See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350174094

QUALITY OF LIFE OF PRISON INMATES IN ILIGAN CITY JAIL

Conference Paper · May 2014

CITATION READS
1 5,421

9 authors, including:

Ray Vincent EDMILAO Araña

Iligan Capitol College
11 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ray Vincent EDMILAO Araña on 19 March 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Association of Multidisciplinary Research (IAMURE) World Research Festival 2014
May 1-3, 2014, Cebu City, Philippines
_____________________________________________________________________

QUALITY OF LIFE OF PRISON INMATES IN ILIGAN CITY JAIL

 
 
Ray Vincent E. Araña
rayvincentarana@gmail.com
Iligan Capitol College
Mahayahay, Iligan City, Philippines

Aileen L. Besadre, Honey Rose P. Busa, Jesel M. Landeza,

Ivan Cris A. Patual and Michael John T. Repayo
College of Criminology
Iligan Capitol College
Mahayahay, Iligan City
_____________________________________________________________________________  
 
ABSTRACT

Quality of life is one of the most commonly used self-assessment outcome

measures. Understanding the quality of life of the prisoners is necessary to inform us on
their current state. Measuring their quality of life satisfaction can generate baseline data
to create and design appropriate and effective rehabilitation program. The satisfaction
level on the different domains of life of selected inmates of Iligan City jail was assessed
to determine their quality of life using the generic version of the Ferrans and Powers
Quality of life index questionnaire. The descriptive survey was employed in this study.
Results revealed that majority of the respondents were slightly satisfied in all domains of
life - health, functioning, psychological, spiritual, social, economic and family; or slightly
high level of the quality of life was achieved by the respondents despite of the condition
that they were held captive in prison. Only the social and economic domains of life affect
the level of satisfaction between the male and female inmates as depicted from the
statistical analysis. There is no significant difference between male and female inmates
satisfaction with the health, functioning, psychological, spiritual and family domains of
life. The overall quality of life index was influenced by the respondent’s gender. Thus,
there is significant difference between male and female inmates overall quality of life.

______________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

The ability of inmates to cope in prison continues to be an area of concern for

both criminal justice practitioners and researchers alike. The harsh reality of
imprisonment can have a negative impact on inmates, influencing their capacity to adapt
to their new environment. Adjustment to prison life is a process that can be affected by a
variety of issues.
 According to Toch (1977) there are eight environmental concerns that impact
inmate behavior and adjustment to prison life: privacy, safety, structure, support,
emotional feedback, social stimulation, activity, and freedom. The inability to have these
concerns addressed manifests in strained inmate tolerance levels and immune systems,
compromised inmate physical and emotional health, and increased incidents of
aggression and violence (Covert, 1995).

Quality of life is defined as the degree of excellence of one’s life that contributes
to satisfaction and happiness and benefits mental health. Quality of life of an individual
would be affected by a number of factors, particularly by the significant positive and
negative life events. As stated by Milbrath (1979), “Subjective studies of Quality of Life
typically have shown that most people derive their greatest sense of quality of life from
their home and family life and from the close supportive relationships they have with
friends and colleagues”.

Criminal Propensity is the notion of an underlying, or latent characteristic of all

individuals – aggression, impulsiveness, self-control, or conditionality – that has a direct
effect on a person’s likelihood of committing criminal acts which may threaten the
wellbeing of the society, or injure any of its members. Research findings suggest that
people with criminal propensity score high on neuroticism, extroversion, psychoticism
and lie tests (Khurana and Dhar, 2000).

For inmates, one of the fundamental consequences of their imprisonment is lack

of control over decisions about their activities. This lack of autonomy is evident in nearly
all aspects of prison life. Prisoners have virtually no privacy and are observable at all
times by different forms of surveillance.

Understanding the quality of life of the prisoners, an understudied population, is

necessary to inform us on their current state. Measuring their quality of life satisfaction
could generate baseline data to create and design appropriate and effective
rehabilitation program. It is for this reason that the researchers inspired and motivated to
conduct this study to establish essential information about the prison inmates life and
eventually use the results in the formulation of effective strategies for possible
community extension program of the College of Criminology.

FRAMEWORK

The conceptual model is shown in Figure 1. As shown in the figure, the quality of
life is hypothesized to be determined by the prison inmates profile and the satisfaction
on the different domains of life – health and functioning, social and economic,
psychological and spiritual, and family.

The aim of quality of life research is to analyze factors that are relevant in the
daily lives of individuals, and to allow individuals to express their satisfaction or
dissatisfaction with these important aspects of life (Ferrans & Powers, 2012). According
to the studies of Kimura and Silva (2009) the essence of quality of life is based on the
life experience that each individual has and, therefore, that individual is the only one in
the position of judging it, according to his or her own values and preference. Previous
studies, both quantitative and qualitative, support the assumption that quality of life is a
subjective concept and, as such, its evaluation depends on the individual perspective of
each subject.

The subjective perception of the level of satisfaction towards the different

domains or aspects of life is considered the main determinant in making a positive or
negative judgment of the subjectively perceived quality of life. Satisfaction, a cognitive
experience, implies a more lasting, long-term judgment about one’s life condition hence
it tends to be more stable.

METHODOLOGY

Respondents
The respondents of the study were the selected inmates of Iligan City Jail. A total
of one hundred thirty (130) inmates were used as samples, twenty (20) females and one
hundred ten (110) males.

Research Design and Locale

This study endeavored to determine the quality of life of selected prison inmates
in Iligan City Jail (Fig. 2). This study used questionnaire in acquiring the necessary
information for analysis and interpretation. The descriptive survey research design was
used in this study.
Research Instrument
The instrument used in gathering the data was a set of standardized
questionnaire by Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index – Generic Version, which is
composed of thirty (33) items inventory rated on a six (6) point Likert type scale. The
questionnaire is divided into two (2) parts: the first part includes the personal attributes
of the respondents such as gender, age, civil status and educational attainment while
the second part provides the satisfaction level of the respondents as to the different
domains of life: health and functioning, social and economic, psychological and spiritual,
and family.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers submitted a request letter addressed to the City Jail Warden of
BJMP for approval to administer the distribution of the questionnaires. For security
reason as advised by the Jail Warden, only the Jail personnel handed over the
questionnaires to the inmates. Questions were translated to the local language as
suggested by the BJMP personnel for the easy understanding and comprehension of
the inmates.

Statistical Tools
The data gathered were summarized, tabulated and analyzed using the following
statistical techniques:

1. Frequency and Percentage

2. Weighted Mean
3. t- Test
 Table 1. Scoring Scale for Weighted Mean

RANGE SATISFACTION QUALITY OF LIFE

LEVEL
1.00-1.82 Very Dissatisfied Very Low

1.83-2.65 Moderately Dissatisfied Moderately Low

2.66-3.48 Slightly Dissatisfied Slightly Low

3.49-4.31 Slightly Satisfied Slightly High

4.32-5.16 Moderately Satisfied Moderately High

5.17-6.00 Very Satisfied Very High

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The researchers present the following categories with analysis and interpretation
of data.

Problem 1: What is the profile of the respondents as to:

  1.1. Gender;
  1.2. Age;
  1.3. Marital status; and
  1.4. Educational level?

Figure 3. Respondents Gender Distribution

 Figure 3 presents the gender distribution of the respondents. It shows that eighty
five percent (85%) of the population were dominantly male while only fifteen percent
(15%) were female respondents.

This reveals that there are more male inmates incarcerated in Iligan City Jail than
female inmates.

Figure 4. Respondents Age Distribution

Figure 4 shows the frequency distribution of the respondents according to age.

Majority of the respondents were from age bracket of 25-34 years old which is thirty
eight percent (38%) of the total population. Thirty five percent (35%) of the respondents
were from age bracket 18-24, eighteen percent (18%) were from 35-44 and seven
percent (7%) were from age bracket 45-54.

The figure implies that most of the respondents are adult inmates.

Figure 5. Respondents Civil Status Distribution

 The figure above displays the frequency distribution of the respondents as to civil
status. It is clearly presented in the figure that majority of the respondents were single
which is fifty eight percent (58%) of the total population compared to thirty six percent
(36%) who were married, five percent (5%) with live-in partner, and only one percent
(1%) separated.

This shows that most of the inmates confined in Iligan City Jail at the time of the
study were single.

Figure 6. Respondents Educational Attainment

Figure 6 shows the distribution of respondents as to educational attainment. Out

of 130 respondents, twenty six percent (26%) of the sample size were high school level,
twenty two percent were high school graduate, seventeen percent (17%) were
elementary graduate, fifteen percent (15%) were college level, fourteen percent (14%)
were elementary level, four percent (4%) were college graduate, and two percent (2%)
have taken up post graduate studies.

This implies that the largest part of the respondents have not completed their
high school studies.

Problem 2: How satisfied are the respondents with each of the following domains
of life?
  2.1. Health and Functioning
  2.2. Social and Economic
  2.3. Psychological and Spiritual
  2.4. Family
 Table 2. Respondents Level of Satisfaction in Terms of Health and Functioning

HEALTH AND FUNCTIONING Weighted

DOMAINS OF LIFE Mean Interpretation
Your health 4.58 Moderately Satisfied
Health care 4.22 Slightly Satisfied
Pain 4.16 Slightly Satisfied
Energy 4.64 Moderately Satisfied
Ability to care of yourself without
help 4.39 Moderately Satisfied
Control over life 4.37 Moderately Satisfied
Chances for living as long as you
would like 4.31 Slightly Satisfied
Sex life 2.84 Slightly Dissatisfied
Ability to take care of family
responsibilities 3.6 Slightly Satisfied
Usefulness to others 3.87 Slightly Satisfied
Worries 3.98 Slightly Satisfied
Things for fun 3.86 Slightly Satisfied
Chances for a happy future 4.3 Slightly Satisfied
SLIGHTLY
OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN 4.08 SATISFIED

Table 2 presents the satisfaction level of the respondents on the health and
functioning domains of life. It clearly shows that the respondents are moderately
satisfied on the amount of energy they need for everyday activities. The sex life got the
lowest weighted mean of 2.84 which indicates that the respondents are slightly
dissatisfied in this aspect of life. Female inmates came out to be more slightly
dissatisfied in their sex life compared to male inmates.

This result could be attributed to the fact that one of the fundamental
consequences of their imprisonment is lack of control over decisions about their
activities. This lack of autonomy is evident in nearly all aspects of prison life including
sexual activities, though conjugal visits are allowed, that is visits were sexual intercourse
between inmates and their spouses may occur. Prisoners have virtually no privacy and
are observable at all times by different forms of surveillance. This loss of liberty and
privacy represents an extreme change from life in the community.

Female inmates are more slightly dissatisfied in terms of sex life than male
inmates since the latter have the high possibility of indulging into sexual stimulation of
one’s own genitals to reach orgasm without bothering on the people around and the
place. Moreover, homosexual rape is a common occurrence in male prisons, with
attacks generally made on vulnerable new inmates.

Table 3. Respondents Level of Satisfaction in Terms of Social and Economic

Domains of life

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC Weighted

DOMAINS OF LIFE Mean Interpretation
Friends 4.14 Slightly Satisfied
Emotional support from people other
than your family 4.11 Slightly Satisfied

Neighborhood 3.81 Slightly Satisfied

Home 3.7 Slightly Satisfied

Job 3.5 Slightly Satisfied

Not having a Job 3.1 Slightly Dissatisfied
Education 3.94 Slightly Satisfied
Financial Needs 3.94 Slightly Satisfied
SLIGHTLY
OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN 3.78 SATISFIED

The table above depicts the satisfaction level of the respondents on the social
and economic domains of life, where the aspect of having friends got the highest
weighted mean of 4.14, while not having a job acquired the lowest weighted mean of
3.1.

The result reveals that respondents are slightly satisfied as to their social
relationship with friends, since they usually resort to build cordial environment inside the
jail for them to feel the sense of belongingness. The finding is relevant to the study of
Apas (2009) that inmates feel the friendly atmosphere afforded by the BJMP officers
and that they do not have regrets in the relationships and interaction showed by the Jail
personnel to them. They are contented and find the feeling of oneness and camaraderie
among the people inside regardless of race, gender and family status.

Not having a job is expected to get the lowest weighted mean or the respondents
are slightly dissatisfied on this aspect because of the situation they are in. They feel
worthless inside due to lack of opportunities, for them to earn and become productive
and eventually help their loved ones.
 Table 4. Respondents Level of Satisfaction in terms of Psychological and
Spiritual

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SPIRITUAL Weighted

DOMAINS OF LIFE Mean Interpretation
Peace of mind 4.23 Slightly Satisfied
Faith in God 5.63 Very Satisfied
Achievement of personal goals 4.1 Slightly Satisfied
Happiness in general 3.84 Slightly Satisfied
Life satisfaction in general 3.62 Slightly Satisfied
Personal appearance 4.2 Slightly Satisfied
Self 4.24 Slightly Satisfied
SLIGHTLY
OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN 4.27 SATISFIED

Table 4 provides the respondents satisfaction level on the psychological and

spiritual domains of life. As shown, faith in God is not a questioned to the respondents
since they are very satisfied on this aspect in life with the highest weighted mean of
5.63. Life satisfaction in general has the lowest weighted mean (3.62) which indicates a
slightly satisfied response from the respondents.

The finding implies that the respondents feel contentment with regards to the
spiritual enrichment program of the Jail Management which is to ensure that the
religious and spiritual needs of inmates are appropriately met.

Respondents’ response on the life satisfaction in general which is slightly

satisfied can be linked to their current condition. Most studies show that while most
inmates, including long-term prisoners, adjust successfully to prison life, many do not
cope well with the pains of imprisonment. Their daily lives are highly regimented and
their move is every watched by prison guards.

Table 5. Respondents Level of Satisfaction in terms of Family

Weighted
FAMILY DOMAINS IN LIFE Mean Interpretation
Family Health 4.14 Slightly Satisfied
Children 3.47 Slightly Dissatisfied
Family happiness 3.9 Slightly Satisfied
Spouse, love or partner 3.65 Slightly Satisfied
Emotional support from family 4.45 Moderately Satisfied
SLIGHTLY
OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN 3.92 SATISFIED
 Table 5 shows the satisfaction level of the respondents on the family domains in
life. Out from the differing responses, the emotional support from family got the highest
weighed mean of 4.45 while aspect on having children has the lowest weighted mean of
3.47.

The moderately satisfied response of the respondents on the emotional support

from family implies that they agreed that their relationship with their family is an
important to them during their incarceration period. This finding can be supported with
literature indicating that a solid family relationship is the best predictor of successful
release from prison (Carlson & Cervera, 1991). Thus, family visitation and family support
could potentially lead to lower rates of recidivism.

The slightly dissatisfied reply of the respondents to the family domain about
children is associated to the profile of the respondents as to civil status. Most of the
respondents are single and thus no partner in life to produce offspring or children of their
own.

Problem 3: What is the respondent’s overall quality of life index?

Table 6. Overall Quality of Life Index

DOMAINS OF LIFE Mean Overall Interpretation

Average Mean
Health and Functioning 4.08
4.01 Slightly High
Social and Economic 3.78
Psychological and 4.27
Spiritual
Family 3.92

Table 6 presents the overall quality of life index of the respondents. The slightly
high level was achieved despite of the set of rigid rules that govern them and the hard
life that further aggravates their situation. Thus, even with the condition that they were
held captive in prison, they still find their prison life satisfactory.

Problem 4: Is there a significant difference between male and female inmates

satisfaction in each of the following domains of life?
  4.1. Health and Functioning
  4.2. Social and Economic
  4.3. Psychological and Spiritual
  4.4. Family
 Table 7. Difference between male and female inmates satisfaction on Health
and Functioning Domains of Life

Gender Mean Std. Deviation Mean t-value Sig. (2-

Difference tailed)
Male 4.07 0.15827 0.03 0.24561 1.960
Female 4.10 0.41097

Table 7 shows the inmates satisfaction on health and functioning domains of life.
As revealed, the calculated t-value of 0.24561 is less than the tabular value of 1.960,
hence, there is no significant difference between the male and female prisoners’
satisfaction towards health and functioning aspects in life.

Table 8. Difference between male and female inmates satisfaction on Social

and Economic Domains of Life

Gender Mean Std. Deviation Mean t-value Sig.

Difference (2tailed)
Male 3.66 0.13497 0.22 2.07315 1.960
Female 3.88 0.26809

The table above presents the inmates satisfaction on social and economic
domains of life. As shown reflected in the table, the calculated t-value of 2.07315 is
greater compared to the tabular value of 1.960, thus, there is significant difference
between the male and female inmates’ satisfaction on social and economic domains of
life.

According to Criminologists Gresham Sykes, male and female prisons cultures

differ fundamentally in difference are larger influenced by rule behaviour learned outside
of jail. Equally, the values and attitudes attributed to inmates’ societies are importation
from the larger world. Although they are distorted by isolation and deprivation, prisons
cultures reflect the culture from which the prisoners have come.

Robert W. Olding, PhD, associate dean of the University of Phoenix School of

Advanced Studies and a former warden, concurs. “From a psychological perspective,
there are dramatic differences between female and male offender populations,” he
explains, “both in terms of the crimes they commit and how they behave in the
correctional system.” He further said that female offenders are more prone to self-harm.
Depression and suicide attempts are much more pronounced among female offenders
than male offenders, who tend to have antisocial tendencies and the violence
associated with it instead. Ironically, he says, “It is important to note the paradoxical
matter that, while incarcerated female offenders show more self-harm and suicide
attempts, male inmates are actually more successful at completing suicides.
 Table 9. Difference between male and female inmates satisfaction on
Psychological and Spiritual Domains of Life

Gender Mean Std. Deviation Mean t-value Sig.

Difference (2tailed)
Male 4.32 0.25223 0.13 0.50004 1.960
Female 4.19 0.63993

Table 9 presents the inmates satisfaction on psychological and spiritual domains

in life. The calculated t-value of 0.50004 is less than the tabular value of 1.960 as shown
in the table. Therefore, there is no significant difference on the satisfaction level
between the male and female on psychological and spiritual domains of life.

Table 10. Difference between male and female inmates satisfaction on

Family Domains of Life

Gender Mean Std. Deviation Mean t-value Sig.

Difference (2tailed)
Male 3.76 0.15205 0.25 0.11617 1.960
Female 4.01 0.18605

Table 10 displays the male and female inmates’ satisfaction response on family
domains of life. As exposed, the calculated t-value of 0. 11617 is less than the tabular
value. As a result, there is no significant difference between the male and female
inmates satisfaction on family aspects in life.

Problem 5: Is there a significant difference between male and female inmates on

the overall quality of life index?

Table 11. Difference between male and female inmates on the Overall Quality
of Life Index

Gender Mean Std. Deviation Mean t-value Sig. (2-

Difference tailed)
Male 3.95 0.06787 0.09 2.60370 1.960
Female 4.04 0.01315
 Table 11 gives the difference between male and female inmates on the overall
quality of life index. It shows that the calculated t-value of 2.60370 is more than the
tabular value which is 1.960. As a general rule, that if the computed value is greater
than the true value, the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is significant
difference between the male and female offenders on the overall quality of life index.

This finding explains that there is a significant difference in the complex

relationship between the coping strategies, adjustment and well-being among male and
female offenders. Research has shown that female inmates exhibit higher levels of
anxiety and depression than male inmates, along with lower levels of self-esteem
(Castellano and Soderstrom, 1997). This suggests that programs need to be in place to
improve female inmates self-esteem. Furthermore, the threat or persistent fear of
victimisation among female inmates that is presented in the prison environment can lead
to hyper-vigilance, which is the sustained heightened cognitive and affective arousal in
the service of scanning the environment for threats (Boxer et al., 2009) and is a key
component of anxiety related syndromes.

Loneliness seems to be a persistent issue which affects the overall quality of

inmates life (Van Herreveld et al., 2007). The loneliness of female incarcerated
individuals is qualitatively different to the male inmates because their degree of
attachment from their families is high than males and they are not used to the fact that
their daily activities are controlled by the prison authorities (Rokach and Koledin, 1997).
This suggests that measures need to be in place to maintain contact and visitation with
family and friends, particularly because many prisoners are imprisoned a long distance
away from home. Similarly, it could be beneficial to allow prisoners more control over
their environment and daily routine. Programs and activities which encourage group
work or friendships may also be of benefit to inmates, particularly as research suggests
that offenders are usually “quite dependent on a mate” (Rokach and Koledin, 1997).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study disclosed that the overall quality of life by prisoners in
Iligan City Jail was still high regardless of their situation inside the prison cell. The
respondent’s quality of life was influenced by gender. Thus, there is really difference on
the needs and wants between male and female offenders.

The findings underscore the importance of the jail management to consider

designing an effective rehabilitation program. Gender plays a critical role throughout the
criminal justice. It is critical that programs provide appropriate screening and
assessment of the needs of individual clients, along with a range of series designed to
meet those needs. Gender differences also play a huge part in coping strategies,
adjustment and behaviour while in prison.

Prisoner’s quality of life could be improved by addressing offender’s pathways

into the criminal justice system, male and female inmates’ differences in offense
patterns, their experiences in the criminal justice system, and their responses to
programs.

The findings of the study also suggest that institutional opportunities and
programs are beneficial for inmates; therefore more need to be provided in order to
make the prison experience as beneficial as possible.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Having the outcome of the study as the basis, the following recommendations are
formulated:

1. To the prison inmates; they should actively participate in all rehabilitation

programs and share their feelings instead of internalizing them because it
would aid inmate adjustment and therefore their well-being.

2. To the Bureau of Jail Management and Protection (BJMP) administrators;

they should develop more programs in coping mechanism of prisoners to
reduce loneliness and boredom. They should offer volunteer opportunities to
prisoners who have showed improvements in their behavior and conduct
constant evaluation on the institutional programs regarding the different
domains in life - health and functioning, social and economic, psychological
and spiritual, and family.

3. To the ICC College of Criminology faculty and students; they should instigate
extension programs focusing on the improvement of the quality of life of the
inmates like literacy and livelihood programs. They should also patronize the
products created by the prisoners to boost their self-esteem.

4. To the prisoners’ family and relatives; they should pay regular visit to the
offenders to provide an outlet for connection as well as a barrier to feelings of
separation. Incarceration period is an extremely stressful experience, and the
stress is best alleviated through support from family members.

5. To the future researchers; similar studies can be undertaken in a more

comprehensive and intensive focus on the factors that affect the quality of life
of the prison inmates with enough time and resources ready at hand. In
addition, it would be beneficial to consider the inmate’s length of stay and the
criminal offense in the future study.
 LITERATURE CITED

Apas, R. M.
2008 Practices of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology Officers as Perceived
by the Inmates of Iligan City Jail. Unpublished Thesis. Iligan Capitol College,
Iligan City.

Boxer, P., Middlemass, K., Delorenzo, T.

2009 Exposure to Violent Crime during Incarceration: Effects on Psychological
adjustment following release. Criminal Justice and Behavior 36(8): 793-807.

Carlson, B. E. and Cervera, N. J.

1991 Incarceration, coping, and support. National Association of Social Workers 36(4):
279-285.

Castellano, T. C. and Soderstorm, I. R.

1997 Self-Esteem, Depression, and Anxiety Evidenced by a Prison Inmate Sample:
Interrelationships and Consequences for Prison Programming. The Prison
Journal 77 (3): 259-280.

Castillo, R. B.
2005. The Condition of Inmates of Quezon Provincial Jail. Unpublished Thesis. MSEUF,
Lucena City.

Cole, G. F.
1982 The America System of Criminal Justice. 3rd edition. Monterey, California:
Books/Cole Publishing Company.

Covert, H.
1995 Ministry to the incarcerated. Chicago: Loyola Books.

De Villa, G. C.
2003 The Effects of Counseling on the Behavior and Rehabilitation on Inmate in Quezon
Provincial Jail. Unpublished Thesis. MSEUF, Lucena City.

Eber, H. W.
1975 Some psychometric correlate of inmates behavior. Georgia Department of
Corrections, Atlanta.

Ferrans, C. E. and Powers, M.

2012 Quality of Life Index. Retrieved from http://www.uic.edu/orgs/qli

Gutierrez, M. R.
2001 The Study of Various Jail Problems as Perceived by the Jail Guards in Quezon
Provincial Jail. Unpublished Thesis. MSEUF, Lucena City.
 Khurana, A. and Dhar, P. L.
2000 Effect of Vipassana Meditation on Quality of Life, Subjective Well-Being, and
Criminal Propensity among Inmates of Tihar Jail, Delhi. Indian Journal of
Criminology, 20-25.

Kimura, M. and Silva, J. V.

2009 Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index. Journal of Sao Paulo University School
of Nursing, 43, 1098-1104.

Milbrath, L.
1979 Policy relevant quality of life research, Annals, AAPSS, 444, 32-45.

Rokach, A. and Koledin, S.

1997 Loneliness in Jail. A study of the loneliness of incarcerated men. International
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 41(2): 168-179.

Toch, H.
1977 Living in prison: The ecology of survival. New York. Free Press.

Van Herreveld, F., Van Der Pligt, Claasen, L. and Van Dijk, W. W.
2007 Inmate Emotion and Psychological and Physical Well-Being: The Use of Crying
Over Spilled Milk. Criminal Justice and Behavior 34 (5): 697-708.

View publication stats