Abstract
This study examines the impact of listening to prison radio on the well-being of inmates. Its main quantitative findings are that listening to the radio had no significant impact on inmates’ anxiety, anger, emotional distress, or self-esteem. The qualitative results found that listening to the radio has a positive impact on inmates’ well-being, their outlook, the atmosphere of the prison, and peer relationships. We conclude that the practice of prison radio reflects sophisticated prison administration, reducing feelings of hostility and anger on the part of the inmates and promoting trust among inmates and between them and the staff.
Keywords
Introduction
Multiple studies have indicated the extremely stressful nature of prison life, whether due to the behaviors of inmates, most of whom have had a troubled life prior to incarceration, or the prison environment (Block & Ruffolo, 2015; Crewe, 2011; Haggerty & Bucerius, 2020). Many imprisoned persons come from highly disadvantaged backgrounds (poor, undereducated, and chronically unemployed; Heidari et al., 2017), and suffer from poor physical and mental health (Baranyi et al., 2019; Semenza & Grosholz, 2019). In prison, their freedom is deprived (Holman & Zeidenberg, 2006; Jewkes, 2002b) under conditions of overcrowding and a violent community (Bensimon et al., 2015; Crewe, 2011). Their ongoing travails in that environment test their mental resilience (Warr, 2016). Consequently, many inmates suffer from high levels of distress, low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and anger (Liebling, 2007; Nagar, 2022).
Understanding prisoners’ distress and its effect on their maladaptive and criminal behaviors, particularly violent crimes in prison, is of paramount concern for correctional services (Ireland et al., 2006; Mansoor et al., 2015). Consequently, U.S. and European correctional services have proposed various efforts to combat the high levels of stress and anger in prison (Bouw et al., 2019), and heighten inmates’ awareness of the potential consequences of these and other negative emotions (Hughes & Wilson, 2018). Such measures include physical exercise (Battaglia et al., 2015; O’Toole et al., 2018; Woods et al., 2017), recreational activities (Basaran, 2016; Edgemon & Clay-Warner, 2018), and formal and informal educational programs (Flynn et al., 2020; Heard et al., 2013).
One program proven effective in improving inmates’ well-being is prison radio (Bedford, 2016; Jewkes, 2002b). Radio stations in prisons expose all inmates to contents relevant for their everyday life (Scifo, 2015). The assumption is that listening to various radio programs that encourage inmates to abandon criminal patterns of thought and behavior and to adopt normative ones instead will help them rehabilitate and reintegrate in society (Anderson & Bedford, 2017b). Several studies (i.e., Bedford, 2016; Knight & Tighe, 2017) indicate that radio programs in prison significantly contribute to promoting social values and norms and to reducing facility antisocial and criminal behaviors. Often employing terms and expressions from the inmates’ own world and addressing issues highly relevant to their lives, radio programming promotes positive change and helps inmates to desist from crime following their release.
Radio Focus—a station operated by and for inmates—was launched by the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) in 2017 in Ayalon, a maximum-security prison facility. Its objectives are to distribute internal knowledge (i.e., knowledge regarding inmates’ rights, rehabilitation programs in prison facilities, etc.), to enable inmates who work in the radio to express themselves creatively and practice normative social skills such as teamwork and interpersonal communication, and to promote cognitive and behavioral processes among the listeners.
The station broadcasts in a closed circuit to all criminal prisons in Israel. In terms of infrastructure and organization, it is like any civilian radio station: it has two recording studios, computers, and an audiotape library. The station broadcasts 24/7, with contents including news and current affairs, economics, sports, health, and music. All programs are produced and edited by the inmates employed at the station, with the help of external experts—a project director, station manager, and producer—all supervised by the IPS. All programs, without exception, are prerecorded and aired only with the IPS' approval.
Regardless of its rehabilitative potential, prison radio has attracted very little theoretical and empirical attention, possibly due to its novelty (Anderson, 2012; Bedford, 2014, 2016; Doliwa, 2013). The few studies that have examined radio in prisons have focused on inmates’ listening habits and on qualitative analysis of the radio's impact on inmates’ subjective well-being (Bonini & Perrotta, 2007; Jewkes, 2002a, 2002b). To the best of our knowledge, no study has yet examined the effects of prison radio on prisoners’ well-being using quantitative measurements. The primary objective of the current study is to fill this gap by analyzing quantitatively the relationship between listening to Radio Focus and inmates’ emotional distress, anxiety, anger and self-esteem. In addition, the study aims at examining qualitatively the link between listening to Radio Focus and incarcerees’ self-reported well-being.
Literature Review
Prison Radio
The 1990s saw the emergence of a new community radio model: stations managed by and for inmates (and sometimes also their families; Bedford, 2014). These stations were divided into two kinds: prisoners’ radio, and prison radio (Anderson, 2013). Prisoners’ radio is part of a community radio station located outside the prison, which broadcasts programs dedicated for prisoners, their families, and other members of the community. Prison radio, on the other hand, is located within the prison and broadcast exclusively to its inmates. Prison radio stations address issues relevant specifically to the correctional facility in which they operate and designed to meet inmates’ needs (Anderson & Bedford, 2017a). These stations are common mainly in the United Kingdom (Bedford, 2016, 2018). Since this article focuses on prison radio, the remainder of the literature review will address this type.
Despite its popularity in several prison services in the Western world, particularly the United Kingdom, the literature on prison radios is sparse (Bedford, 2016; Doliwa, 2013; Grimes & Stevenson, 2012). The few relevant studies have focused on (1) listening habits; (2) impact on inmates’ well-being (Bedford, 2016; Bonini & Perrotta, 2007; Minc et al., 2007); and (3) the effects of working in prison radio. Since the third research direction is irrelevant to the present study, it will not be reviewed here (for reviews, see: Doliwa, 2013; Knight & Tighe, 2017).
Inmates’ listening habits
Only two studies have examined inmates’ listening habits. Minc et al. (2007) examined the listening habits of 500 Australian prisoners and family members to a program broadcast in prison and in a local public radio station (Jailbreak Health Project). The program provided information about diseases (mainly hepatitis B and C and AIDS/HIV), their prevention and treatment, and alleviated the sense of social and family isolation experienced by many infected prisoners. The findings showed that 23% of the female and 16% of the male participants listened to the program. Although the researchers avoided any conclusions about the effectiveness of the program, they did suggest that the listening rates attested to the popularity of programs providing inmates with information relevant to their daily lives. They emphasized the need for follow-up studies to assess the degree to which the inmates followed the instructions provided in the program, and for how long.
Another study examined the listening habits of inmates to programs broadcast by the U.K. National Prison Radio (Bedford, 2016). The findings showed that out of 80,000 inmates in British prisons, 99% heard about the radio, and 37% listened to it every day, with an average daily listening time of no less than 10.4 h (Bedford, 2016). Relatedly, an Italian study revealed that the rates of listening to programs broadcast by public radio stations were much lower than the inmates’ pre-incarceration listening rates (Bonini & Perrotta, 2007).
Impact on inmates’ well-being
It is assumed that listening to prison radio promotes positive social norms and has a positive effect on inmates’ well-being (Bedford, 2016). Jewkes (2002a, 2002b) interviewed 62 long-term, including life-sentenced prisoners, and examined the relation between access to TV and radio in prison and the prisoners’ incarceration experience, with emphasis on adjustment to prison life. She concluded that the media provided the inmates with contents that enabled them to form new identities, explore their inner selves, and experience autonomy and self-respect, despite living in a total institution.
Similarly, according to Anderson (2008, 2015), both active participation in broadcasts and passive listening were antithetical to prisoners’ negative social labeling, as they encouraged a sense of belonging and a desire to become normative citizens. Based on interviews with inmates, Bedford (2014, 2016) showed that prison radio was also an important source of inspiration for activism and social change, as well as for reducing criminal behavior, since it focused on issues directly relevant to the inmate population; provided information on prison services related to welfare, health, education, therapy and rehabilitation; and developed interpersonal communication skills and a better understanding of ideas such as community, responsibility and empathy. In a study of an Australian prison radio station, inmates reported it gave them voice, particularly through song requests, and helped them prepare for the holidays and experience a festive atmosphere (Fisher, 2009). According to both inmates and prison staff, the programs improved relations among prisoners, particularly from indigenous groups.
Finally, Wilkinson and Davidson (2010) examined the effects of prison radio programs on inmates’ mental condition, and concluded that prison radio was effective in promoting interpersonal communication among the inmates and relieving their alienation. Some participants said that the radio was “window” to the world, helping them maintain a sense of community involvement as they were coping with anomie and social isolation.
Method
Quantitative Design
Participants and procedure
The study applied a multiround cross-sectional design. After obtaining the approval of the Ethics Committee of the Bar-Ilan University Department of Criminology and the Research Unit of the IPS, we applied a multistage random stratified cluster sampling approach. First, we randomly sampled six prisons from the 13 prison facilities for adult criminal prisoners in Israel (excluding detention centers, prison facilities for political offenders or terrorists, one prison facility for juveniles, and two prison facilities for undocumented migrants). The sampling criteria were size, security level and location (three from central, two from northern, and one from southern Israel; two maximum- and three medium-security prisons). Next, we randomly selected 2–4 ordinary wards from each prison.
Data were collected in 2018–2019 in three rounds to determine whether the duration of Radio Focus broadcast in prisons affected certain measures. The rounds were conducted approximately 6, 18, and 30 months after Radio Focus began broadcasting, respectively. In each round, two research assistants arrived at the selected ward where all inmates were invited to complete the survey. Participants signed informed consent forms that provided an explanation regarding the study, and then completed the questionnaire battery. The response rate was 80.5%, for a total of 655 participants (218, 236, and 201 respectively in each round).
Instruments
General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg, 1988) is a widely used and validated screening instrument for common mental disorders and emotional distress. Its 12 items are rated on a Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (much more than usual). In the current study, a score of 1 was assigned to “rather more” and “much more than usual”, and 0 to “not at all” and “no more than usual.” The final score was the sum of all items (range: 0 to 12), with higher scores indicating higher emotional distress. This instrument was previously used and validated for the assessment of mental distress among prisoners (McAloney, 2011; Nagar, 2022). Its reliability in the current study was adequate (Cronbach's α = .71).
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6S; Marteau et al., 1992) measures the current presence and severity of anxiety symptoms, including items that probe subjective feelings of worry, tension, and arousal. Items are rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much), with scores ranging from 6 to 24, such that higher scores indicate higher anxiety. This instrument was previously used and validated among prisoners (Bensimon et al., 2015). Its reliability in the current study was adequate (Cronbach's α = .75).
Novaco Anger Scale-Provocation Inventory Short Form (Moeller et al., 2016) was used to measure state anger. It consists of 25 items referring to anger-eliciting situations (e.g., being overcharged by a repair person) rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all angry) to 4 (very angry). The final score is the sum of all items. In the current study, we excluded the last item for irrelevance (“You use your last coin to make a phone call, but you are disconnected …”). The inventory was validated among clinical, nonclinical and offender populations (Moeller et al., 2016). Its reliability in this study was high (Cronbach's α = .89).
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Schmitt & Allik, 2005) consists of ten items assessing positive and negative self-evaluations. Respondents indicate their level of agreement, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 10 to 40, with higher scores reflecting more positive self-evaluations. Its reliability in the current study was adequate (Cronbach's α = .73).
Questionnaire Measuring Radio Focus Listening Habits included items regarding whether the participants listened to the station; frequency of listening; hours per day; time of day; reasons for listening, and; attitudes towards Radio Focus.
Demographic Questionnaire, including items on gender, age, education, religion, country of birth, family status, and number of previous incarcerations.
Qualitative Design
This qualitative portion of the study was informed by the critical interpretive paradigm (Denzin, 2016). Accordingly, we did not intend to answer a question deriving from a preliminary hypothesis or maintain a certain consistent structure, but remained flexible in line with the findings (Charmaz, 2014)
Participants
The participants were 12 inmates (nine men) who had listened to Radio Focus for at least three months, recruited using deliberate sampling (Setia, 2016). Based on our understanding that knowledge of Radio Focus was consistent, among other things, with length of imprisonment (Bedford, 2016), our inclusion criteria were at least three months of imprisonment and listening to Radio Focus. Seven (58%) of the inmates were Jews and the remainder were Muslims, a ratio representative of the entire prison (Vaisman & Einat, 2021).
Procedure
After obtaining all ethical approvals (see above), one of the researchers contacted the education department heads in the three prison facilities randomly assigned for the study and asked for help recruiting interviewees. The first contact with candidates was made in the prisons’ educational wings where they signed informed consent forms after receiving an explanation about the study.
Over the next six months, the second researcher interviewed 12 participants in the educational wing (approximately 16 h in total). At the beginning of each interview, the interviewer reiterated that confidentiality would be maintained and that participation was voluntary and could be stopped at any point. She also made clear to the interviewees that they were being digitally recorded for the purpose of future transcription and that all recordings and transcripts would be kept locked in a safe place. The interviewees then signed an informed consent form. Although more than 30 inmates had originally volunteered, data collection reached saturation after 12 interviews (Hennink et al., 2016).On the days of the interviews, the researcher was accompanied to the educational wing by a correctional officer. The inmate scheduled for interview was escorted from his or her cell to the educational wing. Nonetheless, no correctional officer was present during any of the interviews.
Data collection
Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Hebrew. Selected quotes were translated into English by the authors. The core questions were: (1)What are your preferred radio programs and why? (2) Did listening to the radio programs have any impact on you, and how? (3) Do you think that the radio programs influenced other inmates in prison? (4) Would you like to work in Radio Focus? (5) Do you think the programs had any effect on the atmosphere in prison?
Data analysis
The interviews were thematically analyzed (Chandra & Shang, 2019). Following Elo et al. (2014), the analysis proceeded in three stages. First, key relevant themes emerging from the transcripts were identified (thematic relevance). Next, participants’ interpretations of the meaning of Radio Focus for their identity as inmates and human beings, and their place in prison and in society, were identified (interpretive relevance). Finally, participants’ motivations for listening to Radio Focus were analyzed in order to identify its significance and popularity (motivational relevance).
Validity and Credibility
Two methods were used to ensure the validity and credibility of the findings (Golafshani, 2003). First, the instruments used to conduct the study and analyze the findings were uniform throughout (dependability; Gasson, 2004). Moreover, we took extreme care to document the activities undertaken to collect and analyze the data (Morrow, 2005). Second, we maintained a uniform interview protocol and provided a complete and accurate presentation of their contents. All transcripts were analyzed separately and autonomously by the two researchers to prevent bias. Findings or interpretations deemed biased by the researchers or about which they had conflicting opinions were subsequently discussed until a consensus was reached (Tracy, 2010).
Results
Quantitative Findings
Descriptive statistics
Table 1 presents the participants’ descriptive statistics according to rounds. About 60% were from medium-, and the rest from maximum-security prisons. Most (87.9%) were men; approximately 44% were Jews, 47% Muslims, and 9% of other religions, providing a representative sample of the Israeli prisoner population. The mean age was 35.3 years (SD = 12.4); mean education was 10.6 years (SD = 3.1). Approximately one-third were immigrants. Half were single, 28% were married, 18.4% were divorced, and the rest were either widowed of separated. The mean number of previous incarcerations was 2.4 (SD = 2.4).
Sample Characteristics by Prison Type, No. of Inmates, and Round a (N = 665).
In categorical variables, the data are group size (relative frequency); in quantitative variables, the data represent M ± SD.
Listening habits
Listening habits remained stable across the three rounds. The rates of listening to Radio Focus were 83%, 80.1%, and 82.6%, respectively. The frequency of listening was about 20% listening once a week, 20% listening two or three times a week, and 60% listening nearly every day. About two-thirds of inmates listen to the radio for an hour or two a day, 20% listened for 3–4 h, and 15% more than four hours. Half of the inmates listened to the radio in the afternoon and evening. The inmates’ reasons for listening to Radio Focus were, in decreasing order of frequency: “relaxing” (47.6%), “accumulating knowledge” (23.2%), “updates on prison events” (18.9%), “expanding existing knowledge” (14.8%), “problem solving” (9.8%), and “decision making” (7.5%).
Attitudes toward radio focus
Attitudes towards Radio Focus remained unchanged across the rounds. In general, the inmates perceived listening to it as comforting, and the contents broadcast as useful, reliable, and inspiring. More than half reported that the station provided information unavailable elsewhere and that they would be happy to listen to it even after their release (see Table 2).
Inmates Attitudes Toward Radio Focus (N = 443) a .
Not all participants answered all questions; the number of respondents ranged between 428 and 443.
Inmates’ emotional state
Table 3 presents the emotional state of inmates listening to Radio Focus in the three rounds and overall in terms of state anxiety, anger, emotional distress, and self-esteem. Since there were no significant differences in inmates’ emotional state across the rounds (i.e., the same prisoners were not followed across the rounds, that each round referred to different prisoners), all statistical analyses examining the relations between listening to the radio and emotional state included the entire sample (with no division into rounds).
Inmates’ Emotional State (N = 465).
A series of multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) was computed, with state anxiety, anger, emotional distress, and self-esteem as dependent variables, each with different independent variables related to listening to Radio Focus. The first analysis used listening to Radio Focus (yes/no) as the independent variable. The analysis approached significance, F(4,443) = 1.98, p = .097, partial η2 = .02. This was followed by a set of one-way ANOVAs, showing significant differences between prisoners who listen and do not listen to Radio Focus only in anger, F(1,446) = 6.57, p = .011, partial η2 = .02:prisoners listening to the radio reported higher levels of anger. The second analysis used the frequency of listening to Radio Focus as the independent variable. It showed no significant differences, F (8,744) = .69, ns. The third analysis used hours per day spent listening to Radio Focus as the independent variable. It showed no significant differences, F (8,732) = 1.52, ns (see Table 4).
Means and SDs for Anxiety, Anger, Emotional Distress and Self-Esteem by Variables Related to Listening to Radio Focus (N = 377–448)a.
Note: aThe higher figure represents the number of respondents to the question whether they listened to the radio; the lower figure represents the number of respondents who listened to the radio and who therefore answered the frequency and duration questions.
Qualitative Findings
“Dreams to be fulfilled”: Positive personal impact
The first theme relates to the positive effects of listening to Radio Focus on the inmates’ emotional state. All participants maintained that listening to the radio programs improved their wellbeing and motivated them to make a positive change in their lives: It motivates you. It constantly reminds you that you made some good changes in your life and that you should continue changing. It teaches you how to accept things in life. Thanks to the radio programs you continually refresh the positive changes you made in life and not take them for granted. (B’, 27 years old)
Before I began listening to Radio Focus, I thought “that's it … all done … I’m imprisoned and there is no future for me”. But when I began listening to the programs and to the inmates broadcasting them, I realized that nothing is over and there's a future for me. It gave me strength and faith. I began believing again that there's a future for me, there are dreams to be fulfilled. (M’, 39)
Here in prison, each inmate listens to the programs that are relevant to his specific interests and can find true hope for change and for reintegrating in general society successfully. […] It strengthens us […]. The minute you understand that there's hope for you and that you can change and be changed, all your way of thinking and behaving changes. And it's all thanks to the radio. (S’, 42)
In addition to motivation for change, nearly all research participants related to the fact that the radio programs help them cope with depression: At first, you are depressed […] and you don’t see your relatives and friends. [Unlike prisons,] jails have no TV sets and there's no music. Radio Focus was like WOW, like a fantastic present … like … I don't know … suddenly I’m dancing. And prison is no place for dancing … It's not a happy place. [But] the radio was stronger than me: I hear music that I love and it makes me happy. (M’, 31)
I had lots of mental dissociations and it helped me cope with myself and my difficulties in prison. The music they played on the radio helped me a lot … music is life. Everything here [in prison] is bad and cynical and the music saved me. It helped me cope with my depression and reduce it. (D’, 46)
The emotional support provided by Radio Focus was also manifested in encouraging inmates to share their difficulties and problems and talk about them with their peers and staff members, and to acquire new coping practices: I’m interested in listening to Radio Focus for many reasons: to share my personal problems, to make other inmates listen to my problems and the ways I dealt with them and [thus] help them, and to learn from other inmates. Thanks to many of the programs I learnt how many inmates solved their problems and thanks to them, I managed to solve many of my personal problems. (T’, 33)
“Someone cares for you”: Impact on prison atmosphere
The second theme relates to the positive mental effects of Radio Focus. Nearly all participants asserted that the radio contributed to a relatively pleasant and relaxed atmosphere, which, in turn, generated greater intimacy among the inmates: Initially, when you hear the word “prison,” you think that no-one [of the staff] really cares for you. Some inmates have no family and no one cares for them. And suddenly, thanks to Focus, you realize that someone cares for you and wants us to pass the time more pleasantly. This obviously had a significant effect on us. People are excited to hear songs, and when you ask to play the song that you like and they play it, it's amazing.[…] the programs on the radio generate a good and relaxed atmosphere. It makes everyone happy. (J’ 57).
We always listen to Radio Focus while cleaning the cell. It creates a nice atmosphere. We are happy and sing the songs we like. There are specific programs we like because they help us relax and be happier. It genuinely makes the wing more relaxed and quieter. It also generates a better social atmosphere … we all feel more united. (S’, 42)
When the cell doors open and we go out to the public areas of the wing, we always listen to Radio Focus. It's fun and happy. They play a song in Hebrew, then in English, then in Hebrew, then in Russian, and you see that all the inmates, Russians, Israelis, Ethiopians and Arabs, all listening to the songs and singing together. (L’, 29)
Some of the respondents stated that the relatively good atmosphere created in prison thanks to Radio Focus affected them personally, and transformed them from egocentric and apathetic individuals into more tolerant and empathetic ones, willing to accept different points of view: Thanks to Focus something changed in my reactions, in terms of my tolerance for other people and other views. Suddenly I realized that people who were easily frustrated or angry are more tolerant, accepting, trying to change themselves. For example, there is one Ethiopian inmate who likes black music. Prior to Radio Focus I didn't give a s*** about him or his music, but now I listen to the music together with him and it's nice. It creates a good atmosphere. (H’, 26)
“Groups that saved my life”: Impact on rehabilitation
Many inmates have severe adjustment problems expressed in externalization or internalization behaviors such as impulsivity and violence toward their peers or themselves, or withdrawal, and detachment (Butler, 2019; Crewe & Laws, 2018). This is often exacerbated due to their unwillingness or inability to share their problems and difficulties with other inmates or prison personnel. According to all interviewees, Radio Focus helped them cope with these issues in two ways. The first was the information it provided on treatment and rehabilitative programs available in prison: Honestly, without Radio Focus I wouldn't have known about different [treatment] groups that saved my life […] thanks to it I enrolled in them, participated and completed them successfully. (I’, 38)
The second way listening to Radio Focus helped them to cope was by listening to other inmates talk about their difficulties and problems. This caused those listening to open up and take part in these programs, and share their difficulties with peers and staff members: One of the radio programs (titled “Anger Control and Attention and Deficit Disorder”) exposed me to other treatment programs aired on the radio. Whereas in the past I didn’t know how to share my problems with others … felt as if something is blocking me … today, thanks to some programs, I feel more at ease talking about my difficulties and sharing them with others (F’, 43).
Many of the interviewees credited Radio Focus with completing this treatment and rehabilitative process by adopting normative conduct in prison: I decided to get up and get to work … change my daily routine. Although I was very tired, I listened to different programs all day long and the next morning, went to the wing commander and told him, “Enroll me in one of the rehabilitative programs, I want to start functioning.” (T’, 33)
Discussion
The present study qualitatively and quantitively examined the impact of listening to Radio Focus—a prison radio station in Israel—on inmates’ well-being and emotional state. This is the first study to date to assess the effects and perceptions of prison radio using a representative sample and validated quantitative measures. Hitherto, all studies have relied solely on qualitative methods.
Prior to analyzing our findings, we determined that the radio was highly popular among inmates: approximately 60% listened to the radio programs nearly every day. This popularity, reported in both the quantitative and qualitative parts of our study, reflects the positive attitudes of the inmate population towards the radio. Given that positive attitudes toward normative contexts and programs have been linked with the rehabilitation of criminal populations (Drieschner & Verschuur, 2010), the positive viewpoints of the inmates toward Radio Focus indicate its rehabilitative potential.
The quantitative portion revealed no significant difference in inmates’ anxiety, anger, emotional distress and self-esteem across the three research rounds, meaning that there were no effects of the duration Radio Focus was operating in prisons on the prisoners’ well-being. Additionally, no significant differences in state anxiety, emotional distress, and self-esteem were found between the inmates who listened to the radio and their counterparts who did not. However, anger was higher among inmates listening to the radio. Perhaps, that was due to information provided on Radio Focus; prisoners felt more aware of their situation and their specific needs, thus making them angrier. At the same time, they reported that the radio provided new information regarding treatment and services in and out of prison. Future research should attempt to replicate these counterintuitive findings and suggest possible explanations (e.g., frustration due to services not provided, repeated requests for services that are not addressed, and awareness of rights not being met).
The qualitative portion provided the major finding of this study: the positive impact of Radio Focus on the inmates’ well-being and outlook. Like other investigations indicating the positive effect of listening to prison radio (i.e., Knight & Tighe, 2017), the current study revealed that listening to the radio eased the pains of imprisonment.
Bedford (2016) revealed that radio programs dealing with the health, education, treatment and life skills of inmates led listeners to social activism. Such activism, in turn, helped inmates solve some of their personal problems and minimize their criminal conduct in prison. In the current study as well, some of the programs appeared to enable listeners to reflect on their lives and as a result, reshape their identity and experience self-respect and autonomy. Moreover, many of the participants asserted that some of the programs informed them about various courses and treatments available in prison, help them cope with loneliness and boredom, and contributed to their self-development, and thus motivated them to change their worldview and lifestyle. Thanks to the radio, inmates began thinking positively about their future and expressed a desire to reintegrate into normative society after their release from prison.
Another key qualitative finding relates to the radio's positive impact on the prison atmosphere and the relationships between inmates and their peers and between them and staff. Multiple studies have presented prisons as cruel and harmful (i.e., Liebling & Ludlow, 2016). The rigid security-punitive reality of prison life, and the objective and subjective hardships and deprivations that the incarcerated persons suffer upon entering prison, impede their functioning within it (e.g., Hilinski-Rosick & Freiburger, 2021; Kigerl & Hamilton, 2016; Paterline & Orr, 2016). In contrast to this research as well as other studies revealing a suspicious and distrustful relationship between inmates and their peers and with inmates and prison staff (Crewe, 2011), the current study suggests that prison radio significantly improves all these relationships, and fosters a tolerant and dignifying dialogue. In other words, Radio Focus challenges the traditional balance of power in prison and reduces the tension, distrust, and uneasiness characterizing these relations.
In a similar vein, Rennie (2016) reported that community radio significantly improved communication and relationships between prison community members and helped them develop positive discourse related to their everyday life. This reflects postmodern trends in the fields of penology and prison management (Tait, 2011, which highlight the benefits of prison administration based on intelligent use of soft power (Crewe, 2011), and thus reducing negative and stereotypical perceptions and feelings of hostility, anger, and frustration on the part of inmates, and promoting trust and respect between them and their peers and with staff.
In line with this reasoning, the third qualitative finding relates to the link between listening to Radio Focus and inmates’ treatment and rehabilitation. Many participants maintained that listening to many of the programs, particularly those dealing with prisoners’ problems, led them to open up to their peers and prison staff, share their problems, and eventually, participate in various treatment and rehabilitation programs in prison. This finding is consistent with Ronel and Elisha's (2011) suggestion that offenders who have positive and satisfying experiences are often motivated to change their ways of thinking and behaving and consequently desist.
As a final note, the large gap between the qualitative and quantitative findings concerning inmates’ well-being cannot be ignored. Whereas all inmates interviewed reported improvement in their wellbeing, this was not indicated in the questionnaire responses. Other than the fact that the quantitative examination conducted here is a first of its kind, we believe that, pending future investigations, this gap can be explained in three ways. First, although inmates feel, think, and believe that the prison radio has improved their wellbeing and emotional state, it effectively did not. The second explanation has to do with selection bias: the inmates who agreed to be interviewed were those who were positively affected by the radio, and did not necessarily represent the population of inmates exposed to Radio Focus. Finally, the prison radio may have had a temporary positive effect on inmates, whereas the harsh reality of prison canceled it out in the long run.
Limitations and Implications for Research and Practice
There are four limitations to this study. Regarding the quantitative portion, the first limitation concerns the cross-sectional nature of data collection, which did not allow for longitudinal examination of the radio's effects. Taking into consideration the correlative nature of these findings, they should be interpreted with caution. Moreover, since the study did not follow the same inmates in time, and participants were not evaluated prior to the beginning of radio broadcasting, nor longitudinally during the time since, we are unable to determine the ongoing impact of the radio. Thus, for example, it is possible that inmates with higher levels of state anxiety and emotional distress and lower levels of self-esteem found the relaxing content of some of the programs more attractive than did their counterparts. Future studies should examine the impact of the radio longitudinally among the same inmates, while also controlling for incidents occurring during the time of study (such as violent outbreaks, the introduction of a new therapy program, or the replacement of prisoners in the ward).
The second limitation is the fact that self-report questionnaires are subjected to numerous biases. Future studies should use behavioral measurements, such as prison diaries and notes by correctional personnel documenting such data as the number of violent incidents in each ward.
Regarding the study's qualitative portion, the first limitation relates to data validity. Data collection was performed by semi-structured interviews. Several studies have indicated that this method can result in under- or over-reporting and thus brings the credibility of the testimonies into question. Hence, using other sophisticated data collection techniques, such as ethnographic observation and written self-reports may facilitate detailed or additional data that have not been obtained in this study.
Another limitation of the qualitative design concerns the sample size: only 12 inmates took part in the study. Although this could mean that the generalizability of the findings is limited and that future studies should include larger sample to provide a more universal picture (Krohn et al., 2013), we believe, as mentioned previously, that this size is sufficient, given that data saturation was achieved (Fusch & Ness, 2015).
Despite these limitations, the results of this exploratory study add to the existing knowledge base about the impact of prison radio on the well-being of inmates listening to it. Thus it may provide criminologists and prison authorities with a better understanding of the role of prisoner radio programs and their potential for promoting inmates and helping in their rehabilitation process, both in prison and after their release.
In view of the positive impact of prison radio—at least as reported by the interviewees in the qualitative part of this study—we recommend that prison administrators consider establishing prison radio stations and view them as a significant inmate rehabilitation programming. Exposing incarcerated persons to prison radio stations may help them embrace a more normative worldview and lifestyle within prison and reintegrate into society after their release.
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.