Understanding Social Support Among Incarcerated Men and Women to Advance Prisoner Reentry Innovations

Purpose: Positive social support is highly predictive of reduced reincarceration outcomes for those who are released from prison. Yet little is known about what factors predict who among prisoners are likely to have positive support, relationship characteristics of support providers, and whether there are variations in positive and negative social influence among some support providers (e.g., provide housing but encourage criminal behaviors). This study assessed gender differences in actual and anticipated sources of support and variations in social influence (positive, negative, and mixed) of social support. We also assessed how substance use and mental health histories predicted social support outcomes. This study helps to advance understanding of mechanisms underlying social support and social influence. Improved understanding of these mechanisms is important for optimizing the impact of prisoner reentry interventions.

Methods: Data were collected from a random sample of incarcerated men (n=166) and women (n=230) residing in one of 12 prisons in one southeastern state (N=496) between 2009 and 2012 using a cross sectional design. Participants completed standardized assessments of current and past substance use and mental health problems; received social support pre-incarceration; and anticipated support post-incarceration. Measures of support included subtypes, relationship characteristics, and social influence of support. Wilcoxon Rank Sums and Chisquare tests were performed to determine group differences. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine predictive factors of support and social influence.

Results: Men and women reported that prior to incarceration, they received most of their support from family, friends, or a romantic partner. Women were more likely to report the source of their primary support being a romantic partner (X²=14.91, p<0.05). Across subtypes of support, incarcerated men anticipated more post-release support than women, and reported more pre-release support than women (p<.05). Men were also significantly more likely to report having supporters that were positive influences pre-incarceration when compared to women(12.22 vs 9.83; p<.05). Among both genders, having a network primarily comprised of negative influence was predicted by scoring positive for anti-social personality and reporting  relationship consequences related to substance abuse(p<.05).  For men, having social networks comprised primarily of supporters who were mixed social influences (had both positive and negative influence characteristics) was predicted by history of treatment for drug use(p<0.05). For women, mixed social influence was also predicted by respondents’ history of mental health treatment(b=-0.74, t=-2.18, p=.0001).

Implications:  Despite exponential growth in prisoner reentry programs during the 21^stcentury, national reincarceration results have been intractable. Nearly 77% of all released prisoners are reincarcerated within 5 years. Many social workers recognize that the next challenge for prisoner reentry is to identify how best to intervene with families and other support providers of reentering prisoners to improve outcomes. In order for the best intervention targets to be identified, a more in depth understanding of social support and social influence is urgently needed. This study advances our knowledge of social support and social influences and includes critically important gender-specific analysis that reveals women are significantly disadvantaged compared to men. Results provide important guideposts for social work intervention deliverers and developers.