Children, Adolescents, Obesity, and the Media | Pediatrics | American Academy of Pediatrics (aap.org)
(167) We’re Not Buying It: Stop junk food marketing to kids – YouTube
Please read my expectations posted at the beginning of each discussion posting. I am looking for evidence of relevant weekly course content learning and not just your opinion. You need to support your ideas with evidence of relevant weekly course content learning per the prereading resources stated at the beginning of each discussion posting. The purpose of our discussion postings is to indicate relevant weekly course content learning. I look forward to seeing evidence of learning in your postings!
Prior to beginning work on this discussion, read the article
Policy StatementChildren, Adolescents, Obesity, and the Media (Links to an external site.)(Links to an external site.)
and watch the video
Were Not Buying It: Stop Junk Food Marketing to Kids (Links to an external site.)(Links to an external site.)
Proper health and nutrition is critical to the growth and development of young children, yet many American children eat in ways that do not meet proper nutrition guidelines. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the media, and its promotion of junk food, is a major culprit in the obesity epidemic.
In your discussion post, address the following:
Describe an example of how the media participates in promoting unhealthy food choices.
(Write one paragraph)
Explain how these messages influence the nutrition choices that families make for their children.
(Write one paragraph)
What are two reasons a family would choose fast food for their children?
(Write one paragraph)
Summarize potential long-term consequences of these media messages on childrens health.
(Write one paragraph)
Make sure you cite some information from the pre-reading resources given at the beginning of the directions to support your ideas. The purpose of our discussion postings is to indicate relevant weekly course content learning in your work.
Here are the APA listings for the resources you should list in your Reference section and cite in the text of your posting:
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2011). Policy statementchildren, adolescents, obesity, and the
128(1), 201208. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-1066
Prevention Institute. (2011, October 3).
Were not buying it: Stop junk food marketing to kids[Video file].
Retrieved from https://youtu.be/ab9zbqHJ_p4
When you cite these resources above in the text of your work, you cite them as
American Academy of Pediatrics (2011) and Prevention Institute (2011)
Discussion Chapter 13:How have U.S. prisons changed since the big-house era? What do these changes mean for management?
Discussion Chapter 14:Are some rehabilitative programs more effective or valuable than others? Why or why not?
THE DEFENDANT SAT QUIETLY AND LISTENED TO THE PROSE- CUTOR ADDRESS THE COURT. Michael Bowden was waiting to learn his sentence. Law enforcement officials accused Bowden of smuggling various forms of contraband, such as tobacco and methamphetamine, in return for cash into the Monroe Correctional Complex in Washington State. Bowden, who pled guilty to extortion, was not an organized crime figure, nor was he a powerful prison gang leader.1 At the time of his arrest, Bowden was a correctional officer at the facility. It is no secret that much of the contraband found in prisons comes in with staff. Researchers have talked about the corruption of prison officer authority for more than 50 years. For example, Gresham Sykes observed that prison officers sometimes tolerated minor rule violations in exchange for cooperation.2 And, more recently, investigations have focused on identifying and describing different types of relationships between incarcerated individuals and officers that violate departmental policies. Such actions not only jeopardize prison order, constitute an abuse of legal authority, and violate public trust, but they can also result in criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits. The Bowden case involved a lot more than an officer looking the other way while an incarcerated person engaged in low-level misconduct. As U.S. District Court Judge Richard Jones put it, Bowden was in a position of trust and power and it was abused. Judge Jones went on to say that Bowden compromised the safety of everyone in the facility. Similarly, Michael Obenland, superintendent of the Monroe Correctional Complex, commented that the presence of methamphetamine inside the prison endangers inmates and staff to additional risks as trades are made and debts are accrued, which often leads to increased violence. Bowden was ultimately sentenced to 18 months in federal prison.3 The prison differs from almost every other institution or organization in modern society. It has unique physical features, and it is the only place where a group of employees manage a group of captives. Imprisoned people must live according to the rules of their keepers and with restricted movements. When reading this chapter, keep in mind that prison managers 1. Cannot select their clients 2. Have little or no control over the release of their clients 3. Must deal with clients who are there against their will 4. Must rely on clients to do most of the work in the daily operation of the institution work they are forced to do and for which they are not paid 5. Must depend on the maintenance of satisfactory relationships between clients and staff Given these unique characteristics, how should prisons be run? Further, wardens and other key personnel are asked to perform a difficult job, one that requires skilled and dedicated managers. What rules should guide them? Remember that a wide range of institutions fall under the heading of prison. Some are treatment centers serving a relatively small number of clients; others are sprawling agricultural complexes; still others are ranches or forest camps. Although new facilities have opened in recent years, many prisons remain as large, fortress-like institutions with comparable management structures and incarcerated populations. In this chapter we look at how institutional resources are organized to achieve certain goals. At a minimum, incarcerated individuals must be clothed, fed, kept healthy, provided with recreation, protected from one another, and maintained in custody. In addition, administrators may face the tasks of offering vocational and educational programs and using the prison population as a source of labor in agriculture or industry. To accomplish all this in a community of free individuals would be taxing. To do so when the population consists of some of the most antisocial people in the society is surely a Herculean undertaking, one that depends on organization. Formal Organization The University of Texas, the General Motors Corporation, and the California State Prison at Folsom are very different organizations, each created to achieve certain goals. Differing organizational structures let managers coordinate the various parts of the university, auto manufacturer, and prison in the interests of scholarship, production, and corrections. A formal organization is deliberately established for particular ends. If accomplishing an objective requires collective effort, people set up an organization to help coordinate activities and to provide incentives for others to join. Thus, in a university, a business, and a correctional institution the goals, rules, and roles that define the relations among the organizations members (the organizational chart) have been formally established. Amitai Etzioni, an organization theorist, uses the concept of compliance as the basis for comparing types of organizations. Compliance is obedience to an order or directive given by another person. In compliance relationships, an order is backed up by ones ability to induce or influence another person to carry out ones directives.4 People do what others ask because those others have the meansremunerative, normative, or coerciveto get the subjects to comply. Remunerative power is based on material resources, such as wages, fringe benefits, or goods, which people exchange for compliance. Normative power rests on symbolic rewards that leaders manipulate through ritual, allocation of honors, and social esteem. Coercive power depends on applying or threatening physical force to inflict pain, restrict movement, or control other aspects of a persons life. Etzioni argues that all formal organizations employ all three types of power but that the degree to which they rely on any one of them varies with the desired goal. Thus, although the University of Texas probably relies mainly on normative power in its relationships with students and the public, it relies on remunerative power in relationships with faculty and staff. Although General Motors is organized primarily for manufacturing, it may appeal to team spirit or safety employee of the month campaigns to meet its goals. And although while managing staff, the warden at Folsom may rely on remunerative and normative powers to make this facility the best correctional facility in the United States, in working with prison residents he relies primarily on coercive power. The presence in high-custody institutions of highly alienated lower participants (the incarcerated), Etzioni says, makes the application or threat of force necessary to ensure compliance.5 Coercive power undergirds all prison relationships, but correctional institutions vary in their use of physical force and in the degree to which the incarcerated individuals are alienated. Correctional institutions can be placed on a continuum of custody or treatment goals. At one extreme is the highly authoritarian prison, where the movement of the prison population is greatly restricted, relationships between the supervisors and those who are supervised are formally structured, and the prime emphasis is on custody. In such an institution, treatment goals take a back seat. At the other extreme is the institution that emphasizes the therapeutic aspect of the physical and social environment. Here the staff members help incarcerated individuals overcome problems. Between these ideal types lies the great majority of correctional institutions. However, this custodytreatment continuum may neglect other aspects of imprisonment. After all, we expect a lot of prisons, including rehabilitating the deviant, punishing the wretched, deterring the motivated, and restraining the habitual. Broadly speaking, the purpose of imprisonment is to fairly and justly punish convicted individuals through periods of confinement that are commensurate with the seriousness of the offense. Thus, the mission with respect to incarcerated individuals has five features: 1. Keep them in: The facility must be secure, such that escapes do not happen and contraband cannot be smuggled in. 2. Keep them safe: Everybody inside the prison needs to be kept safe, not only from one another but from various environmental hazards as well. 3. Keep them in line: Prisons run on rules, and the ability of prison administrators to enforce compliance is central to the quality of confinement. 4. Keep them healthy: Individuals serving time in prison are entitled to have care for their medical needs. 5. Keep them busy: Constructive activities, such as work, recreation, education, and treatment programs, are antidotes to idleness.6 Prison work entails accomplishing this mission in a fair and efficient manner, without causing undue suffering. The state may run correctional institutions with other goals as well, but these are the main ones. The Organizational Structure For any organization to be effective, its leaders and staff must know the rules and procedures, the lines of authority, and the channels of communication. Organizations vary in their organizational hierarchy, in their allocation of discretion, in the effort expended on administrative problems, and in the nature of the top leadership. Concepts of Organization The formal administrative structure of a prison is a hierarchy of staff positions, each with its own duties and responsibilities, each linked to the others in a logical chain of command. As Figure 13.1 shows, the warden is ultimately responsible for the operation of the institution. Deputy wardens oversee the functional divisions of the prison: management, custody, programs, and industry and agriculture. Under each deputy are middle managers and line staff who operate the departments. Functions are subdivided according to prison size and population. Three principles are commonly used to organize the functioning of hierarchically structured organizations: unity of command, chain of command, and span of control. Unity of command is the idea that it is most efficient for a subordinate to report to only one superior. If a worker must respond to orders from two or more superiors, chaos ensues. Unity of command is tied to the second concept, chain of command. Because the person at the top of the organization cannot oversee everything, he or she must rely on lower-ranking staff to pass directives down. For example, the warden asks the deputy warden to have custody staff conduct a shakedown; the deputy warden passes the directive to the captain of the guard, who then has the lieutenant in charge of a particular shift carry out the search. The term span of control refers to the extent of supervision by one person. If, for example, a correctional institution offers many educational and treatment programs, the deputy warden for programs may not be able to oversee them all effectively. This deputy wardens span of control is stretched so far that a reorganization and further division of responsibilities may be required. Two other concepts clarify the organization of correctional institutions: line and staff. Line personnel are directly concerned with furthering the institutions goals. They have direct contact with the prison residents; such personnel include the custody force, industry and agricultural supervisors, counselors, and medical technicians. Staff personnel support line personnel. They usually work under the deputy warden for management, handling accounting, training, purchasing, and so on. Custodial employees make up the majority of an institutions personnel. They are normally organized along military lines, from deputy warden to captain to correctional officer. The professional staffsuch as clinicians, teachers, and industry supervisorsare separate from the custodial staff and have little in common with them. All employees answer to the warden, but the treatment personnel and the civilian supervisors of the workshops have their own titles and salary scales. Their responsibilities do not extend to providing special services to the custodial employees. The top medical and educational personnel may formally report to the warden but in fact look to the central office of the department of corrections for leadership. The multiple goals and separate employee lines of command often cause ambiguity and conflict in the administration of prisons. For example, the goals imposed on prisons are often contradictory or unclear. Conflicts between different groups of personnel (custodial versus treatment staff) and between staff and those who are incarcerated present significant challenges to prison administrators. The Warden The warden is the chief executive of the institution. The attitude that he or she brings to the job affects the organization. Not long ago the prison warden was an autocrat who ran the institution without direction from departments of corrections or the intrusion of courts, labor unions, or prisoner support groups.7 Things are quite different today. Contemporary prison wardens need a broad set of skills to manage large groups of employees and to operate facilities in a way that keeps everyone safe. The primary duties and tasks of prison wardens are summarized in The prison warden is the institutions main contact with the outside world. Responsible for operating the prison, he or she normally reports to the deputy commissioner for institutions in the central office of the department of corrections. When the warden directs attention and energy outward (to the central office, parole board, or legislature), he or she delegates the daily operation of the prison to a deputy, usually the person in charge of custody. In recent years, wardens in most states have lost much of their autonomy to managers in the central office who handle such matters as budgets, research and program development, public information, and legislative relations. However, the wardens job security still rests on the ability to run the institution effectively and efficiently. At the first sign of trouble, the warden may be forced to look for a new job, and in some states the top management of corrections seems to be in constant flux. In short, todays prison warden must function effectively despite decreased autonomy and increased accountability. Management Bureaucracies tend to increase the personnel and resources used to maintain and manage the organization. This tendency can especially prevail in public bureaucracies, which strongly emphasize financial accountability and reporting to higher government agencies. Correctional institutions are no exception. Bureaucratic functions often fall to a deputy warden for management, who is responsible for housekeeping tasks: buying supplies, keeping up the buildings and grounds, providing food, maintaining financial records, and the like. However, some states centralize many of these tasks in the office of the commissioner to promote accountability and coordination among constituent institutions. For example, buying supplies from one warehouse that serves all state agencies has decreased the discretion of prison management to contract locally for provisions. Most personnel assigned to manage services for correctional institutions have little contact with the incarcerated; in some facilities they work in buildings separate from the main plant. Only personnel who provide services directly, such as the head of food services, have direct contact with the residents. Custodial Personnel Later in this chapter we examine in detail the role of the correctional officer. Here, simply note that in most institutions the custodial force has graded ranks (captain, lieutenant, officer) with pay differentials and job titles following the chain of command, as in the military. However, unlike the factory and the military, which have separate groups of supervisors and workers or officers and enlisted personnel, the prison requires its lowest-status employee, the correctional officer, to be both a supervisor (of incarcerated individuals) and a worker (for the warden). This causes role conflict and makes officers vulnerable to corruption by members of the prison population. Officers know the warden is judging their performance by the way they manage their clients, and they can seldom manage without at least some cooperation from these clients. Officers ease up on some rules so residents will more willingly comply with other rules and requests. Careers in Corrections offers a view of work as a state correctional officer. Program Personnel The contemporary correctional institution is concerned not only with punishing but also with encouraging prisoners participation in educational, vocational, and treatment programs. Such programs have been a part of corrections since the late 1800s, but the enthusiasm for rehabilitation that swept corrections after World War II created a wider variety of programs, as discussed in Chapter 14. Here we need only mention that rehabilitative and educational personnel find it difficult to achieve their goals in institutions whose primary mission is custody. Industry and Agriculture Personnel Since the invention of the penitentiary, the prison population has provided labor for industry and agriculture. As we show in Chapter 14, the importance of these functions has varied over time and among regions. For instance, in some southern prisons, most residents spend their time tending crops. In the Northeast, prison farms have disappeared because they are uneconomical and ill matched to the urban backgrounds of most prison occupants. Like other programs, industrial and agricultural production is usually administered outside of the strict custodial hierarchy. But unlike educational or treatment programs, work in a factory or farm requires supervisors. For example, administrators must often mediate disputes over the need for officers in guard towers or housing units and the need for officers in fields or factories. The Impact of the Structure The organizational structure of correctional institutions has changed over time. The traditional custodial prison was run as an autocracy, with the warden dominating the guard force and often disciplining employees as strictly as those sentenced to prison. When rehabilitation became a goal and treatment and educational programs were incorporated, a separate structure for programs, often headed by a deputy warden, was added. Its employees were professionals in the social and behavioral sciences, who frequently clashed with autocratic wardens who emphasized custody As some institutions began to focus on rehabilitation, correctional planners and scholars frequently contrasted the traditional prison organization with a collaborative model. For example, a 1967 U.S. presidential commission report referred optimistically to the future correctional institution in which a dedicated and professionally trained staff would work with other administrators and with prison residents to identify problems and to strive for rehabilitation.8 Such an institution would require structural changes to deemphasize the traditionally rigid control function, enlarge the decision-making role of treatment personnel, and allow input from the prison occupants about the operation of the facility. However, by the 1980s it was hard to find either prisons being run this way or correctional leaders advocating that they be so run. Some observers say that no more than a few institutions really followed the collaborative organizational style. Correctional institutions are more humanely administered today than they were in the past. This change is in part a response to the presence of rehabilitative personnel and programs, the increased training and professionalism of correctional personnel, the intrusion of the courts, and the growth of citizen observer groups that monitor operations. Society will no longer tolerate the harsh conditions once prevalent in prisons. A formal organizational chart does not convey the whole story of a prisons organization; no chart can show how the people who occupy the positions actually perform. As theorists explain, an informal organization, with its own rules and procedures, chain of command, and channels of communication, exists alongside the formal structure. Every organization has individuals who ignore directives, bypass the chain of command in communicating to the top, and negotiate with others who perform parallel or associated functions (see For Critical Thinking). Nature of the Work State correctional officers work in the great array of reformatories, prisons, prison camps, and penitentiaries that make up American corrections. Regardless of the setting, they maintain order within the institution and enforce rules and regulations. To keep the facility secure, officers must often search incarcerated individuals and their living quarters for contraband, settle disputes, enforce discipline, and communicate prisoner requests to higher levels. Officers may be assigned to housing units, perimeter patrols, or work assignments. Correctional officers usually work an eight-hour day, five days per week, on rotating shifts. Required Qualifications Correctional officers must be at least 18 to 21 years of age, be a U.S. citizen with no felony convictions, and have at least a high school education and some work experience. Most states require qualifying examinations, including personality screenings. Candidates must be in good health and meet fitness, eyesight, and hearing standards. The American Correctional Association sets training guidelines for recruits. Most states have training academies with instruction on legal restrictions, custody procedures, interpersonal relationships, use of firearms, and self-defense. After graduation from the academy, trainees typically receive several weeks or months of training in the job setting under the supervision of an experienced officer. Earnings and Job Outlook As states have had to deal with the explosion of the prison population, the number of correctional officers has markedly increased during the past three decades. This rapid expansion has slowed in recent years, and growth over the next decade is projected to be about 4 percent. The median annual salary for state correctional officers is $42,670. More Information See the American Correctional Association website How, then, do prisons function? How do residents and staff try to meet their own goals? Although the U.S. prison may not conform to the ideal goals of corrections and the formal organization may little resemble the ongoing reality of the informal relations, order is kept, and a routine is followed. Governing Prisons Traditionally, prison sociologists have looked at prisons as social systems rather than institutions to be governed. Until fairly recently, our understanding of life inside prison was based on inmate balance theory. This perspective was developed in the pioneering works of Donald Clemmer and Gresham Sykes. This theory provides insights on the maintenance of order and the prevention of collective violence.9 According to this view, for the prison system to operate effectively, officials must tolerate minor infractions, relax security measures, and allow informal leaders to keep order. When officials go too far in asserting their authority by cracking down on privileges, the delicate balance of shared authority is upset, which in turn unleashes collective disorder. Criminologists have written about the effects of prison conditions on those who are incarceratedracial and ethnic cleavages, language and roles, and the informal distribution of authority in prisons. However, as John DiIulio notes, sociological research on prison society does little to help correctional officials manage their facilities. In fact, most of this research implies that administrators can do little to govern becausedespite formal rules and regulationsinstitutions are run mainly through the informal social networks of the keepers and the kept (see Table 13.2 for one set of formal rules of conduct). DiIulio finds shocking the extent to which correctional officials seem to have accepted sociological explanations for institutional conditions rather than correcting faulty management practices.10 inmate balance theory A governance theory which posits that for a prison system to operate effectively, officials must tolerate minor infractions, relax security measures, and allow informal leaders to keep order. TABLE 13.2 General Rules, Texas Department of Criminal Justice 1. The possession or use of any tobacco products, paraphernalia, or related products is prohibited. 2. No loud or boisterous talking, no vulgar or abusive language shall be allowed. 3. When talking to an employee or official, offenders will stand with arms by their side and call them Mr., Ms., or Officer (Last Name) or use their title. Offenders can identify the officer by the last name on his nameplate that is worn as part of the uniform. Offenders will show respect when talking with employees, officials, visitors and other offenders. Offenders shall answer yes, sir; no, sir; yes, maam; or no, maam. 4. No fighting, scuffling, horseplay, or similar activities will be allowed. 5. Offenders shall not litter. Trash and garbage will be placed in trash cans. 6. Offenders shall not alter, disfigure, damage or destroy any state property. 7. Offenders shall not have playing cards, dice or any other item that can be used for gambling. 8. Offenders shall not tamper with hand restraints, or any security equipment. 9. Offenders shall not take posted information from bulletin boards. 10. Offenders and their living areas may be searched at any time by staff. 11. Offenders are not allowed in unauthorized areas. 12. Offenders are not allowed in their work areas except during their work hours, unless approved due to special circumstances. 13. Offenders shall not traffic and trade postage supplies, or trade any offenders personal property for other commissary items. 14. Offenders are expected to be dressed and ready when called for work, school, or other turnouts. There shall be no tardiness allowed by offenders. 15. Offenders shall not wear sunglasses indoors unless medically prescribed. DiIulio and others have developed an alternative explanation of prison disorder, which has been dubbed administrative control theory. 11 This perspective posits that disorder results from unstable, divided, or otherwise weak management.12 Thus, when officials lose control over their institutions, collective disorder and other unruly behaviors within the prison population become more likely. This administrative breakdown has several effects: 1. Incarcerated individuals come to believe their conditions of confinement are not only bad but unjust as well. 2. Officials become indifferent to routine security measures and the day-to-day tasks of prison management. 3. Weak management permits gangs and other illicit groups to flourish. These groups, in turn, may help mobilize disturbances.13 What distinguishes a well-run prison from a substandard prison? DiIulio argues that the crucial variable is not the ethnic or racial distribution of the population, the criminal records of those in prison, the size of the institution, the degree of crowding, or the level of funding. What is important is governance: sound and firm prison management. What quality of life should be maintained in a prison? DiIulio states that a good prison provides as much order, amenity, and service as possible given the human and financial resources.14 Order is defined as the absence of individual or group misconduct threatening the safety of othersfor example, assaults, rapes, and other forms of violence or insult. A basic assumption should be that because the state sends people to prison, it is responsible for ensuring their safety there. Amenity is anything that enhances the inmates creature comforts, such as good food, clean bedding, and recreational opportunities. This does not mean that prisons are to function as luxury hotels, but contemporary standards stipulate that correctional facilities should not be deleterious to inmates mental and physical health. Finally, service includes programs designed to improve the life prospects of the incarcerated: vocational training, remedial education, and work opportunities. Here, too, we expect prison residents to be engaged in activities during incarceration that will make them better people and enhance their ability to lead crime-free lives upon release. If we accept the premise that well-run prisons are important for residents, staff, and society, what are some of the problems that correctional administrators must address? The correctional literature points to four factors that make governing prisons different from administering other public institutions: (1) the defects of total power, (2) the limited rewards and punishments, (3) the co-optation of correctional officers, and (4) the strength of inmate leadership. After we review each of these factors, we will consider the administrative systems and leadership styles that can help make prisons safe and humane and serve inmates needs. The Defects of Total Power In his classic study of the New Jersey State Prison, Sykes emphasized that although in formal terms correctional officials have the power to induce compliance from those they supervise, in fact that power is limited and in many ways dependent on cooperation.15 It is from this perspective that the inmate balance theory of management evolved. administrative control theory A governance theory which posits that prison disorder results from unstable, divided, or otherwise weak management. Correctional officers are heavily outnumbered in prisons, so they have to use their interpersonal skills to maintain authority and keep good order. Much of the public believes that prisons are run in an authoritarian manner: Correctional officers give orders, and their clients follow them. Strictly enforced rules specify what the captives may and may not do. Staff members have the right to grant rewards and to inflict punishment. In theory, any imprisoned person who does not follow the rules can be placed in solitary confinement. Because the officers have a monopoly on the legal means of enforcing rules and can be backed up by the state police and the National Guard if necessary, many people believe that no question should arise as to how the prison is run. Certainly, we can imagine a prison society made up of hostile and uncooperative individuals ruled by force. Incarcerated individuals can be legally isolated from one another, physically coerced until they cooperate, and put under continuous surveillance. Although all these things are possible, the public would probably not tolerate such practices for long because people expect correctional institutions to be run humanely. Also, unlike members of other authoritarian organizations such as the military, incarcerated individuals do not recognize the legitimacy of their keepers and therefore are not always moved to cooperate. No sense of duty propels people living in prison to compliance. This is an important distinction because duty is the backbone of most social organizations. With it, rules are followedand need not be explained first. The notion that correctional officers have total power over prison residents has many other flaws. As Sykes points out, The ability of the officials to physically coerce their captives into the paths of compliance is something of an illusion as far as the day-to-day activities of the prison are concerned and may be of doubtful value in moments of crisis.16 Forcing people to follow commands is an inefficient way of making them carry out complex tasks; efficiency is further diminished by the ratio of residents to custody staff (10.3 to 1 in federal prisons and 4.9 to 1 in state facilities) and by the potential danger.17 (See Myths in Corrections.) Of course, physical coercion is used to control incarcerated people. Such tactics may violate criminal statutes and administrative procedures, but they have long occurred in prisons throughout the United Statesand cannot be considered idiosyncratic or sporadic. For example, a study of a Texas prison found that a small but significant percentage of the officers used physical punishment. Force both controlled the prison population and induced cohesion among officers, maintaining a status differential between officers and residents and helping officers win promotions.18 Rewards and Punishments Correctional off