Prior research looking at procedural justice has largely focused on legal authorities, such as the police. There is a gap in the research regarding the influence of procedurally-just treatment of other criminal justice professionals, including 911 operators. These individuals are often the first contact citizens have when initiating police services, and it is likely that 911 operators set the stage for how police encounters with the public unfold. Using a factorial vignette design, this study tests the causal links between procedural injustice and several outcome measures, including cooperation, satisfaction, callback likelihood, and willingness to testify in court. Data from a university-based sample (n=488) were used to estimate a series of ordinal regression models. The results show that participants who received the injustice stimuli were generally less likely to report they would call 911 in the future, cooperate with the 911 operator if asked additional questions, cooperate with the police once they arrived on the scene, and had lower levels of satisfaction with the how the operator handled the call. These results were significant across two different scenarios (i.e., breaking and entering and traffic accident). Seriousness of the encounter also varied across these outcomes, but the magnitude of the effect was more modest. The results demonstrate the effect non-sworn personnel, such as 911 operators, can have on the outcome of police-citizen encounters.

Corrections has a rich history centered around rehabilitation and its obtainability, and has seen the pendulum swing back and forth between rehabilitative and punitive policies. Currently, there is an emphasis on evidence-based practices which provides a unique opportunity to assess gaps in the rehabilitation literature as a means to ensure that rehabilitative-oriented policies are part of the forefront of corrections. One notable gap in the corrections and rehabilitation literature is that research has not assessed what influences meaningful participation in rehabilitative programming during incarceration. Past research has acknowledged that there is an inmate code, characterized heavily by hypermasculinity, that negatively influences behavior during incarceration, yet research has not examined whether this code influences engagement in rehabilitative programming. The current study seeks to address this gap by examining the inmate code, specifically hypermasculinity, as a barrier to rehabilitation during incarceration through in-depth interviews with five incarcerated individuals from a large Southwestern correctional facility. Findings, limitations, and future research suggestions are discussed.

While incarceration can be detrimental for inmates, the children of prisoners can suffer from behavioral issues, poor school performance, and a higher risk of crime and delinquency across the life-course. Separation from one's family is part of what makes

incarceration a punishment, but what can be done to ensure that this punishment has the least harmful effect on children? Prison visitation presents an intriguing opportunity to lessen the potential harms of parental incarceration. Using data from the Arizona Prison Visitation Project (APVP), the current study focuses on inmates who were parents to minor children and seeks to determine: 1) do different types and different amounts of prison contact (in-person, phone, and mail) correlate with changes in the quality of parent-child relationships and 2) does a change in parent-child relationship quality correlate with a change in child behavior. The results from the analysis suggest that visitation and mail contact are associated with positive increases in parent-child relationship quality.

Also, positive changes in parent-child relationship quality were associated with a decrease in the odds of children having behavioral problems during incarceration. This study provides some support for the ability that prison contact can have to increase relationship quality, which in turn, may decrease the presence of behavioral issues in the children of incarcerated parents. Future directions in policy should consider measures to subsidize or refund contact costs, encourage contact between parents and their children, and involve children in in-prison programming designed to improve contact and relationships between parents and their children.