May2011 Corrections Comprehensive Exam Reading List by 7L6t10


                          DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

                      SPRING 2011 READING LIST FOR THE

Reading List for Question # 1 (everyone taking the corrections exam must answer):

   Burke, K., & Leben, S. (2008). Procedural fairness: A key ingredient in public satisfaction.
        Court Review, 44(1/2), 4-25. Available online at

   Franke, D., Biere, D., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2010). Legitimacy in corrections: A randomized
        experiment comparing a boot camp with a prison. Criminology & Public Policy, 9(1),

   Kurlycheck, M. C. (2010). Transforming attitudinal change into behavioral change.
        Criminology & Public Policy, 9(1), 119-125.

   MacKenzie, D. L., Bierie, D., & Mitchell, M. (2007). An experimental study of a therapeutic
       boot camp: Impact on impulses, attitudes, and recidivism. Journal of Experimental
       Criminology, 3, 221–246.

   MacKenzie, D. L., & Souryal, C. (1995). Inmates’ attitude change during incarceration: A
       comparison of boot camp with traditional prison. Justice Quarterly, 12, 325-353.

   MacKenzie, D. L., Wilson, D. B., Armstrong, G. S., & Gover, A. R.. (2001). The impact of
       boot camps and traditional institutions on juvenile residents: Perceptions, adjustment,
       and change. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 279-313.

   Morash, M., & Rucker, L. (1990). A critical look at the idea of boot camp as a correctional
       reform. Crime & Delinquency, 36, 204-222.

   Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Bachman, R., Sherman, L. (1997). Do fair procedures matter?
        The effect of procedural justice on spouse assault. Law & Society Review, 31, 163-204.

   Sparks, R., & Bottoms. A. (1995). Legitimacy and order in prisons. British Journal of
        Sociology, 46, 45-62.
   Styve, G., MacKenzie, D. L., Gover, A. R., & Mitchell, O. (2000). Perceived conditions of
        confinement: A national evaluation of juvenile boot camps and traditional facilities.
        International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 450-467.

   Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping
        public support to policing. Law & Society Review, 37, 513-547.

   Tyler, T. R. (2010). Legitimacy in corrections: Policy implications. Criminology & Public
        Policy, 9(1), 127-134.

   Tyler, T. R. (2001). Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and
        minority group members want from the law and legal authorities? Behavioral Science
        & the Law, 19, 215–235.

   Tyler, T. R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in defendants’ evaluations of their
        courtroom experience. Law & Society Review, 18, 59-71.

   Wells, J.B., Minor, K. L., & Angel, E. (2006). A quasi-experimental evaluation of a shock
        incarceration and aftercare program for juvenile offenders. Youth Violence and
        Juvenile Justice, 4(3), 219-233.

   Wilson, D. B., MacKenzie, D. L., Mitchell, F. N. (2003). Effects of correctional boot camps
        on offending. Oslo, Norway: The Campbell Collaboration. Available online at

Reading List for Question # 2 (option to answer this question or question #3):

   Beck, A. J., & Harrison, P. M. (2007). Sexual victimization in state and federal prisons
        reported by inmates. Washington, DC: Bureau Of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department
        of Justice. Available online at

   Brook, D. (2004). The problem of prison rape. Legal Affairs (March/April). Available
        online at

   Carlson, B. E., & Cervera, N. (1999). Inmates and their families: Conjugal visits, family
        contact, and family functioning. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18(3), 318-331.

   Ellenbogen, P. (2009). Beyond the border: A comparative look at prison rape in the United
        States and Canada. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 42, 335-372.

   Goetting, A. (1982). Conjugal association in prison: Issues and perspectives. Crime &
        Delinquency, 28(1), 52-71.

   Gordon, J. (1999). Are conjugal and familial visitations effective rehabilitative concepts?:
       Yes. The Prison Journal, 79, 119-124.

   Hensley, C., Koscheski, M., & Tewksbury, R. (2002). Does participation in conjugal
        visitations reduce prison violence in Mississippi? An exploratory study. Criminal
        Justice Review, 27(1), 52-65.

   Hensley, C., Rutland, S., Gray-Ray, P. (2000). Inmate attitudes toward the conjugal
        visitation program in Mississippi prisons: An exploratory study. American Journal of
        Criminal Justice, 25(1), 137-145.

   Hensley, C., Rutland, S., Gray-Ray, P. (2000). Conjugal visitation programs: The logical
        conclusion. In C. Hensley (Ed.), Prison sex: Policy and practice (pp. 143-156).
        Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

   Hensley, C., Tewksbury, R., & Chiang, C. P. (2002). Wardens' attitudes toward conjugal
        visitation programs. Journal of Correctional Health Care, 9(3), 307-319.

   Knowles, G. J. (1999). Male prison rape: A search for causation and prevention. The
       Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(3), 267-282. Available online at

   McConnell, E. H. (1999). Are conjugal and familial visitations effective rehabilitative
      concepts?: No. The Prison Journal, 79, 124-131.

   Robertson, J. E. (2003). A clean heart and an empty head: The Supreme Court and sexual
       terrorism in prison. North Carolina Law Review, 81, 433-481.

   Turner, R. G. (2000). Sex in prison. Tennessee Bar Journal, 36, 12-28.

   Wilkinson, R. A. (2003). The cost of conjugal visitation outweighs the benefits. Corrections
        Today, 65(3), 19. Available online at

   Wyatt, R. (2006). Male rape in U.S. prisoners: Are conjugal visits the answer? Case
       Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 37, 579-614.

Reading List for Question # 3 (option to answer this question or question #2):

   Chin, A. (2003). Hope v. Pelzer: Increasing the accountability of state actors in prison
        systems—A necessary enterprise in guaranteeing the Eighth Amendment rights of
        prison inmates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 93(4), 913-946.

   Georgiady, B. N. (2008). An excessively painful encounter: The reasonableness of pain and
        de minimis injuries for Fourth Amendment excessive force claims. Syracuse Law
        Review, 59, 123-164.

Haber, E. (2003). Demystifying a legal twilight zone: Resolving the circuit court split on
    when seizure ends and pretrial detention begins in § 1983 excessive force cases. New
    York Law School Journal of Human Rights, 19, 939-968.

Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002). Available online at:

Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992). Available online at:

Lyndon, P. P. (1995). Escape: A deadly proposition? Prisoners and pretrial detainees. New
    England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement, 21, 203-229.

McGuinness, J. M. (2009). A primer on North Carolina and federal use of force law: Trends
   in Fourth Amendment doctrine, qualified immunity, and state law issues. Campbell
   Law Review, 31, 431-501. Available online at:

Michael J., Scott, R., Gould, L., Crawford, C., & Copeland, M. (2001). Questioning the
    concept of excessiveness with respect to alternative and new age methods and uses of
    force. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 12(3), 235-248.

Miller, M. (2001). Electrified prison fencing: A lethal blow to the Eighth Amendment.
     California Western Law Review, 38(1), 63-86.

Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007). Available online at:

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). Available online at:

Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312 (1986). Available online at:

Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991). Available online at:


To top