all policy questions—issues of how to establish governing principles that will enhance our common life.
One vexing problem for communities and societies is how to resocialize people during or after their experiences in prisons so they are prepared to be contributing and functioning members of society. In the Sociologists in Action feature above, David Kirk shows how he used lessons from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to solve an ex-prisoner puzzle and make policy recommendations.
Sociologists in Action
David S. Kirk Evidence-Based Research and Public Policy: Resocialization After Hurricane Katrina
I have spent much of my professional career using the tools of sociology to examine the myriad consequences of criminal justice policies in the United States. Part of my focus has been on the influence of communities on the resocialization of ex-prisoners. Research reveals that on leaving prison ex-prisoners tend to be geographically concentrated in a relatively small number of neighborhoods within metropolitan areas; they often return to the very same neighborhoods and find themselves surrounded by the friends and neighbors (socializing agents) that helped lead them to criminal behavior in the first place. Thus, it is not surprising that large proportions of ex-prisoners end up back in prison within just 3 years. The hope for ex-prisoners is that they will become resocialized, shedding their criminal identity as they learn the norms, behaviors, and values of law-abiding citizens.
These well-known facts about crime and justice in the United States serve as the backdrop of my research on prisoner reentry, the process of leaving prison and returning to the community. The tragedy of Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the Gulf Coasts of Louisiana and Mississippi in August 2005, afforded me a unique opportunity to examine what would happen if ex-prisoners did not return home to their old neighborhoods upon exiting prison. Katrina provided a natural experiment for investigating the importance of residential change because it forced some people to move who otherwise would not have. Residential change may serve as a catalyst for sustained behavioral change by providing an opportunity for individuals to separate from the former contexts and associates that facilitated their prior criminal behavior. A fresh location enhances resocialization efforts.
As I had hypothesized, prisoners exiting incarceration following Hurricane Katrina were much less likely to reside in the New Orleans neighborhoods where they resided prior to incarceration. Among those who did return to the same parish (a parish is the equivalent of a county) where they resided prior to incarceration, 26% were reincarcerated within 1 year of release from prison. By comparison, only 11% of offenders who moved to a new parish faced reincarceration 1 year after leaving prison. Based on these results, I concluded that separating individuals from their former residential environment reduces their likelihood of recidivism. Moving allows an individual to separate from the peers and routine activities that contributed to his or her criminal behavior in the past.
One critical component of disseminating information about scientific discoveries is to communicate the implications of the research. For instance, in most states, prisoners released on parole are legally required to return to their county of last residence, contributing to a return to old neighborhoods. So, parole policies, although designed to enhance public safety, may in fact undermine it. One implication of my research that I have discussed with key policymakers is that removing the institutional barriers to residential change may enhance public safety by lessening repetition of crime. Additionally, providing incentives for individuals to move to new neighborhoods, such as public housing vouchers, may benefit public safety. In my experience, redesigning public policies is part of a methodical process that involves good science, communication of results, and further testing in a real-world environment to determine effectiveness.
* * * * * * *
David S. Kirk, PhD, is Professorial Fellow in Sociology at Nuffield College, University of Oxford, England. This excerpt is adapted from Sociologists in Action: Sociology, Social Change, and Social Justice (Sage 2014).
These policy questions rely on an understanding of socialization—how socialization influences our beliefs and our positions on issues facing society. For example, making decisions about how to provide positive early childhood education experiences at a time when young children first learn the ways of their culture depends on understanding the socialization they receive at home and at school. The quality of childcare we provide for young children will affect not only how well-trained our future workforce is but also whether the children turn out to be productive citizens or a drain on society. Likewise, resocializing those who have run afoul of the law can turn them into law-abiding citizens. These are all questions public sociologists work on and can help to answer.
Now that we have some understanding of the process of socialization, we look at the next level in the process of interaction and how individuals become members of small groups, networks, and large complex organizations.
What Have We Learned?
Human socialization is pervasive, penetrating, and lifelong. We cannot understand what it means to be human without comprehending the impact of a specific culture on us; the influence of our close associates; and the complex interplay of pressures at the micro, meso, and macro levels. Indeed, without social interaction, there would not even be a self. We humans are, in our most essential natures, social beings. This chapter opens our eyes to the ways in which we become the individuals we are. We move next to a discussion of how we use our socialization in interactions with groups and organizations as members of society.
Key Points
Human beings come with their own biological makeup, but most of what makes us uniquely human we learn from our culture and society—through socialization. Humans who live in isolation from others do not receive the socialization necessary to be part of culture and are sometimes barely human.
The self consists of the interaction of the I—the basic impulsive human with drives, needs, and feelings—and the Me. We develop a reflective self through role-taking and seeing how others might view us.
The self is profoundly shaped by others, but it also has agency—that is, it can be an initiator of action and a maker of meaning.
The self develops through stages, from mimicking others (the play stage) to more intellectually sophisticated abilities such as role-taking and seeing how various roles complement each other (the game stage).
The self is modified as it moves through life stages, and some of those stages require major resocialization—shedding old roles and taking on new ones as one enters new statuses in life.
A number of agents of socialization are at work in each of our lives, communicating messages relevant at the micro, meso, or macro level of social life. At the meso level, for example, we may receive different messages about what it means to be a “good” person depending on our ethnic, religious, or social-class subculture.
Some of these messages may be in conflict with each other, as when global messages about tolerance for those who are different conflict with a nation’s desire to have absolute loyalty and a sense of being superior to other nations.
Discussion Questions
1 Cooley’s
