" (including Savings and
Loan Associations) violations.
Basis Assumptions
The basic assumption of this research was that a source
of motivation (criminal intent) is the value system.
According to Rokeach (1973), the value concept should be
clearly distinguished from other concepts such as attitude,
social norm, and need. However, all these other concepts
are related to values. Rokeach identified five major
assumptions regarding the nature of human values.
(1) the total number of values that a person possesses
is relatively small; (2) all men everywhere possess the
same values to different degrees; (3) values are
organized into value systems; (4) the antecedents of
human values can be traced to culture, society and its
institutions, and personality; and (5) the consequences
of human values will be manifested in all phenomena
that social scientists consider worth investigating and
understanding (1973, p. 3).
This study was based on Rokeach's general assumption that
the value concept should occupy a central position across
all social sciences.
-
It was assumed that, while value systems at the
societal level remain somewhat stable, the value systems at
the individual level are more easily changed, particularly
when they contrast with the prevailing values. Therefore,
individual value systems should be more subject to
clarification and alteration through an intervention. This
assumption was based on the empirical and theoretical
findings of Rokeach (1968, 1973) and Grube (1982). This
author assumed that the restructuring of value systems can
have a positive social impact on inmates, particularly
embezzlers. Sutherland and Cressey (1978) noted that the
embezzler typically has a low rate of recidivism because it
is unlikely that he or she will again be placed in a
position of trust. However, it was assumed that if the
embezzler does not confront these value systems while in
prison, he or she may turn to other anti-social behaviors
because the values system that may have influenced his or
her criminality was not adjusted. Although the embezzlers
were the target group for this study, it was assumed that
all inmates may benefit from value clarification programs.
Finally, this project was based on the notion that value
system research can provide an empirical base for the
development of value clarification programs.
-
Review of Related Literature
The literature review for this research focused on four
general areas: (1) those works concerned with the
conceptual and theoretical development of values; (2) the
research employing the Rokeach Value Survey: (3) those
projects endorsing the use of value clarification programs;
and (4) traditional and recent studies of the embezzler.
Values
Values have been the topic of numerous social sciences
analyses. One of the most frequently cited researchers in
value studies is Milton Rokeach (1960, 1968, 1973, 1979).
Rokeach's work provided the theoretical and conceptual
framework for this study. This section includes a review of
the literature as it relates to Rokeach's emphasis on
values.
Rokeach, a social psychologist, was influenced by
various sociologists, psychologists, philosophers, and
anthropologists. One of his primary influences was Robin
Williams (1968) who emphasized the importance of research on
values. Williams noted that a person's values serve as "the
criteria, or standards in terms of which evaluations are
made. . . . Value-as criterion is usually the more important
usage for purposes of social scientific analysis" (1968, p.
283). Williams proposed that individuals have a relatively
small number of values. This idea has theoretical and
methodological implications in that the "tasks of
-
identifying them [i.e., values] one-by-one and measuring
them become considerably easier, and it also becomes easier
to grapple with theoretical problems. . (Rokeach, 1973,
p. 4). In sum, it was through the theoretical foundations
of Williams that Rokeach was able to articulate the concept
of values as a central and dynamic feature of human
functioning and sociological research.
Rokeach (1973) discussed the major developments in his
analysis of values. First, he suggested that a value is
enduring, and provides the standards and criteria for
behavior and personal evaluation. Rokeach claimed that
without the stability of values, the continuity of
personality and society would be impossible. On the other
hand, he demonstrated that values are not completely stable,
and they are apt to change. Without the flexibility of
values, individual and social change would also be
impossible.
Rokeach conceptualized values as being either
instrumental or terminal. The instrumental values are those
which are concerned with desirable modes of conduct. These
instrumental values are classified as moral values or
competence values. Moral values tend to be interpersonal
while competence values encompass a personal-oriented system
which is related to self-actualization. For example,
honesty and love are typical moral values while imagination
-
8
and logic are viewed as competence values. The terminal
values are those which refer to end-states of existence and
are divided into personal and social values. Personal
values are self-centered and intrapersonal. Salvation and
peace of mind, for example, are personal values, while world
peace and brotherhood are social values.
For this study, the most relevant areas of research
were those inquiries integrating values and delinquency.
Several studies suggested an important link between the two.
For example, Hudak, Andre and Allen (1980) claimed that
social adjustments and deviance were related to social
values. They reported that developmental failures can be
identified in the adoption of problematic value systems.
Saari (1983) discussed the value systems of juvenile
delinquents and argued that values influence behavior
insofar as delinquents tend to expect immediate returns on
their actions. These value systems led to poorly planned
action which resembled criminal patterns of social behavior.
Saari also mentioned the utility of interventions that focus
on preparing adolescents to understand the consequences of
their action.
Heather (1979) and Braithwaite and Braithwaite (1981)
attacked some of the conclusions from this research on value
systems and delinquency because some of these studies failed
to account for the influence of social class. Braithwaite
and Braithwaite stated that many theories about values and
-
9
delinquency are contradictory, inconsistent with empirical
evidence, and detrimental to the development of social
policy. To be effective, they believed that intervention
programs must be based on sound value systems research.
The Rokeach Value Survey
The measurement of values is a popular area of social
psychological research. In fact, according to Subonen
(1985), empirical value research is enjoying a renaissance,
and the concept of values has acquired new prominence in the
social sciences. Because recent studies were influenced by
the theoretical work of Rokeach, many social scientists used
the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) in their analyses. For
example, McKernan (1982) and McKernan and Russell (1980)
applied the gVS to an adolescent population in Northern
Ireland to appraise differences in religion and race as
compared to Americans. McKernan (1982) found that
minorities in Northern Ireland compared to American
minorities because they endorsed the value of equality and
did not place a high priority on hedonism. Similarly,
McKernan and Russell concluded that political climate and
environmental pressures affect value systems. For example,
in Northern Ireland, Catholics rated equality and freedom
much higher than their Protestant counterparts.
Teahan, Adams, and Podany (1980) also reported the
importance of environmental conditions and values. Teahan
-
10
et al. investigated the values of police officers and
demonstrated that as crime rates increased, the officers
became more emotionally detached, less forgiving of others,
and more concerned with achieving a sense of inner harmony.
Other researchers examined the impact of values and
political behavior. For example, Thomas (1981) used the
structure of value systems in his prediction of political
activism among Protestants and Catholics during the Boston
school desegregation controversy. Many of the politically-
oriented studies were influenced by Rokeach (1973), who
identified four basic political orientations: conservative,
socialist, fascist, and communist.
The area of cross-cultural research further
demonstrated the utility of the RVS. Reynolds (1984) found
that Germans were competence-oriented in their modes of
conduct, and Americans were generally morality-oriented.
Moreover, Germans were society-oriented and interpersonal in
their preferred end states, and Americans were more self-
centered and intrapersonal. Among the numerous other
applications of the RVS were studies involving adolescent
socialization (Skeel, 1976), medical students (Feather,
1982), corporate managers (Clare & Sanford, 1979), and
differences among spouses (Medling & McCarrey, 1981).
In a project especially relevant to this research,
Cochrane (1971) examined a Michigan prison population using
-
11
the RVS to measure the value systems of male and female
inmates. Cochrane found significant differences between the
value systems of these inmates and the general population.
Cochrane concluded that "Prisoners appear to have a shorter
time perspective and value those things which have immediate
and personal relevance . . . .Prisoners value the
characteristics of 'wisdom' and 'self-controlled' relatively
high[ly] possibly because they see these lacking in their
lives (1971, p. 79). Cochrane interpreted the value
systems of these prisoners as hedonistic, self-centered, and
unconcerned for the plight of others. This Michigan study
served as the central base for this research insofar as a
replication was designed.
Value Clarification
Because one of the major features of this research was
the extension from an empirical study on value systems to
the development of an intervention program for inmates, it
was appropriate to describe value clarification. The value
clarification movement was initiated by the work of Raths
(1968), which paralleled the subsequent conclusions of
Rokeach (1973) and Grube (1982) that values are subject to
re-evaluation and change. Value clarification is the
process by which individuals are allowed the opportunity to
re-examine their value system and, through various
exercises, are able to change their current set of values.
-
12
Value clarification is a broad term which refers to
numerous strategies designed to help individuals re-examine
their value systems. In fact, Simon, Howe, and Kirschenbaum
(1978) introduced 79 different strategies for value
clarification sessions. These strategies ranged from group
exercises to individual tasks. Although these strategies
implemented different techniques, they all employed the
seven processes developed by Raths, Harmin, and Simon (1966)
to assist participants in their search for value clarity.
They are to (1) choose from alternatives; (2) thoughtfully
consider the consequences of alternatives; (3) choose
freely; (4) prize and cherish; (5) publicly affirm; (6) act
repeatedly; and (7) act with a pattern or consistency.
Kirschenbaum (1977) emphasized that these seven processes
could be interpreted as the development of the "criteria"
for a "value." He reiterated that the task is not only to
clarify one's values but to become fully aware of the
consequences (both personally and socially) of one's
adoption of a given value.
The primary contributors to value clarification are
Kirschenbaum (1977), Simon, Kirschenbaum, and Howe (1978),
and Harmin, Kirschenbaum and Simon (1973). The value
clarification movement was supported by Rokeach, who
strongly endorsed this approach to intervention
(Kirschenbaum, 1977). In one value-oriented program,
Thoresen (1984) integrated value clarification with
-
13
sociological practice and demonstrated its utility as a
teaching technique. Thoresen noted the importance of
identifying values which directly influence social
interaction. She stated that the task of implementing value
ication with sociological practice and demonstrated
its utility as a teaching technique. Thoresen noted the
importance of identifying values which directly influence
social interaction. She stated that the task of
implementing value clarification techniques was "to
sensitize students to the effect of values on their own
choices, and to identify the social categories around which
individuals develop values" (1984, p. 137).
The Embezzler
Donald R. Cressey is one of the leading contributors to
research on embezzlement. In Other People's Money: £ Study
in t]ie Social Psychology of Embezzlement. (1953), Cressey
described the embezzler as an employee who was granted a
position of trust in a bank or company. After a
considerable period of time, this trusted employee began to
borrow" money from the bank or company to reduce a personal
debt. This situation of "borrowing" was identified by
Cressey as a solution to an "unshareable problem." The
employee s unshareable problem" was one that he or she
believed could not be resolved by seeking the help of other
people. Therefore, it was theorized that the employee kept
-
14
his or her problem a secret, but embezzled money to reduce
the debt. Cressey linked the debt to an extravagant
lifestyle.
Embezzlement is a unique topic in the criminological
literature because traditional theories fail to adequately
explain violations of trust. Sutherland and Cressey (1978)
noted that embezzlers are rarely "psychopathic, feeble-
minded, residents of deteriorated slum areas, or in other
ways personally or situationally pathological" (pp. 266-
267). On the contrary, embezzlers are usually educated,
employable, and most violations of trust are committed by
employees who have held positions of financial
responsibility for several years. In fact, Sutherland and
Cressey mentioned that few embezzlements are committed by
new employees. Furthermore, most embezzlers do not have a
criminal history, have lived a respectable life, and are
middle-class and middle-aged males (Hagan, 1986).
Cressey's (1953)) work was criticized from different
angles. Schuessler (1954) pointed out that Cressey's
findings, based on 133 interviews, were difficult to
generalize because they were ex-post facto and only those
incarcerated were represented in the study. Nettler (1974)
criticized Cressey for the introduction of the "unshareable
problem." He found no support for this "unshareable
problem," and viewed the embezzler as motivated by greed,
-
15
temptation, as well as having the opportunity to violate the
company's trust.
These criminological theories were consistent with
Akerstrom (1985) who stated that criminals are condescending
toward rule-bound norms and highly value individualism and
excitement. With the exception of Akerstrom, recent studies
of the embezzler are rare. Most current research has
categorized all white-collar offenders together. This is a
fundamental mistake because there are distinct differences
among several types of white-collar criminals, such as the
corporate criminal whose victim is the consumer and the
intra-organizational offender who victimizes a company
(Coleman, 1985; Welch, 1987).
The current literature on embezzlement contributed
little to the theoretical base of this study. For the years
1980 through 1986 the Criminological and Penological
Abstracts listed only a few studies under the heading
Embezzlement, and no such citations were listed in
Sociological Abstracts for the same period. The few studies
included under this heading offered sweeping generalizations
for the white collar offender with limited links to
criminological theory. Rather, they attempted to market an
approach to crime that would provide preventative
instruments such as personnel assessments. Their attempts
to reduce crime appeared somewhat theoretically naive and
their supportive evidence was flawed.
-
16
Those studies categorized under the heading
"Embezzlement" were not relevant to the criminological
definition of embezzlement, that is, an employee's violation
of a position of trust. The literature included research
which is more appropriate for "Employee Theft" studies where
crimes were committed by employees who were not in a
position of trust. Consequently, it was difficult to apply
the generalizations of these investigators to embezzlement.
Although employee theft research is meaningful, the
conclusions of these studies were not relevant in the
attempt to understand the social psychology of the
embezzler. These studies included employee theft in
convenience stores (Brown, 1986; Terris & Jones, 1982), drug
stores (Brown & Pardue, 1985), restaurants (Hawkins, 1984),
home improvement centers (Jones & Terris, 1983) and
insurance brokerage firms (Smith, 1981). Therefore, this
author concluded that these investigations focused on an
entirely different aspect of white-collar crime.
Significant of the Study
It was the hope of this author that by approaching the
act of embezzlement from a perspective involving value
systems, a more convincing explanation of this crime could
be formulated. Moreover, criminological theory of
embezzlement could be clarified by identifying the
-
17
embezzler's possible source of motivation (that is, his or
her value system).
The empirical dimensions of this study were included to
contribute to the practical applications of these research
findings. In the spirit of sociological practice this
research was designed to offer direct intervention
implications by suggesting value clarification programs for
incarcerated offenders, particularly embezzlers. Cochrane
underscored the importance of value systems to intervention
by suggesting that "knowledge of individual prisoners' value
system could be used for counseling and rehabilitation
purposes (1971, p. 79). There is a greater need for such
value oriented programs due to the increase in prison
sentences for white-collar offenders. This author suggests
that value clarification programs be developed because there
is a dearth of intervention programs for those convicted of
white-collar criminal offenses. Because prisons are assumed
to be "correctional" it is not difficult to defend the
development of a value clarification program to adjust
problematic value systems. By participating in such
programs it is assumed that the inmate would be less likely
to be involved in further anti—social behavior.
-
CHAPTER II
METHOD
This chapter is presented to address the components of
the research design by: (1) describing the rationale for
the hypotheses; (2) listing the hypotheses; (3) discussing
the scope of the research, the instrument, and the sample;
and (4) articulating the procedures for data analysis and
the testing of the hypotheses.
Hypotheses
This author set out to replicate Cochrane's (1971)
research on the value systems of inmates using the Rokeach
V a l u e S u r v e r (RVS)• It was hypothesized that there would be
a difference between the value systems of the incarcerated
inmates at the Federal Correctional Institution, Fort Worth
and the general population. Cochrane found that inmates
maintain "a shorter time perspective and value those things
which have immediate and personal relevance" when contrasted
with the general population (1971, p. 79). In addition to
this hypothesis this study assessed the hypothesized
differences between the incarcerated embezzlers and their
matched offender control group (those inmates convicted of
crimes other than embezzlement).
18
-
19
While the embezzlers and their matched control offender
group were expected to endorse similar value system
patterns, it was hypothesized that the embezzlers would
place more importance on some selected items of the RVS.
This author proposed that the differences in value rankings
may be related to the fundamental differences between
embezzlers and those convicted of other crimes. It was
assumed that those convicted of crimes other than
embezzlement, such as violent acts or drug-related offenses,
had more complicated motivations. For example, the criminal
convicted on drug charges may have been responding to
various factors such as peer pressure, addictions,
discrimination, poor education, and few employment
opportunities.
These characteristics are in sharp contrast to those of
the embezzler, who is typically middle class, employable,
and does not have a criminal history. Hence, it was assumed
that the act of embezzlement is much more likely to be
influenced by the value systems of the offenders than by
other social pressures. Based on this assumption it was
hypothesized that the responses to certain items on the RVS
would show that the embezzler was more self-centered than
his or her matched offender control group.
The hypotheses were based on the findings of Cochrane
(1971) who found statistically significant differences
-
20
between the responses of a prison population and the general
population (National Opinion Research Center, NORC, Rokeach,
1968). The NORC data set was comprised of a national area
probability sample of adult Americans (N = 1409).
Consistent with the methodology of Rokeach, Cochrane
stratified his sample by gender. He found differences
between the male inmate group as contrasted with the NORC
data on the following items: "pleasure," "wisdom," "self-
controlled," "capable," "a world at peace," "equality,"
"national security," "salvation," and "honest." Cochrane
also discovered differences between the female inmate group
as contrasted with the NORC data on the following items:
'an exciting life," "a sense of accomplishment," "freedom,"
inner harmony," "wisdom," "broadminded," "capable,"
"independent," "intellectual," "logical," "self-controlled,"
a world at peace," "national security," "salvation,"
helpful," and "honest."
The hypotheses for this study were designed to
replicate Cochrane's findings by testing the same survey
items for which he found statistically significant
differences. The hypotheses were presented in four
sections. First, data from the male embezzlers were
contrasted with data from their matched offender control
group. Second, data from the female embezzlers were
contrasted with data from their matched offender control
-
21
group. Third, data from the Fort Worth sample of male
inmates (embezzlers combined with the Fort Worth sample of
female inmates (embezzlers combined with the matched
offender control group) were contrasted with the data from
the NORC.
Mile Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group
The embezzler group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 1: Pleasure
H 2: Wisdom
H 3: Self-Controlled
H 4: Capable
The embezzler group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 5: A world at peace
H 6: Equality
H 7: National security
H 8: Salvation
H 9: Honest
F e m a l e Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group
The embezzler group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
-
22
H 10: An exciting life
H 11: A sense of accomplishment
H 12: Freedom
H 13: Inner harmony
H 14: Wisdom
H 15: Broadminded
H 16: Capable
H 17: Independent
H 18: Intellectual
H 19: Logical
H 20: Self-controlled
The embezzler group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group
H 21: A world at peace
H 22: National security
H 23: Salvation
H 24: Helpful
H 25: Honest
Eort Worth Male Inmates Versus the NORC Sample
The inmate group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with the NORC:
H 26: Pleasure
H 27: Wisdom
H 28: Self-controlled
H 29: Capable
-
23
The inmate group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with the NORC:
H 30: A world at peace
H 31: Equality
H 32: National security
H 33: Salvation
H 34: Honest
Fort Worth Female Inmates Versus the NORC Sample
The inmate group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with the NORC:
H 35: An exciting life
H 36: A sense of accomplishment
H 37: Freedom
H 38: Inner harmony
H 39: Wisdom
H 40: Broadminded
H 41: Capable
H 42: Independent
H 43: Intellectual
H 44: Logical
H 45: Self-controlled
The inmate group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with the NORC:
H 46: A world at peace
H 47: National security
-
24
H 48: Salvation
H 49: Helpful
H 50: Honest
Scope
This author examined the value systems of embezzlers
and their matched control group at the Federal Correctional
Institution at Fort Worth who were incarcerated at the time
of the data collection (April, 1987). The data from the
general population was limited to the data set of the
National Opinion Research Center (Rokeach, 1968, 1973).
The measurement was limited to the inmates' reported
value systems based on the Rokeach Value Survey and the
following demographic variables: offense type, gender, age,
race, education, religion, and income. This author
appraised the statistically significant differences between
the embezzlers and their matched offender control group by
employing the median test of significance. Further analyses
involved contrasting the composite medians of the responses
of the inmates at Fort Worth on the RVg to the general
population (NORC).
Instrument
The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) appraises the
hierarchical arrangement of instrumental and terminal
values. Each of these two sets of values was presented in
an alphabetized list of 18 items which represent the
instrumental and terminal values. The instrumental values
-
25
are those values related to preferable modes of conduct.
The terminal values represent preferable end-states of
existence. The participants were instructed to arrange
these items in order of personal and relative importance.
The RVS was revised in 1982. Rokeach (1968, 1973) and
Cochrane (1971) employed the earlier version (Form D)
whereas this author used the most recent edition of the
survey (Form G). Form G was selected for this study because
it was the only form available. The difference between
these forms is that Form G includes "health" and "loyal,"
and Form D includes "happiness" and "cheerful." This
alteration of items led this author to caution against the
precise comparison of results using these two forms.
However, it was assumed that this change of items had
improved the survey. This survey was self-administered in
groups and required from 10 to 30 minutes to complete. The
RVS was used by permission of Rokeach and its publisher.
The Sample
The participants in this study were those inmates
incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution at Fort
Worth at the time of the data collection (April, 1987).
These subjects were selected from this prison for the
convenience of this study because this author was employed
at this facility. Two groups were the focus of this
research. The first group consisted of embezzlers (N = 31).
-
26
The second group included a matched control group of those
convicted of crimes other than embezzlement, who matched the
embezzlers by gender, age, and race (N = 31). The control
group was matched according to the precision (pairwise or
one-to-one) technique. The responses of these inmates were
contrasted with the responses of a national area probability
sample of adult Americans obtained by the National Opinion
Research Center (NORC) (N = 1409) (Rokeach, 1968, 1973).
Research Design
Because value systems research is not always amenable
to experimental design, a quasi-experimental design was
selected for this study. While experimental designs are
appropriate for stimulus-response studies this research
relied on a quasi-experimental design because of the nature
of values. As they relate to criminality, values constitute
property-disposition data. A property-disposition
relationship involves a background characteristic (for
example, criminality) as it relates to an orientation (such
as the criminal's value system). Property-disposition
relationships are different from stimulus-response
relationships on four basic research issues: time interval,
degree of specificity nature of comparison groups, and time
sequence of events (Rosenberg, 1968; Nachmias & Nachmias,
1981). The quasi-experimental design in this study was the
contrasted groups design which was used to assess the value
-
27
systems of the target groups: the embezzlers, their matched
control group, and the NORC sample.
Participation was encouraged but strictly voluntary and
forms of informed consent were signed by the participants.
The inmates received one hour of program credit for their
participation. Program credit allows the inmate to gain a
favorable impression from the staff who assume that
participation in studies is indicative of inmate
cooperation; hence, this served as incentive. Program
credit is commonly used in prison studies because the
inmates participation is viewed favorably by parole boards
and may improve the inmates' chances for parole.
This researcher guaranteed confidentiality and
anonymity to the participants. In fact, the responses were
treated as aggregate data in which composite rank orders and
median ranks were compiled and contrasted accordingly.
Therefore, individual responses were not identifiable. This
information remained in the sole possession of this
researcher. Upon compiling the composite rank orders and
median ranks on each of the 36 RVS items (18 items per set),
each of these items was ranked based on the composite
median.
Procedures for Analysis of Data and Testing of Hypotheses
Once the composite rank order and median ranks were
tabulated for the responses of embezzlers and their matched
-
28
control groups, the median test was employed to determine
the existence of statistically significant differences
between these groups.
The median test is a nonparametric test of significance
for ordinal data and "a procedure to determine whether two
independent groups differ in central tendencies" (Siegel,
1956, p. 111). The median test provides information
relating to the likelihood that two independent groups have
been drawn from the same population. In this study the
median test was applied at the .05 level of significance
(one-tailed test). The median test was selected as the
nonparametric test best suited for these data because of the
small sample size, the ordinal level of measurement (ranking
of items), and the fact that this researcher could not
assume that the responses would be normally distributed.
A different method of analysis was used when the
medians of the inmate group (embezzlers combined with their
matched control group) were contrasted with the medians of
the NORC data set. Simple comparison of the composite
medians was used to determine the differences between the
groups. It was decided that a difference of 1.0 between the
medians would constitute a difference sufficient for
rejection of the null hypothesis. The median test could not
be used at this stage of the analysis because nonparametric
-
29
tests require the individual identification of the responses
and the NORC data set did not provide this information.
Furthermore, the differences in sample sizes impeded the use
of the median test for comparisons (Fort Worth group, N =
62; the NORC sample, N = 1409).
Further analyses involved a presentation of the medians
of the groups stratified by offense category, gender, age,
race, education, religion, and income. These analyses were
used to assess the impact of the demographic variables as
well as to search for patterns among the value systems.
Summary
This chapter presented the research design and
methodology of the study. In sum, the details of the
hypotheses and the scope of the study were addressed. In
addition to a description of the Rokeach Value Survey. the
procedures for gathering the data from the prison sample
were explained. The contrasted groups design was presented
as the research design and the methods of analyzing the data
were described as they related to the hypotheses.
-
CHAPTER III
RESULTS
The findings of this study are revealed in this
section, as well as is a description of the method,
procedure, and composition of the samples. The tested
hypotheses are also presented with their respective results
and interpretations. Furthermore, the influences of age,
race, education, religion, and income on the value systems
of the inmates are discussed.
Sub.iects
Two groups of incarcerated offenders were drawn from
"kh® inmate population at the Federal Correctional
Institution (F.C.I.) at Fort Worth. One group consisted of
all the male and female embezzlers (U = 31) who were
incarcerated at this institution at the time of the data
collection (April, 1987). The second group, the embezzlers'
matched control group, included incarcerated offenders
convicted of crimes other than embezzlement who were also
incarcerated at Fort Worth at the time of the data
collection.
The method of sampling for this study was the precision
matching technique (also known as pairwise or one-to-one
30
-
31
matching). These embezzlers were matched by gender, race,
and age. For example, for every embezzler who is female,
white, and 25 years old, an inmate with the same
characteristics, who was convicted of a crime other than
embezzlement, was included in the matched control group. In
the case where there was more than one inmate who possessed
these characteristics, a random selection technique was used
(for example, coin tossing or the table of random digits).
For this study, inmates selected for the matched control
group were those whose crimes least resembled white-collar
offenses. For the distribution of the types of embezzlement
these inmates represent, refer to Table 1. The offense
categories for the matched control group are presented in
Table 2.
Table 1
Composition of Embezzlers at Fort Worth
Embezzlement Category Codes Number
Postal (100) x
Bank (101): False Entries, Misappropriation of Bank Funds
Other (102): Including Savings and Loan Association
Benefit Plan (103): Employee Benefit Plan 1
TOTAL 31
-
32
Table 2
Composition of Non-Embezzler Matched Control Group (Ft. Worth)
Offense Category Number
Drug Violations 16
Alien Smuggling 4
Fire Arms 3
Bank Robbery 2
Contempt 1
Depriving Civil Rights 1
Escape/Harbor 1
Fraud 1
Government Reservation Violation 1
Kidnaping 1
TOTAL 31
The samples were stratified by gender, race, and age in
order to create a group of inmates that could be compared to
Cochrane's (1971) sample of Michigan inmates. Cochrane
compared his Michigan prison sample to a sample assumed to
be representative of the general population. Cochrane
matched his prison sample by gender, race, and age with a
sample drawn from the National Opinion Research Center
(NORC) (Rokeach, 1968). The design and method of comparing
and contrasting these various samples were consistent with
-
33
the contrasted groups design (Nachmias & Nachmias, 1981).
The distribution of the samples from Fort Worth, Michigan,
and NORC are presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Composition of Samples
*Fort Worth **Michigan ***NORC Age
Group White Blask Qthgr White Black Other White Black Other
Males
18-29 0 0 0 118 87 3 30 16 1
30-39 6 0 0 47 49 6 17 14 1
40 + 10 0 0 25 29 1 9 11 1
Total 16 0 0 190 165 10 56 41 3
Females
18-29 8 2 0 29 25 1 29 21 1
30-39 20 2 0 9 21 1 9 20 0
40 + 14 0 0 9 9 1 0 10 1
Total 42 4 0 47 55 3 38 51 2
*Half of the inmates in the Fort Worth Sample for this study
are convicted of embezzlement and the other half are convicted
of miscellaneous crimes.
**This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison
sample.
***This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a
matched control group.
-
34
The sample of embezzlers included 23 female embezzlers
and eight male embezzlers. Because this sample consisted of
mostly females, some possible explanations for this gender
imbalance were in order. First, females may rely on the
most easily detectable methods of embezzlement; hence, they
are caught more often. Male embezzlers, by virtue of their
position m financial institutions, may have lower
accountability and can conceal their activities more
readily. Second, women may be more likely to confess to
their crimes to avoid a lengthy criminal investigation, as
informally reported by one female embezzler to this
investigator. Unfortunately, these explanations are more
amenable to investigation through interviews and case
studies, which were beyond the scope of this study.
Procedure
The samples of inmates at Fort Worth were tested using
the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS: Form G) in group settings.
The inmates participated in this study on a voluntary basis
and provided informed consent. Out of 62 inmates, only one
person refused to complete the survey. This person was
replaced by another inmate who possessed the appropriate
matched characteristics.
Data Analysis
Consistent with the data analyses of Rokeach (1968,
1973) and Cochrane (1971), the responses to the RVS items
were tabulated into aggregate medians and composite
-
35
rankings. For the purposes of this contrasted groups design
the medians served as the criteria for comparing and
contrasting these items among the various samples.
Two procedures were used to compare and contrast these
groups. First, the median test was applied to determine the
statistically significant differences between the embezzlers
and their matched control group. The median test assessed
these differences at the .05 level of significance (one-
tailed test). This statistical analysis also involved the
Bonferonni technique which was used to reduce the likelihood
of obtaining significant differences by chance (hence,
reducing false positives) (Glass & Stanley, 1970).
Secondly, simple comparisons of the medians between the
inmate group (N = 62) (embezzlers and their matched control
group) and the NORC sample (N = 1409) were employed to
identify the similarities and differences.
The Testing of the Hypotheses
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the hypotheses
were presented in four sets. The first set of hypotheses
contrasted the male embezzlers with their matched offender
control group. Secondly, the female embezzlers were
contrasted with their matched offender control group. These
two sets of hypotheses employed the median test to appraise
statistically significant differences. Third, male
embezzlers and their matched offender control group
(together as one group) were contrasted with the NORC data
-
36
(Rokeach, 1973). Finally, the female embezzlers and their
matched offender control group (together as one group) were
contrasted with the NORC data. These last two sets of
hypotheses were tested according to the simple comparison
procedure. The following null hypotheses are presented in
their respective categories indicating whether they have been
accepted or rejected.
Mal£ Qpbegslers vsrsug their matched control group.
The embezzler group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 1: Pleasure
H 2: Wisdom
H 3: Self-controlled
H 4: Capable
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
The embezzler group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 5: A world at peace accept the null hypothesis
H 6: Equality accept the null hypothesis
H 7: National security accept the null hypothesis
H 8: Salvation accept the null hypothesis
H 9: Honest accept the null hypothesis
-
37
Female QmfrezglQrs versus their matched control group.
The embezzler group will place more importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 10: An exciting life accept the null hypothesis
H 11: A sense of accomp. accept the null hypothesis
H 12: Freedom accept the null hypothesis
H 13: Inner harmony accept the null hypothesis
H 14: Wisdom accept the null hypothesis
H 15: Broadminded accept the null hypothesis
H 16: Capable accept the null hypothesis
H 17: Independent accept the null hypothesis
H 18: Intellectual accept the null hypothesis
H 19: Logical accept the null hypothesis
H 20: Self-controlled accept the null hypothesis
The embezzler group will place less importance on the
following items when contrasted with their matched control
group:
H 21: A world at peace
H 22: National security
H 23: Salvation
H 24: Helpful
H 25: Honest
Fort Worth male inmates versus the NQRC samnlA The
inmate group will place more importance on the following
items when contrasted with the NORC sample:
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
-
38
H 26
H 27
H 28
H 29
Pleasure
Wisdom
Self-controlled
Capable
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
The inmate group will place less importance on the following
items when contrasted with the NORC sample:
H 30
H 31
H 32
H 33
H 34
A world at peace
Equality
National security
Salvation
Honest
reject the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
Fort Worth female inmates versus the NORC sample. The
inmate group will place more importance on the following
items when contrasted with the NORC sample:
H 35
H 36
H 37
H 38
H 39
H 40
H 41
H 42
H 43
H 44
H 45
An exciting life
A sense of accomp.
Freedom
Inner harmony
Wisdom
Broadminded
Capable
Independent
Intellectual
Logical
Self-controlled
reject the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
-
39
The inmate group will place less importance on the following
items when compared with the NORC sample:
H 46
H 47
H 48
H 49
H 50
A world at peace
National security
Salvation
Helpful
Honest
reject the null hypothesis
reject the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
accept the null hypothesis
Interpretati nn
One could argue that comparing responses obtained in 1987
with responses obtained in 1968 (NORC) may be problematic in
the case of the value items. For example, in 1968 this nation
was experiencing the Viet Nam War and civil rights
demonstrations and so one may assume that citizens today would
place less importance on some of these items than they did in
1968. While this assumption may be true, it is imperative to
keep in mind that Cochrane found statistically significant
differences between a prison population and the NORC data in
1971 for these same items ("a world at peace," "equality," and
"national security"). An additional caution related to
interpretation was the difference in sample size between the
inmate group (N = 62) and the NORC sample (N = 1409).
The hypotheses were created to replicate the research of
Cochrane (1971) who found statistically significant
differences between a Michigan prison sample and a matched
control group drawn from the NORC sample (Rokeach, 1968). The
-
40
results of the four sets of hypotheses are presented and
interpreted in the following section.
lisle and female embezzlers versus their matched controls
The research hypotheses in these sections were based on the
theoretical assumption that the embezzler's value system has
far more influence on his or her committing a crime than the
value system of a criminal convicted of a crime other than
embezzlement (for example, drug or fire arms violations).
This was reasoned because the embezzlers, unlike other
offenders, are educated, employable, and middle-class. Hence,
it was proposed that those values reflecting self-centeredness
would be endorsed by the embezzlers. These hypotheses were
assessed by the median test (.05 level of significance, one-
tailed test). All the null hypotheses in this section were
accepted suggesting no differences between these groups. That
is, the embezzlers possess those value systems which are
characteristic of those inmates convicted of other crimes.
£ori Wprtfr sals jrmateg versus tii£ NORC sample. As
displayed in the list of hypotheses, three null hypotheses in
this category were rejected. "A world at peace," "equality,"
and "national security" are those items that demonstrated
differences between the male inmate group as contrasted with
the NORC data. Although only three of these items yielded
differences between the groups these three items did fit the
theoretical framework of Cochrane, who found that members of
the prison population do not favor those values which do not
-
41
have immediate and personal relevance. Concerning the item
equality, it must be noted that this item was favored more
by blacks than by whites (Cochrane, 1971).
Fort Worth female inmates versus the NORC sample. It was
evident in the list of the hypotheses that the following items
met the terms for rejecting the null hypothesis: "an exciting
life," "wisdom," "independent," "intellectual," "logical," "a
world at peace," and "national security." These findings
partially supported the results of Cochrane (1971). Keep in
mind that these hypotheses take into consideration the basic
differences between male and female ranking of values
(Rokeach, 1968, 1973). Attending to the differences between
the inmates and the general population, female prisoners
constitute a much more rare group as compared to their male
counterparts (Cochrane, 1971). Cochrane noted that these
females must violate the social norms far more often than
males in order to be prosecuted and incarcerated.
Cochrane revealed that female convicts differ from their
matched control group on 14 of 36 values. Cochrane observed
that the value systems of the female prisoners resembled -
"masculine" preferences more than their female control group.
These results partially supported this notion by demonstrating
that the female inmates at Fort Worth endorsed such
masculine value systems. In this investigation female
inmates preferred "an exciting life," "independent,"
"intellectual," and logical."
-
42
Further Analyses
Consistent with the contrasted groups design, additional
conclusions about these various groups were drawn by situating
their rankings of items side by side and interpreting the
results horizontally. Tables 4, 5, 6, and 7 illustrate the
contrasts and comparisons of the Fort Worth inmates with
Cochrane's (1971) Michigan sample as well as with the matched
control group he had drawn from the NORC data set. These
tables were stratified according to gender, offense category
(only for Fort Worth: embezzlers versus the matched offender
control group), and type of value (terminal and instrumental).
While these lengthy tables can overwhelm the reader with data,
these groups can be contrasted more readily if the most
preferred values were listed independently to accentuate the
differences. Six contrast groups, stratified by gender and
type of value (terminal and instrumental), have been
identified in order to assess their respective value systems.
The contrasted groups for this design were: (1) Embezzlers
(males and females as separate groups), (2) Matched Offender
Control Groups (males and females as separate groups), (3)
Fort Worth inmate group (embezzlers and matched offender
control group: males and females as separate groups), (4)
Michigan prison group (Cochrane, 1971), (5) Cochrane's (1971)
matched control group drawn from the NORC, and (6) the NORC
sample (Rokeach, 1968, 1973) (see Appendix C).
-
43
One advantage of the contrasted groups design was its
ability to identify group differences and similarities. Of
all the terminal values in each of the male contrasted groups,
only one value was listed as among the five most preferred
values: "family security." Therefore, this value was
important to the prison groups and the general population.
Freedom was listed in three of the four prison groups
and the NORC sample, which demonstrated its importance to both
populations. Cochrane (1971) mentioned in his study that
"freedom" was valued more by the matched control group than by
the prison group. Cochrane explained that, although prisoners
were aware of their lack of freedom, this lower ranking may be
an attempt to reduce the dissonance aroused by imprisonment"
(1971, p. 76). Among other common values, "self-respect" and
a comfortable life" were also endorsed by the prison groups
and the general population sample.
One value that was strongly preferred by only the general
population sample was "a world at peace." The lack of this
preference clearly showed that the prison group placed a low
priority on large-scale social situations. This finding
supported Cochrane who stated: "In general it appears that
those values which do not have immediate and personal
relevance are considered less important by the prison group
than the control group" (1971, p. 76).
-
44
Table 4
Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups
Survey Item Emb.
H = 8
Med/Rnk
Terminal Values
Non-Emb. Emb. & Non ^Michigan ++NORC
8
Med/Rnk
16
Med/Rnk
363
Med/Rnk
100
A comfortable life 6 .5/5 4 .0/3 5.5/5 7 .43/6 7 .67/6 An exciting life 11 .0/13 10 .0/10 11.0/12 13 .13/15 13 .86/17 A sense of accomp. 7 .0/6 6 .0/5 6.0/6 7 .68/7 9 .00/9
A world of peace 10 .5/12 14 .0/15.5 12.5/13 *9 .00/9 *4 .27/3
A world of beauty 14 .0/14.5 13 .0/13 14.0/15.5 14 .51/17 13 .77/16 Equality 16 .0/18 14 .0/15.5 14.5/17 *8 .52/8 *6 .50/4 Family security 1 .0/1 4 .5/4 2.0/1 4 .61/1 3 .61/1 Freedom 7 .5/8 2 • 5/1 4.0/2.5 5 .33/3 3 .92/2 Happiness (Form D)
*6, .49/4 Happiness (Form D)
*6, .49/4 *8 . 10/7 Health (Form G) 5 .0/4 3, .5/2 4.0/2.5
Inner harmony 10, .0/11 10. .5/11 10.5/11 9. 88/12 11. 30/12 Mature love 7. .5/8 8. ,0/7 7.5/7 9. 72/11 11. ,60/13 National security 15. 5/17 15. 5/18 15.5/18 *13. 88/16 *11. 63/14 Pleasure 14. 0/14.5 13. 5/14 14.0/15.5 *12. 92/14 *14. 40/18 Salvation 3. 5/3 15. 5/17 8.5/9 *15. 05/18 *11. 21/11 Self-respect 3. 0/2 7. 5/6 5.0/4 6. 73/5 7. 64/5 Social recogition 14. 5/16 12. 5/12 13.0/14 12. 03/13 13. 30/15 True friendship 7. 5/8 9. 0/8.5 8.0/8 9. 52/10 10. 00/10 Wisdom 9. 5/10 9. 0/8.5 9.0/10 *8. 17/2 *5. 16/8
Indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median
test). These are the results of Cochrane's (1974) study.
+This Michigan category represents Cochrane1s (1971) prison sample.
+*This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched
control group.
Med: refers to composite median.
Rnk: refers to composite rank order by ranking the medians.
-
45
Table 5
Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups
Survey Item
Instrumental Values
Emb. Non-Emb. Emb. & Hon +Michigan
H = 8 8 16 363
Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk
++ NORC
100
Med/Rnk
Ambitious 5 .0/2.5 4 .5/2 5 .0/2.5 6 .11/1 6 .00/2
Broadminded 8 .0/6 10 .5/11 8 .5/6.5 7 .16/4 7 .79/5
Capable 9 .5/10 11 .0/14 10 .5/11.5 *8 . 11/7 *9 .72/11
Cheerful (Form D) 11 .97/15 10 .50/12
Loyal (Form G) 9 .0/8 11 .0/14 9 .5/10
Clean 9 .5/10 5 .5/4 8 .5/6.5 7 .69/6 9 .36/8
Courageous 12, .5/14.5 10 .0/9.5 11 .5/14 8. .68/9 7 .00/4
Forgiving 5, .0/2.5 8 .5/6 7 .0/4 10 .10/11 8 .07/6
Helpful 11. .0/13 11, .0/14 11, .0/13 10, .32/12 9 .50/9
Honest 3, .0/1 4 .0/1 4 .0/1 *6, .16/2 *3 .77/1
Imaginative 12. .5/14.5 11, .0/14 12. . 5/17 14. .71/18 13, .50/17
Independent 10. .0/12 11, .0/14 10. .5/11.5 8. .67/8 8, .50/7
Intellectual 13. ,0/16 8. .5/6 12. 0/15.5 10. .09/10 12. ,30/15
Logical 14. .0/17 10. ,0/9.5 12. 0/15.5 13. ,35/16 13. .37/16
Loving 6. 0/4 8. 5/6 7. 5/5 11. 13/14 11. 50/14
Obedient 15. 5/18 16. 0/18 15. 5/18 13. 42/17 13. 88/18
Polite 8. 5/7 11. 5/17 9. 0/8.5 10. 63/13 11. 00/13
Responsible 6. 5/5 5. 0/3 5. 0/2.5 7. 23/5 6. 79/3
Self-controlled 9. 5/10 9. 0/8 9. 0/8.5 *6. 90/3 *9. 68/10
Indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median
test). These are the results of Cochrane's (1974) study.
+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison sample.
++This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched
control group.
Med: refers to composite median.
Rnk: refers to composite rank order by ranking the medians.
-
46
Table 6
Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups
Terminal Values
Survey Item Emb. Non-Emb. Emb. & Hon "^Michigan ++NORC
& = 23 23 46 98 91
Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk
A comfortable life 12.0/13 10.0/11.5 11 .0/12.5 8 .50/9 7 .69/7
An exciting life 14.0/15.5 • • 16.0/18 14 .0/15 *14 .79/18 *16 .43/18
A sense of accomp. 9.0/8.5 9.0/9 9 .0/8.5 *8 . 10/8 *9 .94/9 A world of peace 10.0/10.5 9.0/9 9 .0/8.5 *7 .36/7 *3 .36/1
A world of beauty 13.0/14 14.0/15.5 14 .0/15 13 .38/17 14 .45/16 Equality 11.0/12 11.0/13 11 .0/12.5 6 .17/4 6 .25/4 Family security 3.0/1 4.0/2 3 • 5/1 4 .50/2 3 .75/2 Freedom 6.0/5.5 6.0/4.5 6 .0/4.5 *3 .32/1 *4 .88/3 Happiness (Form D)
.30/8 .86/5 Happiness (Form D)
7 .30/8 6 . .86/5
Health (Form G) 5.0/3.5 3.0/1 4 .5/3
Inner harmony 8.0/7 9.0/9 8. .5/7 *8, .83/10 *10. 71/12
Mature love 9.0/8.5 10.0/11.5 10. .0/10.5 10. ,50/11 11. 42/13
National security 15.0/17 14.0/15.5 14. 5/17 *13. 50/14 11. 64/14 Pleasure 14.0/15.5 14.0/15.5 14. 0/15 13. 80/16 14. 69/17 Salvation 5.0/3.5 7.0/6 6 . 5/6 13. 72/15 10. 60/11 Self-respect 4.0/2 5.0/3 4. 0/2 6. 59/5 7. 39/6
Social recognition 16.0.18 14.0/15.5 15. 0/18 13. 36/13 14. 00/15 True friendship 10.0/10.5 8.0/7 10. 0/10.5 11. 25/12 10. 10/10 Wisdom 6.0/5.5 6.0/4.5 6. 0/4.5 *5. 00/3 *9. 13/8
"indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median
test). These are the results of Cochrane's (1974) study.
+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) p r i 8 e n s a m p l e .
++This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched
control group.
Med: refers to composite median.
Rnk: refers to composite rank order by ranking the medians.
-
47
Table 7
Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups
Survey Item
Instrumental Values
Non-Emb FmVi A. +-K
fi = 23
Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk
Ambitious 10.0/9.5 7.0/5 8.5/6 6.33/4 6.33/3 Broadminded 11.0/12 9.0/8.5 11.0/11 .5 *5.70/1 *8.94/9 Capable 12.0/14.5 13.0/15 12.0/14 .5 *9.17/9 *10.38/13 Cheerful (Form D)
11.50/15 Cheerful (Form D)
11.50/15 11.58/14 Loyal (Form G) 8.0/5 9.0/8.5 9.0/8
Clean 9.0/7 9.0/8.5 9.0/8 5.83/2 5.27/2 Courageous 12.0/14.5 12.0/13.5 12.0/14 .5 9.21/10 8.80/8 Forgiving 7.0/4 6.0/3.5 6.5/4 8.17/7 7.67/5 Helpful 9.0/7 9.0/8.5 9.0/8 *10.64/12 *8.60/7 Honest 2.0/1 3.0/1 2.5/1 *6.00/3 *3.85/1 Imaginative 15.0/17.5 14.0/16.5 14.5/17 15.90/18 16.09/18 Independent 9.0/7 6.0/3.5 7.0/5 *8.50/8 *10.33/12 Intellectual 11.0/12 14.0/16.5 11.0/11. 5 *11.00/13 *12.86/16 Logical 14.0/16 10.0/11 12.0/14. 5 *12.67/16 14.82/17 Loving 4.0/2 9.0/8.5 5.5/3 11.00/14 8.40/6 Obedient 15.0/17.5 15.0/18 15.0/18 12.92/17 12.13/15 Polite 11.0/12 12.0/13.5 12.0/14. 5 10.32/11 9.42/11 Responsible 5.0/3 5.0/2 5.0/2 6.64/5 6.58/4 Self-controlled 10.0/9.5 11.0/12 10.0/10 *7.27/6 *9.40/10
•indict.. . s i g n i f i c a n t d i « . , . „ c . ( m . d i w
test). These are the results of Cochrane's (1974) study.
+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison sample.
This NORC sample vas drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched
control group.
Med: refers to composite median.
Rnk: refers to composite rank order by ranking the medians.
-
48
Taking into consideration the alteration in RVS forms
(D versus G), it was assumed that this instrument was
improved by replacing "happiness" (a global and somewhat
vague item) with "health" (a more specific term). In this
design, "health" was strongly endorsed by those groups
tested with Form G, and "happiness" was strongly endorsed by
those groups tested with Form D.
The terminal values preferred by the female groups were
similar to those of their male counterparts. The only
salient difference between the male and female groups was
that "wisdom" was strongly preferred by all of the female
prison groups while this item was strongly valued by only
one male prison group. Consistent with the male value
systems, the female prison groups also discounted "a world
at peace."
Among the instrumental value systems of the male
groups, there were three common values listed by all of the
groups: "honest," "ambitious" and "responsible." These
values were preferred by both the prison groups as well as
those members of the general population. Cochrane (1971)
believed that the endorsement of "honest" could be
indicative of the conflict between the prisoners' values and
behavior, which could be used as additional material for
dissonance reduction studies.
It was also worth noting that the items "forgiving" and
"loving" were preferred by three of the four prison groups
-
49
but not by the general population sample. This result may
be interpreted as a function of the punishment and
incarceration of the prison groups. Finally, "courageous"
was favored by the general population sample, but not
preferred by any of the prison groups. The RVS defined
"courageous" as standing up for your beliefs, and it
appeared that the prison groups did not consider this value
to be important.
The female instrumental values also appeared to be
similar to those of the male groups which suggested that
different patterns between genders did not exist. However,
one exception was the item "independent," which was endorsed
by two of the prison groups but not by either of the general
population samples. It could be hypothesized that an
extreme sense of independence (self-reliant and self-
sufficient) may leave a woman vulnerable to criminal, or
unconventional, paths toward achieving self-reliance.
The results in this study partially supported some of
Cochrane's findings that inmate value systems differ from
the general population. He enhanced his interpretations by
noting that male and female prison groups "resemble each
other much more closely than they resemble their respective
controls' value system" (1971, p. 78). (For additional
comparisons based on this assumption, refer to Tables 8 and
9, which illustrate the terminal and instrumental values as
reported by males and females.)
-
50
Survey Item
Table 8
Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Terminal Values
Comparison of Gender
Fort Worth NORC
Median Median
Males Females Males Females (N = 16) (N = 46) (N = 665) (N = 744)
A comfortable life 5.5 11 .0 7 .77 10.02
An exciting life 11.0 14 .0* 14 .62 15.57*
A sense of accomp. 6.0 9 .0 8 .29 9.40
A world at peace 12.5* 9 . 0* 3 .75* 3.00*
A world of beauty 14.0 14 .0 13 .61 13.51
Equality 14.5* 11 .0 8 .87* 8.29
Family security 2.0 3 .5 3 .86 3.78
Freedo 4.0 6 .0 4, .91 6.05
Happiness (Form D) — — 7. .94 7.34
Health (Form G) 4.0 4. .5 — - -
Inner harmony 10.5 8. .5 11. .08 9.83
Mature love 7.5 10. 0 12. 57 12.32
National security 15.5* 14. 5* 9. 21* 9.81*
Pleasure 14.0 14. 0 14. 14 14.97
Salvation 8.5 6. 5 9. 88 7.33
Self-respect 5.0 4. 0 8. 16 7.40
Social recognition 13.0 15. 0 13. 79 15.01
True friendship 8.0 10. 0 9. 63 9.06
Wisdom 9.0 6. 0* 8. 49 7.71*
•Supports the hypothesized difference between groups.
-
51
Survey Item
Table 9
Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Instrumental Values
Comparison of Gender
Fort Worth NORC
Median Median
Males Females Males Females (M = 16) (N = 46) (fi = 665) (N = 744)
Ambitious 5.0 8.5 5.61 7.33
Broadminded 8.5 11.0 7.20 7.64
Capable 10.5 12.0 8.86 10.10
Cheerful (Form D) 10.41 9.43
Loyal (Form G) 9.5 9.0
Clean 8.5 9.0 9.43 8.13
Courageous 11.5 12.0 7.49 8.06
Forgiving 7.0 6.5 8.23 6.43
Helpful 11.0 9.0 8.35 8.07
Honest 4.0 2.5 3.43 3.21
Imaginative 12.5 14.5 14.28 16.10
Independent 10.5 7.0* 10.17 10.72*
Intellectual 12.0 11.0* 12.77 13.22*
Logical 12.0 12.0* 13.51 14.65*
Loving 7.5 5.5 10.90 8.64
Obedient 15.5 15.0 13.51 13.08
Polite 9.0 12.0 10.85 10.71
Responsible 5.0 5.0 6.58 6.82
Self-controlled 9.0 10.0 9.65 9.55
-
52
Although Cochrane revealed more differences between the
Michigan prison groups and their matched control groups than
were obtained in this study, this may be attributed to the
qualitative differences between the prison population at
Fort Worth as compared to other prisons. For example, the
inmates at Fort Worth are generally low risk, nonviolent,
and minimum security. However, while not all of the inmates
at Fort Worth are middle-class, white-collar, and educated,
many of the embezzlers did fit this description.
Considering these characteristics, inmates at Fort Worth
(particularly the embezzlers) resemble the general
population far more than they resemble other prison
populations.
Additional Analyses
Because gender was only one of the demographic
variables used to stratify these samples, it was appropriate
to introduce those meaningful findings based on the other
characteristics of these samples: age, race, education,
religion, and income. The selection of these variables was
based on those listed by Rokeach (1968, 1973). This section
concentrates on the salient features of the additional
analyses.
Age. Rokeach (1973) presented a comprehensive analysis
of values as they related to a person's individual
development. He proposed a series of developmental patterns
in which a person's chronological age corresponded with a
-
53
particular value system. This author included age as a
variable to take into account the influence a person's age
has on his or her value system.
Four major age categories (and their respective N) were
delineated for the Fort Worth samples: 20-29 (N = 10), 30-
39 (N = 28), 40-49 (fi = 12), and 50-59 (JtJ = 12) (see Table
3). Responses to the RVS items for these age categories
were reported in Appendix D as they compared and contrasted
with the data from the NORC sample. As was the case with
many of these findings, one must exercise caution when
comparing the sample from Fort Worth with the NORC sample
because of the difference in size.
Consistent with the previous findings, when the Fort
Worth group and the NORC sample were divided into age
groups, drastic differences in the ranking of the items "a
world at peace," "equality" and "national security"
appeared. Each of the inmate age categories clearly placed
a lower emphasis on these items than the NORC sample, which
added additional support to the conclusion that these
inmates were more self-centered and less concerned for
society.
The item "self-respect" also differentiated between
these age groups. The inmates placed more importance on
this item, which may be indicative of their current struggle
with dissonance. Once a person has endured the process of
criminalization through the criminal justice system he or
-
54
she may seek self-respect because nobody else appears to
respect them. This experience with the criminal justice
system may also explain the differences on the items
broadminded (defined as open—minded) and "courageous"
(defined as standing up for one's beliefs) in which the Fort
Worth group placed much less importance than the NORC
sample. Upon experiencing punishment and degradation from
the system, one may not be expected to retain an open mind
or feel that it pays to stand up for one's beliefs.
Considering this, one may also understand why the Fort Worth
group favored "forgiving" more than the NORC sample.
Finally, the item "loving" (defined as affectionate and
tender) was ranked higher, which may be a function of
gender, particularly in a co-correctional institution where
members of the opposite sex are constant reminders of
affection and "tenderness.
Race. In one of his studies, Rokeach (1973) found that
race was an important factor in determining a person's value
system. For example, a person who has experienced racial
discrimination may form a value system different from that
of a person who has not endured such degradation.
Taking this into consideration, race was selected as an
additional variable to analyze value systems. For the
purposes of this investigation, blacks were not sufficiently
represented in this investigation. This is not to say that
blacks were not sufficiently represented at F.C.I., Fort
-
55
Worth, but the target population was the embezzler, and
there were only two black embezzlers (both female) in this
sample (four blacks total, including their matched controls,
see Table 3). Therefore, no inferences about the responses
-
56
and comparisons with the NORC sample in this section focused
on these two educational categories.
Table 10
Frequency Distributions of Education
Years of Education
Frequency Percent
4 3 4.8
5 2 3.2
7 2 3.2
8 3 4.8
9 1 1.6
10 1 1.6
11 1 1.6
12 23 37.1
13 7 11.3
14 7 11.3
15 6 9.7
16 4 6.5
17 1 1.6
18 1 1.6
Total 62 100.0
Note. M - 12.00; Median = 12.00; SD = 3.178
-
57
As expected, both of these categories ranked the
following items lower than the NORC sample: "a world at
peace, "equality," "national security," "broadminded,"
courageous," and "loving." The inmates in these categories
Placed more importance on "salvation," and "self-respect."
The differences in the item "self-controlled" (defined as
restrained and self-disciplined) appeared to be masked by
other variables until the sample was stratified by
education. In this case "self-controlled" was ranked lower
by those with "some college" than by the same educational
category in the NORC sample.
Religion. Religion was also included as an additional
variable because of the basic relationship between religion
and values. Religion is assumed to be comprised of an
identifiable set of values and a person's religious
background is assumed to influence his or her value system.
Similar to the variable education, the inmates in this
sample represented two major categories: Catholic (N = 19)
and Baptist (N = 19) (see Table 11 and Appendix G).
Considering this breakdown, the interpretations were limited
to these religious groups as they compared to the same
religions reported by the NORC.
The Catholics and Baptists in the Fort Worth sample
also placed a low priority on "a world at peace,"
"equality," "national security," "ambitious," "broadminded,"
"courageous," and "obedient." On the other hand, both of
-
58
Table 11
Frequency Distributions of Religion
Value Label Frequency Percent
Catholic 19 30.6
Episcopalian 2 3.2
Lutheran 2 3.2
Presbyterian 3 4.8
Methodist 6 9.7
Baptist 19 30.6
None 1 1.6
Other 10 16.1
these religious groups placed more importance on "mature
love," "self-respect," "independence," and "logical." The
Baptists, as opposed to the Catholics, assigned a higher
value on "loving," and "responsible," and both groups ranked
"wisdom" higher than their respective NORC categories.
An additional finding from this analysis was that the
Catholics appeared to fit Cochrane's model that "pleasure"
is valued more by Michigan prisoners than their matched
control group. In this investigation, the incarcerated
Catholics placed a higher premium on "pleasure" than those
Catholics in the NORC sample.
-
59
Admittedly there was a major drawback by stratifying a
prison sample by religion. The most obvious problem was
that it was difficult to infer their degree of religiosity
from their stated preference. One may assume that
criminality is an indication of a low degree of religiosity.
However, imprisonment often rekindles a concern for religion
as seen by inmates who embrace Bibles and attend services.
Consequently, it was difficult to determine if such inmates
were sincerely religious or trying to project a "reformed-
character (or both).
Income. An additional variable used to stratify the
inmate sample at Fort Worth was income. Rokeach (1973)
described the basic differences between individuals of
different income brackets. He argued that, when appraising
a person's value system, income should be one of the
variables taken into consideration. As is the case with the
other variables, income may influence life chances and
experiences which, in turn, affect the formation of a value
system.
Table 12 and Appendix H list the 16 income categories
and their respective frequencies. In order to avoid any
negative (or threatened) responses to this income variable
by the inmates, broad categories were used instead of exact
income disclosures. It was assumed that income was a
sensitive issue with these inmates, particularly the
embezzlers. The first six income categories were included
-
60
so that these responses could be compared and contrasted
with those NORC responses published by Rokeach (1973).
Table 12
Frequency Distributions for Income
Value Label Frequency Percent
0-2,000 4 6.5
2,000-3,999 1 1.6
4,000-5,999 3 4.8
8,000-9,999 1 1.6
10-15K 12 19.4
16-20K 6 9.7
21-25K 10 16.1
26-30K 12 19.4
31-40K 4 6.5
41-50K 3 4.8
51-60K 1 1.6
61-70K 1 1.6
91K + 3 4.8
Total 61 100.0
Note. M = 7.672; Median = 8.000; SD = 3.295.
A serious limitation in usin