Social Media Usage and Incarcerated Women: A Pilot Study

Abstract

The purpose of this pilot study was to explore social media usage among incarcerated women in a modified therapeutic community. An author-developed social media questionnaire was administered to 89 incarcerated women. Participants reported high levels of social media usage, and many had used social media to engage in criminal behavior. Although most of the women identified seeing pictures of friends actively using substances on social media as a trigger for relapse, they still planned to reactive their social media accounts upon release. The role and power of social media in these women’s lives must be understood and planned for in prison-based treatment programs.

Keywords

social media incarcerated women substance abuse modified therapeutic community

Introduction

Although incarcerated women constitute 7% of the U.S. prison population (Carson, 2016), their numbers grew by more than 700% between 1980 and 2014, from a 26,378 in 1980 to 215,332 in 2014 (The Sentencing Project, 2015). This growth in the female prison population has largely been the result of more stringent drug laws, increasing the demand for appropriate correctional drug treatment programs (Covington & Bloom, 2008; Messina, Burdon, & Prendergast, 2003). Therapeutic communities (TCs) have become the preferred criminal justice solution for meeting the treatment needs of drug-dependent inmates within the prison system (Messina et al., 2003). TC programs were developed with the primary goal of treating substance abuse and introducing prosocial values to reduce criminal thinking and activity (DeLeon, 1995; Messina et al., 2003).

Women entering prison substance abuse treatment are at a significant disadvantage in comparison with their male counterparts (Messina et al., 2003; Messina, Grella, Burdon, & Prendergast, 2007). Compared with male offenders, women have higher rates of intimate partner violence, sexual violence, child and psychological abuse, posttraumatic stress disorder, and chronic physical and mental health issues (DeHart, Lynch, Belknap, Dass-Brailsford, & Green, 2014; Greene, Haney, & Huratdo, 2000; James & Glaze, 2006; Lynch, DeHart, Belknap, & Green, 2012; McDaniels-Wilson & Belknap, 2008; Messina et al., 2003; Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, & Samuels, 2009). Research also indicates that serious mental illness places women at a higher risk across the life span for substance abuse and drug offending (DeHart et al., 2014). These complex needs must be addressed when preparing for successful reentry (Covington, 2002; Covington & Bloom, 2008; O’Brien & Young, 2006).

With the coming of age of social media and the Internet, there has not been a national policy regarding social media and Internet usage among those incarcerated (Chambliss, 2011). Only four states currently allow limited Internet access (Branstetter, 2015). California has reported problems with inmates smuggling in phones, accessing social media, and contacting their victims (Dobuzinskis, 2011). This has led to a policy by Facebook banning the use of its social media website by those currently incarcerated. With the rise of social media use among adults (Duggan & Smith, 2013), it is important to consider the influence of social media on postrelease behavior such as alcohol and drug use (Stoddard, Bauermeister, Gordon-Messer, Johns, & Zimmerman, 2012). Thus, the purpose of this pilot study was to examine social media usage among incarcerated women in a modified therapeutic community (MTC).

Literature Review

Female offenders experience significant challenges when reentering the community (Carter & Marcum, 2017; Covington, 2002; Covington & Bloom, 2008; O’Brien & Young, 2006). Many women lack access to important social services, which puts them at risk of relapse (Richie, 2001). For example, most female offenders do not receive the crucial “wraparound services” needed for successful reintegration, including substance abuse treatment upon release (Richie, 2001). Moreover, female offenders have noted how a lack of health care services, mental health treatment, educational and employment services, secure and affordable housing, and child and family reunification support contribute to the array of challenges they experience during reentry (Wright, Van Voorhis, Salisbury, & Bauman, 2012).

In addition to these challenges, female offenders are faced with triggers for relapse as they reintegrate into their former communities (Wright et al., 2012). Research suggests that the social and relational aspects of women’s lives are more likely to elicit substance abuse relapse in comparison with their male counterparts (Covington, 2002). Women place a strong focus on relationships in their personal lives as a source of self-worth and empowerment, which greatly affects the way they see themselves within their communities (O’Brien & Young, 2006). Often, the relational aspects of female offenders’ lives serve as strong indicators for offending in the first place and can directly affect women’s outcomes during recovery (Covington & Bloom, 2008). For example, many female offenders are involved in drug-related activity due to relationships with drug-addicted partners or social networks with a heavy presence of illegal substance (Covington & Bloom, 2008). Thus, the likelihood of relapse increases when they are placed back within the same social situations and environments upon release (Covington & Bloom, 2008).

Social Media as a Trigger

At the time of entrance into the prison system, many female offenders have a network of family members, friends, and acquaintances that facilitates illegal behaviors (Bui & Morash, 2010). Upon release, women who are exposed to the same negative social conditions are more likely to fall back into the same habits, and have less successful reentries than women who adopt prosocial networks (Bui & Morash, 2010). Although most women do not have Internet access while incarcerated, social media is prevalent upon an inmate’s release, reconnecting women with former social networks (Branstetter, 2015). Social media penetrates into social systems throughout many different communities, connecting people easier than ever before (Van Dijck & Poell, 2013). For women, especially, peer influence via social media has the ability to trigger alcohol abuse (Cook, Bauermeister, Gordon-Messer, & Zimmerman, 2013). Facebook has been shown to be a source of influence on young adults for engaging in substance abuse and risky sexual behavior, due to the frequency of the behaviors displayed on the site by “friends” (Moreno, Kota, Schoohs, & Whitehill, 2013). Social media does not have the face-to-face restrictions to which former social networks were tied, and therefore, the opportunities for influence are easier than ever (Trepte & Reinecke, 2013; Van Dijck & Poell, 2013). Throughout recent years, social media has become prevalent in nearly all aspects of daily life, including informal interactions with friends, institutional structures, and professional settings, making it nearly inescapable (Van Dijck & Poell, 2013). This constant communication can become problematic when it affects an individual’s behavior, actions, and intentions for sobriety.

As Moreno et al. (2013) noted in their study, social media has a strong influence on the way individuals conduct themselves on- and offline. With the understanding that these relationships can have a direct impact on an individual’s ability to stay sober, considerations must be made in preparing offenders, once they are released back into our media-driven society. The more thoroughly inmates are prepared at the time of reentry often directly affects their success rate (Wright et al., 2012). As researchers continue to identify new ways to support inmates upon release from prison, this integral aspect of our society needs to be considered.

Method

Participant Selection

The sample was selected from the population of incarcerated women in a Southern State’s MTC with a total population of approximately 100 residents. The MTC is a minimum security women’s unit, separate from the prison that focuses on drug and alcohol treatment. The MTC model retains most of the key components, structure, and processes of a traditional TC. MTCs in correctional facilities include additional programming on the interrelationship between criminal thinking, substance abuse, and mental health. Moreover, this program provides gender-specific material to address the needs of female offenders by integrating material on healthy relationships, sexual and domestic violence, and trauma. Finally, operational adjustments are made to comply with the security requirements of the correctional facility. All the women in the unit are incarcerated with sentences of 4 years or less due to substance use, or due to criminal behaviors associated with substance use.

The only criteria for inclusion in the pilot study were that they be in the general population, not in intake, medical, or behavioral segregation, and they must agree to participate in the study.

Procedures

In fall 2014, the study was explained to the residents at a morning group meeting. Following this meeting, the primary researcher attended three separate process group sessions to administer the survey to each group of residents. Instructions were given verbally, and the information was also supplied in written form via the implied consent form. The residents were told that their participation was completely voluntary and that there would be no repercussions for not completing the survey. The anonymity of the surveys was ensured by giving each participant a survey and a manila envelope to place it in when completed. All procedures and forms were approved the university’s institutional review board and the Department of Community Corrections.

Measures

Social media usage

A social media questionnaire was developed by the researcher that examined how residents used social media prior to incarceration. The questions explored how many different social media sites residents had used, how many friends they had in total on social media, how many times per day they checked these sites, and how much time they spent on these sites. Their beliefs regarding social media and the way in which they have used social media in the past were also examined, with questions regarding whether they have posted pictures of themselves when they were not sober, they have seen pictures of others not sober, and they believe this is a trigger. In addition, a “Comments” section was included at the end of the social media questionnaire. Prior to the pilot study, the social media questionnaire and the Texas Christian University Drug Screen (TCU-DS-II) (Simpson, Joe, Knight, Rowan-Szal, & Gray, 2012) were pilot tested with three residents who were scheduled to leave the facility before the end of October. The residents reported the questionnaire was easy to understand and no changes were made.

Substance dependence

Substance dependence was defined as scoring a three or above on a scale ranging from one to nine using the TCU-DS-II that includes questions about their drug use during the last 12 months before they were incarcerated (Simpson, Joe, Knight, Rowan-Szal, & Gray, 2012). The TCU-DS-II has test–retest reliability in the .89 to .95 ranges and construct and predictive validity (Simpson et al., 2012).

Results

The total sample consisted of 89 incarcerated female residents in an MTC. Based on the descriptive statistics for the study sample, the women were predominantly Caucasian (n = 77, 86.5%). Only 4.5% (n = 4) identified as multiracial, 2.2% (n = 2) as Hispanic, 2.2% (n = 2) as African American, and one participant (1.1%) was Native American/American Indian. A majority of the sample (n = 38, 42.7%) ranged in age from 26 to 35 years, whereas 25.8% (n = 23) had an age span from 36 to 35 years, 20.2% (n = 18) from 18 to 25 years, and 11.2% (n = 10) from 46 to 55 years. Approximately 89.9% (n = 80) of the women were classified as substance dependent.

Social Media Usage

Social media usage for the study sample is presented in Table 1. Almost 86% (n = 76) of the residents had a social media account prior to entering the correctional facility, with 31.6% (n = 24) having one social media account, 28.9% (n = 22) having two social media accounts, and 21.1% (n = 16) reporting three social media accounts. Only 18.4% (n = 14) indicated they had four or more social media accounts. A majority (n = 26, 34.2%) of the residents had 301 or more friends on social media. In terms of usage, there was significant variation among residents, with 31.6% (n = 24) noting that prior to incarceration, they checked social media 0 to 3 times per day; 27.6% (n = 24) checked social media 15 or more times per day. For time spent on social media, most of the residents (n = 50, 65.8%) reported more than an hour per day browsing social media prior to incarceration. Due to incarceration, most of the residents (n = 65, 85.5%) had not checked social media in more than 90 days, and a majority (n = 42, 55.3%) indicated only thinking about checking social media 0 to 2 times per day.

Table 1.

Social Media Usage.

	n	%
Number of different social media accounts
1	24	31.6
2	22	28.9
3	16	21.1
4	6	7.9
5+	8	10.5
Number of friends on all social media accounts
0-75	11	14.5
76-150	12	15.8
151-225	14	18.4
226-300	13	17.1
301+	26	34.2
How many times per day social media was “checked”
0-3	24	31.6
4-6	12	15.8
7-10	12	15.8
11-15	7	9.2
15+	21	27.6
How much time per day browsing social media
0-30 min	15	19.7
31-60 min	11	14.5
61-120 min	16	21.1
121-180 min	11	14.5
181-240 min	9	11.8
241-300 min	14	18.4
How long since social media was checked
Less than 90 days	11	14.5
91-180 days	28	36.8
181-270 days	18	23.7
More than 271 days	19	25.0
How many times per day thought about checking social media
0-2 times	42	55.3
3-5 times	15	19.7
6-8 times	9	11.8
9-11 times	4	5.3
12+ times	6	7.9

Table 2 presents descriptive data on the residents’ social media behavior and online network. Approximately 80.3% (n = 61) of residents believed social media was addicting. A majority of the participants (n = 55, 73.3%) reported that they had posted pictures of themselves when intoxicated and written posts while intoxicated (n = 63, 84.0%). Although few residents reported posting pictures that showed active use of drugs and/or alcohol (n = 24, 32.0%), several had viewed pictures of friends on social media of friends actively using drugs and/or alcohol (n = 54, 72%). Of the residents who viewed pictures of friends on social media actively using drugs and/or alcohol, 44.3% (n = 27) stated that viewing these types of pictures increased their craving for drugs and/or alcohol. In terms of criminal behavior, 52% of residents (n = 39) reported involving social media in criminal behavior and 36.5% (n = 27) reported that 0% to 25% of their friends on social media were involved in criminal behavior. A majority of the residents (n = 65, 86.7%) planned to rejoin social media upon release, and only 14.7% (n = 11) worried that access to social media could increase the risk of relapse.

Table 2.

Social Media Behavior and Online Network.

	n	%
Believe that social media is addicting
Yes	61	80.3
No	15	19.7
Posted pictures of self when intoxicated
Yes	55	73.3
No	20	26.7
Written posts while intoxicated
Yes	63	84.0
No	12	16.0
Posted pictures that showed active use of drugs and/or alcohol
Yes	24	32.0
No	51	68.0
Viewed pictures on social media of friends actively using drugs and/or alcohol
Yes	54	72.0
No	21	28.0
Pictures of friends actively using drugs and/or alcohol were a trigger that increased craving for drugs and/or alcohol
Yes	27	44.3
No	34	55.7
Involved social media in criminal behavior
Yes	39	52.0
No	36	48.0
Percentage of friends on social media involved in criminal behavior
0-25	27	36.5
26-50	21	28.4
51-75	14	18.9
76-100	12	16.2
Plan to rejoin social media upon release
Yes	65	86.7
No	10	13.3
Worried about access to social media increasing risk of relapse
Yes	11	14.7
No	64	85.3

Discussion

In our pilot study of the incarcerated female population, 76 out of the 89 residents surveyed had a social media account before incarceration. Notably, 100% of the 18 residents who fell within the 18- to 25-year-old age range claimed to have had a social media account before they were incarcerated. Most of the women reported they had at least 301 friends. The online venue is simply another peer connection from which people learn and then emulate peers’ behaviors that can, in turn, escalate the negative behaviors, according to Stoddard et al. (2012). Using social media in criminal behavior was not uncommon. Overall, 52% of the women reported having done so—and they are not just using it for sale of drugs or arranging to meet friends with whom to use narcotics. The residents also shared that they are using social media to profile future forgery or theft victims, or trolling for prospective drug clients or drug dealers. The power of social media in these women’s lives has not gone unnoticed by law enforcement. Several residents reported that when they absconded, their parole officer would act as a “friend” and lure them into meeting where they would then be taken into custody.

For this population, returning to social media is like going back to the “old neighborhood.” Except, if this was a real brick-and-mortar neighborhood, one in three of these women would be returning to a neighborhood where more than half of her neighbors/friends were involved in criminal activity. Seven out of 10 residents had posted pictures while intoxicated, and even more had written posts while intoxicated. Whereas only one third of the residents admitted to posting pictures of themselves that show active usage of drugs and/or alcohol, close to three fourths say they had seen their friends’ social media pictures of active usage. The pull of social media cannot go unnoticed by treatment teams, as its strong influence can be a trigger for relapse while the women try to reconnect with former social networks. Many of the women in the study reported planning to reactive their social media sites upon release, which indicates a need to consider the influence of social media during treatment and while planning for reentry into both their physical and online communities.

Limitations

The current study had several limitations. First, because the information was gathered by self-report, the participants could have answered the questions incorrectly due to recall bias, social desirability bias, and/or errors in self-observation. For instance, residents were asked to remember what their social media activity was like before they were incarcerated. For some, this period of time was more than 1 year. In addition, determining how much influence peers have via social media is difficult to ascertain as many of the study participants know and interact with their social media connections in their day-to-day lives (Cook et al., 2013). Another limitation was that a large majority of the residents surveyed are substance dependent, which may have influenced the findings. Also, some of the surveys had missing data, which may have skewed the results. In addition, because there was not a widely available social media measurement tool due to the limited research in this area, one of the questionnaires was self-created and untested (other than pilot testing), and as such, no previous reliability and validity data exist for this instrument. Finally, study findings cannot be generalizable to other incarcerated populations as this is a cross-sectional, convenience sample that may not be representative of the population demographics. For example, in this sample, 86% of the respondents identified as being Caucasian/White/non-Hispanic, compared with 78% for the state population (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2014).

Implications

This study holds several practice implications. As part of the MTC treatment plan, residents are given extensive training about how to reenter society upon release. Gender-specific needs must be considered, as the women within these facilities experience different challenges to reentry than their male counterparts (Bui & Morash, 2009; Covington, 2002; Covington & Bloom, 2008; O’Brien & Young, 2006; Richie, 2001; Wright et al., 2012). The relational aspect of female substance abuse and criminal activity must be addressed, as well as the social outlets that negative relationships can develop within (Covington & Bloom, 2008). Because overlap of social circles (online interaction and face-to-face interaction) is known to occur, the findings illustrate the need for education regarding the power of peer influence via social media on relapse behavior. However, the influence of the residents’ social circles outside of social media needs to be taken into account as well (Cook et al., 2013).

Eighty percent of the resident population surveyed believes social media is addictive. Yet, 68% still plan to reactivate their social media accounts upon release. It is possible that some residents believe that social media addiction is not as harmful as their physical addiction to legal and/or illicit substances. Still, treatment providers must consider issues of comorbidity (being prone to develop more than one type of addiction) when working with this population (Grover et al., 2013). The National Institute on Drug Abuse (2010) suggested a variety of ways in which to treat comorbid conditions: medication and/or behavioral therapies, which include multisystemic therapy, cognitive–behavior therapy, brief strategic family therapy, dialectical behavior therapy, and group therapy. Accounting for the power of social media in resident’s lives when incorporating these interventions is essential to meeting the complex needs of this population. Even though the concept of social media addiction is an area that has been unexplored until recently, the residents’ brief narratives, taken from the “Comments” section of the questionnaire, leave no doubt as to their impression of its power. For example, one resident stated, “Drugs and social media to me are equally as addictive,” whereas another noted, “I believe I was just as addicted to social media as I was to drugs.” The influence of social media and its implications for prison-based treatment is a vast landscape for the scientific community, as well as the correctional system.

As powerful as social media are, there is also the potential for their use in a therapeutic and positive way for female offenders participating in an MTC. Residents could use social media to tell their stories of addiction via a “Recovery Page” and share their stories and successes with others, provided it could be set up in a way to limit content and posts. Residents would also benefit from this exchange through the therapeutic power of sharing their story and realizing they are helping others who may struggle with addiction in the process (Hamby, 2013). This would benefit the prisons that house this population, as more people would understand the value of the services they offer. In addition, allowing limited access to social media in prisons would benefit those residents who, under the guidance and supervision of a counselor, want to go through their “friends” list and remove people that may be a relapse trigger. Moreover, according to Branstetter (2015), allowing social media in prisons could be used to help residents find employment, which has been linked to reducing recidivism.

Because this is an emerging field of research, there remains more to be done to improve our understanding of the associations between peer influence via social media, substance dependence, and future criminal behavior. A majority of the research has been cross sectional in nature. Thus, future studies should use random sampling procedures and consider incorporating a longitudinal design to examine how peer influence via social media affects long-term outcomes such as recidivism and relapse among incarcerated women. Finally, it is imperative that future studies begin to incorporate healthy social media use into their treatment programs, and identify ways to use social media to connect with residents in a positive and empowering manner that is focused on recovery and sobriety.

Conclusion

This pilot study illustrates the need to collect more information on peer influence received via social media on substance use behaviors. This is a relatively new field of research and there is much left to understand about the role social media has in the development of social norms. Providing these women with the best possible outcomes after release, which includes preventing relapse and recidivism by mitigating the risks from peer influence received from social media, is the ultimate goal. To be more successful in this goal, the role and power of social media in these women’s lives must be understood and planned for. The more beneficial aspects of the Internet, which are currently not allowed for this population, must be expanded, to give them equal opportunity in the job market. Additional research, which would include a longitudinal study of a random sample, needs to be conducted to further expand our understanding of how social media and online peer networks influence outcomes among incarcerated women.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Julie Perkins, MSW, is a licensed master social worker. She is employed by the Veterans Health Care System as a housing specialist focused on housing needs of the nation’s homeless veteran population.

April Rand, MSW, PhD, is a part-time faculty member at the University of Arkansas School of Social Work. Her research interests include sex trafficking and prostitution, trauma, and women involved in the criminal justice system.

Allison Sheaffer, MSW, is a graduate of the University of Arkansas School of Social Work. Her current research interests include women involved in the commercial sex trade and at-risk youth.

References

Branstetter

(2015, February 9). The case for internet access in prisons. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/02/09/the-case-for-internet-access-in-prisons/

Bui

H. N.

Morash

(2010). The impact of network relationships, prison experiences, and internal transformation on women’s success after prison release. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 49, 1-22.

Carson

E. A.

(2016). Prisoners in 2015. U.S. Department of Justice Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf

Carter

L. M.

Marcum

C. D.

(2017). Female offenders and reentry: Pathways and barriers to returning to society. New York, NY: Routledge.

Chambliss

W. J.

(2011). Corrections. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Cook

S. H.

Bauermeister

J. A.

Gordon-Messer

Zimmerman

M. A.

(2013). Online network influences on emerging adults’ alcohol and drug use. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1674-1686. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9869-1

Covington

S. S.

(2002, January). Helping women recover: Creating gender-responsive treatment. Paper presented at “From Prison to Home” Conference. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/research/publication/womans-journey-home/view/full_report

Covington

S. S.

Bloom

B. E.

(2008). Gender responsive treatment and services in correctional settings. Women & Therapy, 29(3-4), 9-33.

DeHart

Lynch

Belknap

Dass-Brailsford

Green

(2014). Life history models of female offending: The roles of serious mental illness and trauma in women’s pathways to jail. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 138-151.

10.

DeLeon

G. D.

(1995). Therapeutic communities for addictions: A theoretical framework. Substance Use & Misuse, 30, 1603-1645.

11.

Dobuzinskis

(2011). Facebook to close U.S. prison inmate accounts. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/10/us-facebook-prisons-idUSTRE77905820110810

12.

Duggan

Smith

(2013). Social media update 2013. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/12/30/social-media-update-2013/

13.

The Sentencing Project. (2015). Fact sheet: Incarcerated women and girls. Retrieved from www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Incarcerated-Women-and-Girls.pdf

14.

Greene

Haney

Hurtado

(2000). Cycles of pain: Risk factors in the lives of incarcerated mothers and their children. The Prison Journal, 80, 3-23.

15.

Grover

Kamins

M. A.

Martin

I. A.

Davis

S. W.

Haws

Mirabito

A. M.

. . . Rapp

(2013). From use to abuse: When everyday consumption behaviours morph into addictive consumptive behaviours. SSRN Electronic Journal, 11, 1-8. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2207025

16.

Hamby

(2013). Resilience and . . . 4 benefits to sharing your story. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-web-violence/201309/resilience-and-4-benefits-sharing-your-story

17.

James

D. J.

Glaze

L. E.

(2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

18.

Lynch

DeHart

Belknap

Green

(2012). Women’s pathways to jail: The roles and intersections of serious mental illness and trauma. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance.

19.

McDaniels-Wilson

Belknap

(2008). The extensive sexual violation and sexual abuse histories of incarcerated women. Violence Against Women, 14, 1090-1127.

20.

Messina

Burdon

Prendergast

(2003). Assessing the needs of women in institutional therapeutic communities. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 37, 89-106.

21.

Messina

Grella

Burdon

Prendergast

(2007). Childhood adverse events and current traumatic distress: A comparison of men and women drug-dependent prisoners. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1385-1401.

22.

Moreno

M. A.

Kota

Schoohs

Whitehill

J. M.

(2013). The Facebook influence model: A concept mapping approach. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 504-511.

23.

The National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2010). Comorbidity: Addiction and other mental illnesses. Retrieved from https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/comorbidity-addiction-other-mental-illnesses/how-should-comorbid-conditions-be-treated

24.

O’Brien

Young

(2006). Challenges for formerly incarcerated women: A holistic approach to assessment. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 87, 359-366.

25.

Richie

B. E.

(2001). Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 368-389.

26.

Simpson

D. D.

Joe

G. W.

Knight

Rowan-Szal

G. A.

Gray

J. S.

(2012). Texas Christian University (TCU) short forms for assessing client needs and functioning in addiction treatment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 51(1-2), 34-56. doi:10.1080/10509674.2012.633024

27.

Steadman

H. J.

Osher

F. C.

Robbins

P. C.

Case

Samuels

(2009). Prevalence of serious mental illness among jail inmates. Psychiatric Services, 60, 761-765.

28.

Stoddard

S. A.

Bauermeister

J. A.

Gordon-Messer

Johns

Zimmerman

M. A.

(2012). Permissive norms and young adults’ alcohol and marijuana use: The role of online communities. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 73(6), 968-975.

29.

Trepte

Reinecke

(2013). The reciprocal effects of social network site use and the disposition for self-disclosure: A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1102-1112.

30.

U.S. Department of Commerce. (2014). Population estimates (V2014). Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/00

31.

Van Dijck

Poell

. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2-14.

32.

Wright

E. M.

Van Voorhis

Salisbury

E. J.

Bauman

(2012). Gender-responsive lessons learned and policy implications for women in prison: A review. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 1612-1616.