37? THE VALUE SYSTEMS OF INCARCERATED EMBEZZLERS: …/67531/metadc330949/... · criminological theories fail to provide a cogent understanding of embezzlement. In light of this, there

3 7 ?

/Vg/c/

THE VALUE SYSTEMS OF INCARCERATED EMBEZZLERS: THE

IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICE AND VALUE

CLARIFICATION PROGRAMS FOR CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

Michael Welch, M.A., M.S.

Denton, Texas

August, 1987

Welch, Michael, The Value Rvstams of Incarcerated

Embezzlers: The Implications for Sociological Practice and

Value Clarification Pm^rami for Correctional Institutions.

Doctor of Philosophy (Sociology), August, 1987, 178 pp., 12

tables, references, 62 titles.

An empirical investigation at a southwestern minimum

security federal correctional institution was designed to

assess the value systems of incarcerated embezzlers (N = 31)

as they compared to a matched offender control group (N =

31). Based on their responses on the Rokeach Value Survey

(RVS). no statistically significant differences between

these groups were found. Therefore, this finding suggested

that these embezzlers possessed similar value systems held

by those inmates convicted of other crimes.

When the responses of the embezzler sample were

combined with their matched offender control group, a few

differences were revealed between the combined inmate group

and the general population norms (National Opinion Research

Center [N0RC3» Rokeach, 1968, 1973). Simple comparisons of

the composite medians of the male inmate group and the NORC

showed differences on the following survey items: "a world

at peace," "equality," and "national security." Among the

items which demonstrated differences between the female

prison group and the NORC were "an exciting life," "wisdom,"

"independent," "intellectual," "logical," "a world at

peace," and "national security." The findings provided

partial support for Cochrane's (1971) conclusions that

prisoners are self-centered, and place low importance on

those values which do not have immediate or personal

relevance. However, because many of the inmates' responses

emulated the NORC data, it was concluded that their value

systems resembled the general population more than other

prison populations.

In addition to the empirical analyses, this project

addressed the practical implications of value systems

research by proposing value clarification programs for

correctional institutions. The selection of value

clarification programs was inspired by the implications of

the emerging perspective of sociological practice.

Sociological practice was described as it relates to these

programs as well as to sociology in the larger context.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . .

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Definitions of Terms Basic Assumptions Review of Related Literature Values The Rokeach Value Survey Value Clarification The Embezzler Significance of the Study

II. METHOD 18

Hypotheses Male Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group

Female Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group

Fort Worth Male Inmates Versus the NORC Sample

Fort Worth Female Inmates Versus the NORC Sample

Scope Instrument The Sample Research Design Procedures for Analysis of Data and Testing of Hypotheses

Summary

III. RESULTS 30

Subjects Procedure Data Analysis

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS—CONTINUED

Page

The Testing of the Hypotheses Interpretation Further Analyses Additional Analyses Summary

IV. DISCUSSION 63

Summary of the Findings Methodological Considerations Implications Sociological Practice Value Clarification Conclusions

APPENDICES 83

REFERENCES 171

xv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Composition of Embezzlers at Forth Worth . . . 31

2. Composition of Non-Embezzler Matched Control Group (Fort Worth) 32

3. Composition of Samples 33

4. Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Terminal) 44

5. Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Instrumental) 45

6. Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Terminal) 46

7. Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups (Instrumental) 47

8. Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Terminal Value . 50

9. Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Instrumental Value 51

10. Frequency Distributions of Education 56

11. Frequency Distributions of Religion 58

12. Frequency Distributions for Income 60

v

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter is presented to introduce the study of

value systems and embezzlers by stating the research

problem, the purpose of the study, the definition of

research terms, and the basic assumptions. Furthermore, a

review of the literature relating to value systems and

embezzlers is included.

This author examined the social psychology of

embezzlers insofar as it related to their value systems, and

this study was designed to address some basic research

issues. First, it was recognized that traditional

criminological theories fail to provide a cogent

understanding of embezzlement. In light of this, there is a

dearth of recent studies on the embezzler despite a recent

trend to incarcerate white-collar criminals. Second, the

Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) (Rokeach, 1968), an instrument

which measures value systems, has been applied to numerous

populations. However, few studies have focused on the

criminal population, and this author has not found an

application of the RVS to white-collar offenders. Third,

assuming that criminality was related to the inmates' value

systems, the task of this research was to extend value

systems research to the development of value clarification

programs for correctional institutions. Therefore, the

examination of the inmates' value systems has direct

theoretical and practical implications.

Statement of the Problem

The study addressed the following research questions:

(1) Are the value systems of incarcerated offenders

different from those of the general population, and if so,

how? (2) Are the value systems of the incarcerated

embezzlers different from those of other offenders who are

incarcerated for crimes other than embezzlement, and if so,

how? Considering these potential differences, can a related

intervention strategy be introduced in correctional

institutions to remedy antisocial behavior?

Purpose of the Study

The ultimate purpose of this investigation was to

replicate the value system research of Cochrane (1971) who

employed the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) and found

significant differences between inmates and the general

population. This author hypothesized similar findings and

should these results be replicated, they should provide

adequate reason to propose the development of value

clarification programs for inmates. The development of such

interventions was recommended by Cochrane, who maintained

that a value-oriented strategy may reduce anti—social

behavior. In essence, this study was designed to continue

the value systems research of Cochrane and to explore its

practical implications.

Definitions of Terms

The following terms have restricted meaning and thus

were in this investigation as follows:

1. Value: "an enduring belief that a specific mode of

conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially

preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or

end-state of existence" (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5).

2. Value System: "an enduring organization of beliefs

concerning preferable modes of conduct or end-states of

existence along a continuum of relative importance"

(Rokeach, 1973, p. 5).

3. Rokeach Value Survey (RVS): an "instrument [which]

assesses a respondent's hierarchical arrangement of two

kinds of values: instrumental and terminal. Instrumental

values refer to preferable modes of conduct; terminal values

refer to preferable end-states of existence" (Robinson &

Shaver, 1973, p. 547).

4. Value Clarification: the organization of various

exercises designed to assist individuals in re-examining

their value systems. It rests on the assumption that value

systems are dynamic and capable of being restructured

(Kirschenbaum, 1977).

Embezzlers: those offenders "who use a position of

trust to appropriate company assets for their own personal

use" (Coleman, 1985, p. 81). In this study, the embezzlers

represented four categories of embezzlement: "Bank,"

Postal, Benefit Plan," and "Other" (including Savings and

Loan Associations) violations.

Basis Assumptions

The basic assumption of this research was that a source

of motivation (criminal intent) is the value system.

According to Rokeach (1973), the value concept should be

clearly distinguished from other concepts such as attitude,

social norm, and need. However, all these other concepts

are related to values. Rokeach identified five major

assumptions regarding the nature of human values.

(1) the total number of values that a person possesses

is relatively small; (2) all men everywhere possess the

same values to different degrees; (3) values are

organized into value systems; (4) the antecedents of

human values can be traced to culture, society and its

institutions, and personality; and (5) the consequences

of human values will be manifested in all phenomena

that social scientists consider worth investigating and

understanding (1973, p. 3).

This study was based on Rokeach's general assumption that

the value concept should occupy a central position across

all social sciences.

It was assumed that, while value systems at the

societal level remain somewhat stable, the value systems at

the individual level are more easily changed, particularly

when they contrast with the prevailing values. Therefore,

individual value systems should be more subject to

clarification and alteration through an intervention. This

assumption was based on the empirical and theoretical

findings of Rokeach (1968, 1973) and Grube (1982). This

author assumed that the restructuring of value systems can

have a positive social impact on inmates, particularly

embezzlers. Sutherland and Cressey (1978) noted that the

embezzler typically has a low rate of recidivism because it

is unlikely that he or she will again be placed in a

position of trust. However, it was assumed that if the

embezzler does not confront these value systems while in

prison, he or she may turn to other anti-social behaviors

because the values system that may have influenced his or

her criminality was not adjusted. Although the embezzlers

were the target group for this study, it was assumed that

all inmates may benefit from value clarification programs.

Finally, this project was based on the notion that value

system research can provide an empirical base for the

development of value clarification programs.

Review of Related Literature

The literature review for this research focused on four

general areas: (1) those works concerned with the

conceptual and theoretical development of values; (2) the

research employing the Rokeach Value Survey: (3) those

projects endorsing the use of value clarification programs;

and (4) traditional and recent studies of the embezzler.

Values

Values have been the topic of numerous social sciences

analyses. One of the most frequently cited researchers in

value studies is Milton Rokeach (1960, 1968, 1973, 1979).

Rokeach's work provided the theoretical and conceptual

framework for this study. This section includes a review of

the literature as it relates to Rokeach's emphasis on

values.

Rokeach, a social psychologist, was influenced by

various sociologists, psychologists, philosophers, and

anthropologists. One of his primary influences was Robin

Williams (1968) who emphasized the importance of research on

values. Williams noted that a person's values serve as "the

criteria, or standards in terms of which evaluations are

made. . . . Value-as criterion is usually the more important

usage for purposes of social scientific analysis" (1968, p.

283). Williams proposed that individuals have a relatively

small number of values. This idea has theoretical and

methodological implications in that the "tasks of

identifying them [i.e., values] one-by-one and measuring

them become considerably easier, and it also becomes easier

to grapple with theoretical problems. . (Rokeach, 1973,

p. 4). In sum, it was through the theoretical foundations

of Williams that Rokeach was able to articulate the concept

of values as a central and dynamic feature of human

functioning and sociological research.

Rokeach (1973) discussed the major developments in his

analysis of values. First, he suggested that a value is

enduring, and provides the standards and criteria for

behavior and personal evaluation. Rokeach claimed that

without the stability of values, the continuity of

personality and society would be impossible. On the other

hand, he demonstrated that values are not completely stable,

and they are apt to change. Without the flexibility of

values, individual and social change would also be

impossible.

Rokeach conceptualized values as being either

instrumental or terminal. The instrumental values are those

which are concerned with desirable modes of conduct. These

instrumental values are classified as moral values or

competence values. Moral values tend to be interpersonal

while competence values encompass a personal-oriented system

which is related to self-actualization. For example,

honesty and love are typical moral values while imagination

8

and logic are viewed as competence values. The terminal

values are those which refer to end-states of existence and

are divided into personal and social values. Personal

values are self-centered and intrapersonal. Salvation and

peace of mind, for example, are personal values, while world

peace and brotherhood are social values.

For this study, the most relevant areas of research

were those inquiries integrating values and delinquency.

Several studies suggested an important link between the two.

For example, Hudak, Andre and Allen (1980) claimed that

social adjustments and deviance were related to social

values. They reported that developmental failures can be

identified in the adoption of problematic value systems.

Saari (1983) discussed the value systems of juvenile

delinquents and argued that values influence behavior

insofar as delinquents tend to expect immediate returns on

their actions. These value systems led to poorly planned

action which resembled criminal patterns of social behavior.

Saari also mentioned the utility of interventions that focus

on preparing adolescents to understand the consequences of

their action.

Heather (1979) and Braithwaite and Braithwaite (1981)

attacked some of the conclusions from this research on value

systems and delinquency because some of these studies failed

to account for the influence of social class. Braithwaite

and Braithwaite stated that many theories about values and

9

delinquency are contradictory, inconsistent with empirical

evidence, and detrimental to the development of social

policy. To be effective, they believed that intervention

programs must be based on sound value systems research.

The Rokeach Value Survey

The measurement of values is a popular area of social

psychological research. In fact, according to Subonen

(1985), empirical value research is enjoying a renaissance,

and the concept of values has acquired new prominence in the

social sciences. Because recent studies were influenced by

the theoretical work of Rokeach, many social scientists used

the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) in their analyses. For

example, McKernan (1982) and McKernan and Russell (1980)

applied the gVS to an adolescent population in Northern

Ireland to appraise differences in religion and race as

compared to Americans. McKernan (1982) found that

minorities in Northern Ireland compared to American

minorities because they endorsed the value of equality and

did not place a high priority on hedonism. Similarly,

McKernan and Russell concluded that political climate and

environmental pressures affect value systems. For example,

in Northern Ireland, Catholics rated equality and freedom

much higher than their Protestant counterparts.

Teahan, Adams, and Podany (1980) also reported the

importance of environmental conditions and values. Teahan

10

et al. investigated the values of police officers and

demonstrated that as crime rates increased, the officers

became more emotionally detached, less forgiving of others,

and more concerned with achieving a sense of inner harmony.

Other researchers examined the impact of values and

political behavior. For example, Thomas (1981) used the

structure of value systems in his prediction of political

activism among Protestants and Catholics during the Boston

school desegregation controversy. Many of the politically-

oriented studies were influenced by Rokeach (1973), who

identified four basic political orientations: conservative,

socialist, fascist, and communist.

The area of cross-cultural research further

demonstrated the utility of the RVS. Reynolds (1984) found

that Germans were competence-oriented in their modes of

conduct, and Americans were generally morality-oriented.

Moreover, Germans were society-oriented and interpersonal in

their preferred end states, and Americans were more self-

centered and intrapersonal. Among the numerous other

applications of the RVS were studies involving adolescent

socialization (Skeel, 1976), medical students (Feather,

1982), corporate managers (Clare & Sanford, 1979), and

differences among spouses (Medling & McCarrey, 1981).

In a project especially relevant to this research,

Cochrane (1971) examined a Michigan prison population using

11

the RVS to measure the value systems of male and female

inmates. Cochrane found significant differences between the

value systems of these inmates and the general population.

Cochrane concluded that "Prisoners appear to have a shorter

time perspective and value those things which have immediate

and personal relevance . . . .Prisoners value the

characteristics of 'wisdom' and 'self-controlled' relatively

high[ly] possibly because they see these lacking in their

lives (1971, p. 79). Cochrane interpreted the value

systems of these prisoners as hedonistic, self-centered, and

unconcerned for the plight of others. This Michigan study

served as the central base for this research insofar as a

replication was designed.

Value Clarification

Because one of the major features of this research was

the extension from an empirical study on value systems to

the development of an intervention program for inmates, it

was appropriate to describe value clarification. The value

clarification movement was initiated by the work of Raths

(1968), which paralleled the subsequent conclusions of

Rokeach (1973) and Grube (1982) that values are subject to

re-evaluation and change. Value clarification is the

process by which individuals are allowed the opportunity to

re-examine their value system and, through various

exercises, are able to change their current set of values.

12

Value clarification is a broad term which refers to

numerous strategies designed to help individuals re-examine

their value systems. In fact, Simon, Howe, and Kirschenbaum

(1978) introduced 79 different strategies for value

clarification sessions. These strategies ranged from group

exercises to individual tasks. Although these strategies

implemented different techniques, they all employed the

seven processes developed by Raths, Harmin, and Simon (1966)

to assist participants in their search for value clarity.

They are to (1) choose from alternatives; (2) thoughtfully

consider the consequences of alternatives; (3) choose

freely; (4) prize and cherish; (5) publicly affirm; (6) act

repeatedly; and (7) act with a pattern or consistency.

Kirschenbaum (1977) emphasized that these seven processes

could be interpreted as the development of the "criteria"

for a "value." He reiterated that the task is not only to

clarify one's values but to become fully aware of the

consequences (both personally and socially) of one's

adoption of a given value.

The primary contributors to value clarification are

Kirschenbaum (1977), Simon, Kirschenbaum, and Howe (1978),

and Harmin, Kirschenbaum and Simon (1973). The value

clarification movement was supported by Rokeach, who

strongly endorsed this approach to intervention

(Kirschenbaum, 1977). In one value-oriented program,

Thoresen (1984) integrated value clarification with

13

sociological practice and demonstrated its utility as a

teaching technique. Thoresen noted the importance of

identifying values which directly influence social

interaction. She stated that the task of implementing value

ication with sociological practice and demonstrated

its utility as a teaching technique. Thoresen noted the

importance of identifying values which directly influence

social interaction. She stated that the task of

implementing value clarification techniques was "to

sensitize students to the effect of values on their own

choices, and to identify the social categories around which

individuals develop values" (1984, p. 137).

The Embezzler

Donald R. Cressey is one of the leading contributors to

research on embezzlement. In Other People's Money: £ Study

in t]ie Social Psychology of Embezzlement. (1953), Cressey

described the embezzler as an employee who was granted a

position of trust in a bank or company. After a

considerable period of time, this trusted employee began to

borrow" money from the bank or company to reduce a personal

debt. This situation of "borrowing" was identified by

Cressey as a solution to an "unshareable problem." The

employee s unshareable problem" was one that he or she

believed could not be resolved by seeking the help of other

people. Therefore, it was theorized that the employee kept

14

his or her problem a secret, but embezzled money to reduce

the debt. Cressey linked the debt to an extravagant

lifestyle.

Embezzlement is a unique topic in the criminological

literature because traditional theories fail to adequately

explain violations of trust. Sutherland and Cressey (1978)

noted that embezzlers are rarely "psychopathic, feeble-

minded, residents of deteriorated slum areas, or in other

ways personally or situationally pathological" (pp. 266-

267). On the contrary, embezzlers are usually educated,

employable, and most violations of trust are committed by

employees who have held positions of financial

responsibility for several years. In fact, Sutherland and

Cressey mentioned that few embezzlements are committed by

new employees. Furthermore, most embezzlers do not have a

criminal history, have lived a respectable life, and are

middle-class and middle-aged males (Hagan, 1986).

Cressey's (1953)) work was criticized from different

angles. Schuessler (1954) pointed out that Cressey's

findings, based on 133 interviews, were difficult to

generalize because they were ex-post facto and only those

incarcerated were represented in the study. Nettler (1974)

criticized Cressey for the introduction of the "unshareable

problem." He found no support for this "unshareable

problem," and viewed the embezzler as motivated by greed,

15

temptation, as well as having the opportunity to violate the

company's trust.

These criminological theories were consistent with

Akerstrom (1985) who stated that criminals are condescending

toward rule-bound norms and highly value individualism and

excitement. With the exception of Akerstrom, recent studies

of the embezzler are rare. Most current research has

categorized all white-collar offenders together. This is a

fundamental mistake because there are distinct differences

among several types of white-collar criminals, such as the

corporate criminal whose victim is the consumer and the

intra-organizational offender who victimizes a company

(Coleman, 1985; Welch, 1987).

The current literature on embezzlement contributed

little to the theoretical base of this study. For the years

1980 through 1986 the Criminological and Penological

Abstracts listed only a few studies under the heading

Embezzlement, and no such citations were listed in

Sociological Abstracts for the same period. The few studies

included under this heading offered sweeping generalizations

for the white collar offender with limited links to

criminological theory. Rather, they attempted to market an

approach to crime that would provide preventative

instruments such as personnel assessments. Their attempts

to reduce crime appeared somewhat theoretically naive and

their supportive evidence was flawed.

16

Those studies categorized under the heading

"Embezzlement" were not relevant to the criminological

definition of embezzlement, that is, an employee's violation

of a position of trust. The literature included research

which is more appropriate for "Employee Theft" studies where

crimes were committed by employees who were not in a

position of trust. Consequently, it was difficult to apply

the generalizations of these investigators to embezzlement.

Although employee theft research is meaningful, the

conclusions of these studies were not relevant in the

attempt to understand the social psychology of the

embezzler. These studies included employee theft in

convenience stores (Brown, 1986; Terris & Jones, 1982), drug

stores (Brown & Pardue, 1985), restaurants (Hawkins, 1984),

home improvement centers (Jones & Terris, 1983) and

insurance brokerage firms (Smith, 1981). Therefore, this

author concluded that these investigations focused on an

entirely different aspect of white-collar crime.

Significant of the Study

It was the hope of this author that by approaching the

act of embezzlement from a perspective involving value

systems, a more convincing explanation of this crime could

be formulated. Moreover, criminological theory of

embezzlement could be clarified by identifying the

17

embezzler's possible source of motivation (that is, his or

her value system).

The empirical dimensions of this study were included to

contribute to the practical applications of these research

findings. In the spirit of sociological practice this

research was designed to offer direct intervention

implications by suggesting value clarification programs for

incarcerated offenders, particularly embezzlers. Cochrane

underscored the importance of value systems to intervention

by suggesting that "knowledge of individual prisoners' value

system could be used for counseling and rehabilitation

purposes (1971, p. 79). There is a greater need for such

value oriented programs due to the increase in prison

sentences for white-collar offenders. This author suggests

that value clarification programs be developed because there

is a dearth of intervention programs for those convicted of

white-collar criminal offenses. Because prisons are assumed

to be "correctional" it is not difficult to defend the

development of a value clarification program to adjust

problematic value systems. By participating in such

programs it is assumed that the inmate would be less likely

to be involved in further anti—social behavior.

CHAPTER II

METHOD

This chapter is presented to address the components of

the research design by: (1) describing the rationale for

the hypotheses; (2) listing the hypotheses; (3) discussing

the scope of the research, the instrument, and the sample;

and (4) articulating the procedures for data analysis and

the testing of the hypotheses.

Hypotheses

This author set out to replicate Cochrane's (1971)

research on the value systems of inmates using the Rokeach

V a l u e S u r v e r (RVS)• It was hypothesized that there would be

a difference between the value systems of the incarcerated

inmates at the Federal Correctional Institution, Fort Worth

and the general population. Cochrane found that inmates

maintain "a shorter time perspective and value those things

which have immediate and personal relevance" when contrasted

with the general population (1971, p. 79). In addition to

this hypothesis this study assessed the hypothesized

differences between the incarcerated embezzlers and their

matched offender control group (those inmates convicted of

crimes other than embezzlement).

18

19

While the embezzlers and their matched control offender

group were expected to endorse similar value system

patterns, it was hypothesized that the embezzlers would

place more importance on some selected items of the RVS.

This author proposed that the differences in value rankings

may be related to the fundamental differences between

embezzlers and those convicted of other crimes. It was

assumed that those convicted of crimes other than

embezzlement, such as violent acts or drug-related offenses,

had more complicated motivations. For example, the criminal

convicted on drug charges may have been responding to

various factors such as peer pressure, addictions,

discrimination, poor education, and few employment

opportunities.

These characteristics are in sharp contrast to those of

the embezzler, who is typically middle class, employable,

and does not have a criminal history. Hence, it was assumed

that the act of embezzlement is much more likely to be

influenced by the value systems of the offenders than by

other social pressures. Based on this assumption it was

hypothesized that the responses to certain items on the RVS

would show that the embezzler was more self-centered than

his or her matched offender control group.

The hypotheses were based on the findings of Cochrane

(1971) who found statistically significant differences

20

between the responses of a prison population and the general

population (National Opinion Research Center, NORC, Rokeach,

1968). The NORC data set was comprised of a national area

probability sample of adult Americans (N = 1409).

Consistent with the methodology of Rokeach, Cochrane

stratified his sample by gender. He found differences

between the male inmate group as contrasted with the NORC

data on the following items: "pleasure," "wisdom," "self-

controlled," "capable," "a world at peace," "equality,"

"national security," "salvation," and "honest." Cochrane

also discovered differences between the female inmate group

as contrasted with the NORC data on the following items:

'an exciting life," "a sense of accomplishment," "freedom,"

inner harmony," "wisdom," "broadminded," "capable,"

"independent," "intellectual," "logical," "self-controlled,"

a world at peace," "national security," "salvation,"

helpful," and "honest."

The hypotheses for this study were designed to

replicate Cochrane's findings by testing the same survey

items for which he found statistically significant

differences. The hypotheses were presented in four

sections. First, data from the male embezzlers were

contrasted with data from their matched offender control

group. Second, data from the female embezzlers were

contrasted with data from their matched offender control

21

group. Third, data from the Fort Worth sample of male

inmates (embezzlers combined with the Fort Worth sample of

female inmates (embezzlers combined with the matched

offender control group) were contrasted with the data from

the NORC.

Mile Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group

The embezzler group will place more importance on the

following items when contrasted with their matched control

group:

H 1: Pleasure

H 2: Wisdom

H 3: Self-Controlled

H 4: Capable

The embezzler group will place less importance on the


group:

H 5: A world at peace

H 6: Equality

H 7: National security

H 8: Salvation

H 9: Honest

F e m a l e Embezzlers Versus Their Matched Control Group



group:

22

H 10: An exciting life

H 11: A sense of accomplishment

H 12: Freedom

H 13: Inner harmony

H 14: Wisdom

H 15: Broadminded

H 16: Capable

H 17: Independent

H 18: Intellectual

H 19: Logical

H 20: Self-controlled



group



H 23: Salvation

H 24: Helpful

H 25: Honest

Eort Worth Male Inmates Versus the NORC Sample

The inmate group will place more importance on the

following items when contrasted with the NORC:

H 26: Pleasure

H 27: Wisdom


H 29: Capable

23

The inmate group will place less importance on the



H 31: Equality


H 33: Salvation

H 34: Honest

Fort Worth Female Inmates Versus the NORC Sample

The inmate group will place more importance on the


H 35: An exciting life

H 36: A sense of accomplishment

H 37: Freedom

H 38: Inner harmony

H 39: Wisdom

H 40: Broadminded

H 41: Capable

H 42: Independent

H 43: Intellectual

H 44: Logical


The inmate group will place less importance on the




24

H 48: Salvation

H 49: Helpful

H 50: Honest

Scope

This author examined the value systems of embezzlers

and their matched control group at the Federal Correctional

Institution at Fort Worth who were incarcerated at the time

of the data collection (April, 1987). The data from the

general population was limited to the data set of the

National Opinion Research Center (Rokeach, 1968, 1973).

The measurement was limited to the inmates' reported

value systems based on the Rokeach Value Survey and the

following demographic variables: offense type, gender, age,

race, education, religion, and income. This author

appraised the statistically significant differences between

the embezzlers and their matched offender control group by

employing the median test of significance. Further analyses

involved contrasting the composite medians of the responses

of the inmates at Fort Worth on the RVg to the general

population (NORC).

Instrument

The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) appraises the

hierarchical arrangement of instrumental and terminal

values. Each of these two sets of values was presented in

an alphabetized list of 18 items which represent the

instrumental and terminal values. The instrumental values

25

are those values related to preferable modes of conduct.

The terminal values represent preferable end-states of

existence. The participants were instructed to arrange

these items in order of personal and relative importance.

The RVS was revised in 1982. Rokeach (1968, 1973) and

Cochrane (1971) employed the earlier version (Form D)

whereas this author used the most recent edition of the

survey (Form G). Form G was selected for this study because

it was the only form available. The difference between

these forms is that Form G includes "health" and "loyal,"

and Form D includes "happiness" and "cheerful." This

alteration of items led this author to caution against the

precise comparison of results using these two forms.

However, it was assumed that this change of items had

improved the survey. This survey was self-administered in

groups and required from 10 to 30 minutes to complete. The

RVS was used by permission of Rokeach and its publisher.

The Sample

The participants in this study were those inmates

incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution at Fort

Worth at the time of the data collection (April, 1987).

These subjects were selected from this prison for the

convenience of this study because this author was employed

at this facility. Two groups were the focus of this

research. The first group consisted of embezzlers (N = 31).

26

The second group included a matched control group of those

convicted of crimes other than embezzlement, who matched the

embezzlers by gender, age, and race (N = 31). The control

group was matched according to the precision (pairwise or

one-to-one) technique. The responses of these inmates were

contrasted with the responses of a national area probability

sample of adult Americans obtained by the National Opinion

Research Center (NORC) (N = 1409) (Rokeach, 1968, 1973).

Research Design

Because value systems research is not always amenable

to experimental design, a quasi-experimental design was

selected for this study. While experimental designs are

appropriate for stimulus-response studies this research

relied on a quasi-experimental design because of the nature

of values. As they relate to criminality, values constitute

property-disposition data. A property-disposition

relationship involves a background characteristic (for

example, criminality) as it relates to an orientation (such

as the criminal's value system). Property-disposition

relationships are different from stimulus-response

relationships on four basic research issues: time interval,

degree of specificity nature of comparison groups, and time

sequence of events (Rosenberg, 1968; Nachmias & Nachmias,

1981). The quasi-experimental design in this study was the

contrasted groups design which was used to assess the value

27

systems of the target groups: the embezzlers, their matched

control group, and the NORC sample.

Participation was encouraged but strictly voluntary and

forms of informed consent were signed by the participants.

The inmates received one hour of program credit for their

participation. Program credit allows the inmate to gain a

favorable impression from the staff who assume that

participation in studies is indicative of inmate

cooperation; hence, this served as incentive. Program

credit is commonly used in prison studies because the

inmates participation is viewed favorably by parole boards

and may improve the inmates' chances for parole.

This researcher guaranteed confidentiality and

anonymity to the participants. In fact, the responses were

treated as aggregate data in which composite rank orders and

median ranks were compiled and contrasted accordingly.

Therefore, individual responses were not identifiable. This

information remained in the sole possession of this

researcher. Upon compiling the composite rank orders and

median ranks on each of the 36 RVS items (18 items per set),

each of these items was ranked based on the composite

median.

Procedures for Analysis of Data and Testing of Hypotheses

Once the composite rank order and median ranks were

tabulated for the responses of embezzlers and their matched

28

control groups, the median test was employed to determine

the existence of statistically significant differences

between these groups.

The median test is a nonparametric test of significance

for ordinal data and "a procedure to determine whether two

independent groups differ in central tendencies" (Siegel,

1956, p. 111). The median test provides information

relating to the likelihood that two independent groups have

been drawn from the same population. In this study the

median test was applied at the .05 level of significance

(one-tailed test). The median test was selected as the

nonparametric test best suited for these data because of the

small sample size, the ordinal level of measurement (ranking

of items), and the fact that this researcher could not

assume that the responses would be normally distributed.

A different method of analysis was used when the

medians of the inmate group (embezzlers combined with their

matched control group) were contrasted with the medians of

the NORC data set. Simple comparison of the composite

medians was used to determine the differences between the

groups. It was decided that a difference of 1.0 between the

medians would constitute a difference sufficient for

rejection of the null hypothesis. The median test could not

be used at this stage of the analysis because nonparametric

29

tests require the individual identification of the responses

and the NORC data set did not provide this information.

Furthermore, the differences in sample sizes impeded the use

of the median test for comparisons (Fort Worth group, N =

62; the NORC sample, N = 1409).

Further analyses involved a presentation of the medians

of the groups stratified by offense category, gender, age,

race, education, religion, and income. These analyses were

used to assess the impact of the demographic variables as

well as to search for patterns among the value systems.

Summary

This chapter presented the research design and

methodology of the study. In sum, the details of the

hypotheses and the scope of the study were addressed. In

addition to a description of the Rokeach Value Survey. the

procedures for gathering the data from the prison sample

were explained. The contrasted groups design was presented

as the research design and the methods of analyzing the data

were described as they related to the hypotheses.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

The findings of this study are revealed in this

section, as well as is a description of the method,

procedure, and composition of the samples. The tested

hypotheses are also presented with their respective results

and interpretations. Furthermore, the influences of age,

race, education, religion, and income on the value systems

of the inmates are discussed.

Sub.iects

Two groups of incarcerated offenders were drawn from

"kh® inmate population at the Federal Correctional

Institution (F.C.I.) at Fort Worth. One group consisted of

all the male and female embezzlers (U = 31) who were

incarcerated at this institution at the time of the data

collection (April, 1987). The second group, the embezzlers'

matched control group, included incarcerated offenders

convicted of crimes other than embezzlement who were also

incarcerated at Fort Worth at the time of the data

collection.

The method of sampling for this study was the precision

matching technique (also known as pairwise or one-to-one

30

31

matching). These embezzlers were matched by gender, race,

and age. For example, for every embezzler who is female,

white, and 25 years old, an inmate with the same

characteristics, who was convicted of a crime other than

embezzlement, was included in the matched control group. In

the case where there was more than one inmate who possessed

these characteristics, a random selection technique was used

(for example, coin tossing or the table of random digits).

For this study, inmates selected for the matched control

group were those whose crimes least resembled white-collar

offenses. For the distribution of the types of embezzlement

these inmates represent, refer to Table 1. The offense

categories for the matched control group are presented in

Table 2.

Table 1

Composition of Embezzlers at Fort Worth

Embezzlement Category Codes Number

Postal (100) x

Bank (101): False Entries, Misappropriation of Bank Funds

Other (102): Including Savings and Loan Association

Benefit Plan (103): Employee Benefit Plan 1

TOTAL 31

32

Table 2

Composition of Non-Embezzler Matched Control Group (Ft. Worth)

Offense Category Number

Drug Violations 16

Alien Smuggling 4

Fire Arms 3

Bank Robbery 2

Contempt 1

Depriving Civil Rights 1

Escape/Harbor 1

Fraud 1

Government Reservation Violation 1

Kidnaping 1

TOTAL 31

The samples were stratified by gender, race, and age in

order to create a group of inmates that could be compared to

Cochrane's (1971) sample of Michigan inmates. Cochrane

compared his Michigan prison sample to a sample assumed to

be representative of the general population. Cochrane

matched his prison sample by gender, race, and age with a

sample drawn from the National Opinion Research Center

(NORC) (Rokeach, 1968). The design and method of comparing

and contrasting these various samples were consistent with

33

the contrasted groups design (Nachmias & Nachmias, 1981).

The distribution of the samples from Fort Worth, Michigan,

and NORC are presented in Table 3.

Table 3

Composition of Samples

*Fort Worth **Michigan ***NORC Age

Group White Blask Qthgr White Black Other White Black Other

Males

18-29 0 0 0 118 87 3 30 16 1

30-39 6 0 0 47 49 6 17 14 1

40 + 10 0 0 25 29 1 9 11 1

Total 16 0 0 190 165 10 56 41 3

Females

18-29 8 2 0 29 25 1 29 21 1

30-39 20 2 0 9 21 1 9 20 0

40 + 14 0 0 9 9 1 0 10 1

Total 42 4 0 47 55 3 38 51 2

*Half of the inmates in the Fort Worth Sample for this study

are convicted of embezzlement and the other half are convicted

of miscellaneous crimes.

**This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison

sample.

***This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a

matched control group.

34

The sample of embezzlers included 23 female embezzlers

and eight male embezzlers. Because this sample consisted of

mostly females, some possible explanations for this gender

imbalance were in order. First, females may rely on the

most easily detectable methods of embezzlement; hence, they

are caught more often. Male embezzlers, by virtue of their

position m financial institutions, may have lower

accountability and can conceal their activities more

readily. Second, women may be more likely to confess to

their crimes to avoid a lengthy criminal investigation, as

informally reported by one female embezzler to this

investigator. Unfortunately, these explanations are more

amenable to investigation through interviews and case

studies, which were beyond the scope of this study.

Procedure

The samples of inmates at Fort Worth were tested using

the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS: Form G) in group settings.

The inmates participated in this study on a voluntary basis

and provided informed consent. Out of 62 inmates, only one

person refused to complete the survey. This person was

replaced by another inmate who possessed the appropriate

matched characteristics.

Data Analysis

Consistent with the data analyses of Rokeach (1968,

1973) and Cochrane (1971), the responses to the RVS items

were tabulated into aggregate medians and composite

35

rankings. For the purposes of this contrasted groups design

the medians served as the criteria for comparing and

contrasting these items among the various samples.

Two procedures were used to compare and contrast these

groups. First, the median test was applied to determine the

statistically significant differences between the embezzlers

and their matched control group. The median test assessed

these differences at the .05 level of significance (one-

tailed test). This statistical analysis also involved the

Bonferonni technique which was used to reduce the likelihood

of obtaining significant differences by chance (hence,

reducing false positives) (Glass & Stanley, 1970).

Secondly, simple comparisons of the medians between the

inmate group (N = 62) (embezzlers and their matched control

group) and the NORC sample (N = 1409) were employed to

identify the similarities and differences.

The Testing of the Hypotheses

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the hypotheses

were presented in four sets. The first set of hypotheses

contrasted the male embezzlers with their matched offender

control group. Secondly, the female embezzlers were

contrasted with their matched offender control group. These

two sets of hypotheses employed the median test to appraise

statistically significant differences. Third, male

embezzlers and their matched offender control group

(together as one group) were contrasted with the NORC data

36

(Rokeach, 1973). Finally, the female embezzlers and their

matched offender control group (together as one group) were

contrasted with the NORC data. These last two sets of

hypotheses were tested according to the simple comparison

procedure. The following null hypotheses are presented in

their respective categories indicating whether they have been

accepted or rejected.

Mal£ Qpbegslers vsrsug their matched control group.



group:

H 1: Pleasure

H 2: Wisdom


H 4: Capable

accept the null hypothesis






group:

H 5: A world at peace accept the null hypothesis

H 6: Equality accept the null hypothesis

H 7: National security accept the null hypothesis

H 8: Salvation accept the null hypothesis

H 9: Honest accept the null hypothesis

37

Female QmfrezglQrs versus their matched control group.



group:

H 10: An exciting life accept the null hypothesis

H 11: A sense of accomp. accept the null hypothesis

H 12: Freedom accept the null hypothesis

H 13: Inner harmony accept the null hypothesis

H 14: Wisdom accept the null hypothesis

H 15: Broadminded accept the null hypothesis

H 16: Capable accept the null hypothesis

H 17: Independent accept the null hypothesis

H 18: Intellectual accept the null hypothesis

H 19: Logical accept the null hypothesis

H 20: Self-controlled accept the null hypothesis



group:



H 23: Salvation

H 24: Helpful

H 25: Honest

Fort Worth male inmates versus the NQRC samnlA The

inmate group will place more importance on the following

items when contrasted with the NORC sample:






38

H 26

H 27

H 28

H 29

Pleasure

Wisdom

Self-controlled

Capable





The inmate group will place less importance on the following


H 30

H 31

H 32

H 33

H 34

A world at peace

Equality

National security

Salvation

Honest

reject the null hypothesis





Fort Worth female inmates versus the NORC sample. The

inmate group will place more importance on the following


H 35

H 36

H 37

H 38

H 39

H 40

H 41

H 42

H 43

H 44

H 45

An exciting life

A sense of accomp.

Freedom

Inner harmony

Wisdom

Broadminded

Capable

Independent

Intellectual

Logical

Self-controlled












39

The inmate group will place less importance on the following

items when compared with the NORC sample:

H 46

H 47

H 48

H 49

H 50

A world at peace

National security

Salvation

Helpful

Honest






Interpretati nn

One could argue that comparing responses obtained in 1987

with responses obtained in 1968 (NORC) may be problematic in

the case of the value items. For example, in 1968 this nation

was experiencing the Viet Nam War and civil rights

demonstrations and so one may assume that citizens today would

place less importance on some of these items than they did in

1968. While this assumption may be true, it is imperative to

keep in mind that Cochrane found statistically significant

differences between a prison population and the NORC data in

1971 for these same items ("a world at peace," "equality," and

"national security"). An additional caution related to

interpretation was the difference in sample size between the

inmate group (N = 62) and the NORC sample (N = 1409).

The hypotheses were created to replicate the research of

Cochrane (1971) who found statistically significant

differences between a Michigan prison sample and a matched

control group drawn from the NORC sample (Rokeach, 1968). The

40

results of the four sets of hypotheses are presented and

interpreted in the following section.

lisle and female embezzlers versus their matched controls

The research hypotheses in these sections were based on the

theoretical assumption that the embezzler's value system has

far more influence on his or her committing a crime than the

value system of a criminal convicted of a crime other than

embezzlement (for example, drug or fire arms violations).

This was reasoned because the embezzlers, unlike other

offenders, are educated, employable, and middle-class. Hence,

it was proposed that those values reflecting self-centeredness

would be endorsed by the embezzlers. These hypotheses were

assessed by the median test (.05 level of significance, one-

tailed test). All the null hypotheses in this section were

accepted suggesting no differences between these groups. That

is, the embezzlers possess those value systems which are

characteristic of those inmates convicted of other crimes.

£ori Wprtfr sals jrmateg versus tii£ NORC sample. As

displayed in the list of hypotheses, three null hypotheses in

this category were rejected. "A world at peace," "equality,"

and "national security" are those items that demonstrated

differences between the male inmate group as contrasted with

the NORC data. Although only three of these items yielded

differences between the groups these three items did fit the

theoretical framework of Cochrane, who found that members of

the prison population do not favor those values which do not

41

have immediate and personal relevance. Concerning the item

equality, it must be noted that this item was favored more

by blacks than by whites (Cochrane, 1971).

Fort Worth female inmates versus the NORC sample. It was

evident in the list of the hypotheses that the following items

met the terms for rejecting the null hypothesis: "an exciting

life," "wisdom," "independent," "intellectual," "logical," "a

world at peace," and "national security." These findings

partially supported the results of Cochrane (1971). Keep in

mind that these hypotheses take into consideration the basic

differences between male and female ranking of values

(Rokeach, 1968, 1973). Attending to the differences between

the inmates and the general population, female prisoners

constitute a much more rare group as compared to their male

counterparts (Cochrane, 1971). Cochrane noted that these

females must violate the social norms far more often than

males in order to be prosecuted and incarcerated.

Cochrane revealed that female convicts differ from their

matched control group on 14 of 36 values. Cochrane observed

that the value systems of the female prisoners resembled -

"masculine" preferences more than their female control group.

These results partially supported this notion by demonstrating

that the female inmates at Fort Worth endorsed such

masculine value systems. In this investigation female

inmates preferred "an exciting life," "independent,"

"intellectual," and logical."

42

Further Analyses

Consistent with the contrasted groups design, additional

conclusions about these various groups were drawn by situating

their rankings of items side by side and interpreting the

results horizontally. Tables 4, 5, 6, and 7 illustrate the

contrasts and comparisons of the Fort Worth inmates with

Cochrane's (1971) Michigan sample as well as with the matched

control group he had drawn from the NORC data set. These

tables were stratified according to gender, offense category

(only for Fort Worth: embezzlers versus the matched offender

control group), and type of value (terminal and instrumental).

While these lengthy tables can overwhelm the reader with data,

these groups can be contrasted more readily if the most

preferred values were listed independently to accentuate the

differences. Six contrast groups, stratified by gender and

type of value (terminal and instrumental), have been

identified in order to assess their respective value systems.

The contrasted groups for this design were: (1) Embezzlers

(males and females as separate groups), (2) Matched Offender

Control Groups (males and females as separate groups), (3)

Fort Worth inmate group (embezzlers and matched offender

control group: males and females as separate groups), (4)

Michigan prison group (Cochrane, 1971), (5) Cochrane's (1971)

matched control group drawn from the NORC, and (6) the NORC

sample (Rokeach, 1968, 1973) (see Appendix C).

43

One advantage of the contrasted groups design was its

ability to identify group differences and similarities. Of

all the terminal values in each of the male contrasted groups,

only one value was listed as among the five most preferred

values: "family security." Therefore, this value was

important to the prison groups and the general population.

Freedom was listed in three of the four prison groups

and the NORC sample, which demonstrated its importance to both

populations. Cochrane (1971) mentioned in his study that

"freedom" was valued more by the matched control group than by

the prison group. Cochrane explained that, although prisoners

were aware of their lack of freedom, this lower ranking may be

an attempt to reduce the dissonance aroused by imprisonment"

(1971, p. 76). Among other common values, "self-respect" and

a comfortable life" were also endorsed by the prison groups

and the general population sample.

One value that was strongly preferred by only the general

population sample was "a world at peace." The lack of this

preference clearly showed that the prison group placed a low

priority on large-scale social situations. This finding

supported Cochrane who stated: "In general it appears that

those values which do not have immediate and personal

relevance are considered less important by the prison group

than the control group" (1971, p. 76).

44

Table 4

Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups

Survey Item Emb.

H = 8

Med/Rnk

Terminal Values

Non-Emb. Emb. & Non ^Michigan ++NORC

8

Med/Rnk

16

Med/Rnk

363

Med/Rnk

100

A comfortable life 6 .5/5 4 .0/3 5.5/5 7 .43/6 7 .67/6 An exciting life 11 .0/13 10 .0/10 11.0/12 13 .13/15 13 .86/17 A sense of accomp. 7 .0/6 6 .0/5 6.0/6 7 .68/7 9 .00/9

A world of peace 10 .5/12 14 .0/15.5 12.5/13 *9 .00/9 *4 .27/3

A world of beauty 14 .0/14.5 13 .0/13 14.0/15.5 14 .51/17 13 .77/16 Equality 16 .0/18 14 .0/15.5 14.5/17 *8 .52/8 *6 .50/4 Family security 1 .0/1 4 .5/4 2.0/1 4 .61/1 3 .61/1 Freedom 7 .5/8 2 • 5/1 4.0/2.5 5 .33/3 3 .92/2 Happiness (Form D)

*6, .49/4 Happiness (Form D)

*6, .49/4 *8 . 10/7 Health (Form G) 5 .0/4 3, .5/2 4.0/2.5

Inner harmony 10, .0/11 10. .5/11 10.5/11 9. 88/12 11. 30/12 Mature love 7. .5/8 8. ,0/7 7.5/7 9. 72/11 11. ,60/13 National security 15. 5/17 15. 5/18 15.5/18 *13. 88/16 *11. 63/14 Pleasure 14. 0/14.5 13. 5/14 14.0/15.5 *12. 92/14 *14. 40/18 Salvation 3. 5/3 15. 5/17 8.5/9 *15. 05/18 *11. 21/11 Self-respect 3. 0/2 7. 5/6 5.0/4 6. 73/5 7. 64/5 Social recogition 14. 5/16 12. 5/12 13.0/14 12. 03/13 13. 30/15 True friendship 7. 5/8 9. 0/8.5 8.0/8 9. 52/10 10. 00/10 Wisdom 9. 5/10 9. 0/8.5 9.0/10 *8. 17/2 *5. 16/8

Indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median

test). These are the results of Cochrane's (1974) study.

+This Michigan category represents Cochrane1s (1971) prison sample.

+*This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched

control group.

Med: refers to composite median.

Rnk: refers to composite rank order by ranking the medians.

45

Table 5

Value Rankings of Male Prisoners and Matched Control Groups

Survey Item

Instrumental Values

Emb. Non-Emb. Emb. & Hon +Michigan

H = 8 8 16 363

Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk

++ NORC

100

Med/Rnk

Ambitious 5 .0/2.5 4 .5/2 5 .0/2.5 6 .11/1 6 .00/2

Broadminded 8 .0/6 10 .5/11 8 .5/6.5 7 .16/4 7 .79/5

Capable 9 .5/10 11 .0/14 10 .5/11.5 *8 . 11/7 *9 .72/11

Cheerful (Form D) 11 .97/15 10 .50/12

Loyal (Form G) 9 .0/8 11 .0/14 9 .5/10

Clean 9 .5/10 5 .5/4 8 .5/6.5 7 .69/6 9 .36/8

Courageous 12, .5/14.5 10 .0/9.5 11 .5/14 8. .68/9 7 .00/4

Forgiving 5, .0/2.5 8 .5/6 7 .0/4 10 .10/11 8 .07/6

Helpful 11. .0/13 11, .0/14 11, .0/13 10, .32/12 9 .50/9

Honest 3, .0/1 4 .0/1 4 .0/1 *6, .16/2 *3 .77/1

Imaginative 12. .5/14.5 11, .0/14 12. . 5/17 14. .71/18 13, .50/17

Independent 10. .0/12 11, .0/14 10. .5/11.5 8. .67/8 8, .50/7

Intellectual 13. ,0/16 8. .5/6 12. 0/15.5 10. .09/10 12. ,30/15

Logical 14. .0/17 10. ,0/9.5 12. 0/15.5 13. ,35/16 13. .37/16

Loving 6. 0/4 8. 5/6 7. 5/5 11. 13/14 11. 50/14

Obedient 15. 5/18 16. 0/18 15. 5/18 13. 42/17 13. 88/18

Polite 8. 5/7 11. 5/17 9. 0/8.5 10. 63/13 11. 00/13

Responsible 6. 5/5 5. 0/3 5. 0/2.5 7. 23/5 6. 79/3

Self-controlled 9. 5/10 9. 0/8 9. 0/8.5 *6. 90/3 *9. 68/10

Indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median


+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison sample.

++This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched

control group.



46

Table 6

Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups

Terminal Values

Survey Item Emb. Non-Emb. Emb. & Hon "^Michigan ++NORC

& = 23 23 46 98 91

Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk

A comfortable life 12.0/13 10.0/11.5 11 .0/12.5 8 .50/9 7 .69/7

An exciting life 14.0/15.5 • • 16.0/18 14 .0/15 *14 .79/18 *16 .43/18

A sense of accomp. 9.0/8.5 9.0/9 9 .0/8.5 *8 . 10/8 *9 .94/9 A world of peace 10.0/10.5 9.0/9 9 .0/8.5 *7 .36/7 *3 .36/1

A world of beauty 13.0/14 14.0/15.5 14 .0/15 13 .38/17 14 .45/16 Equality 11.0/12 11.0/13 11 .0/12.5 6 .17/4 6 .25/4 Family security 3.0/1 4.0/2 3 • 5/1 4 .50/2 3 .75/2 Freedom 6.0/5.5 6.0/4.5 6 .0/4.5 *3 .32/1 *4 .88/3 Happiness (Form D)

.30/8 .86/5 Happiness (Form D)

7 .30/8 6 . .86/5

Health (Form G) 5.0/3.5 3.0/1 4 .5/3

Inner harmony 8.0/7 9.0/9 8. .5/7 *8, .83/10 *10. 71/12

Mature love 9.0/8.5 10.0/11.5 10. .0/10.5 10. ,50/11 11. 42/13

National security 15.0/17 14.0/15.5 14. 5/17 *13. 50/14 11. 64/14 Pleasure 14.0/15.5 14.0/15.5 14. 0/15 13. 80/16 14. 69/17 Salvation 5.0/3.5 7.0/6 6 . 5/6 13. 72/15 10. 60/11 Self-respect 4.0/2 5.0/3 4. 0/2 6. 59/5 7. 39/6

Social recognition 16.0.18 14.0/15.5 15. 0/18 13. 36/13 14. 00/15 True friendship 10.0/10.5 8.0/7 10. 0/10.5 11. 25/12 10. 10/10 Wisdom 6.0/5.5 6.0/4.5 6. 0/4.5 *5. 00/3 *9. 13/8

"indicates a statistically significant difference between groups (median


+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) p r i 8 e n s a m p l e .

++This NORC sample was drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched

control group.



47

Table 7

Value Rankings of Female Prisoners and Matched Control Groups

Survey Item

Instrumental Values

Non-Emb FmVi A. +-K

fi = 23

Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk Med/Rnk

Ambitious 10.0/9.5 7.0/5 8.5/6 6.33/4 6.33/3 Broadminded 11.0/12 9.0/8.5 11.0/11 .5 *5.70/1 *8.94/9 Capable 12.0/14.5 13.0/15 12.0/14 .5 *9.17/9 *10.38/13 Cheerful (Form D)

11.50/15 Cheerful (Form D)

11.50/15 11.58/14 Loyal (Form G) 8.0/5 9.0/8.5 9.0/8

Clean 9.0/7 9.0/8.5 9.0/8 5.83/2 5.27/2 Courageous 12.0/14.5 12.0/13.5 12.0/14 .5 9.21/10 8.80/8 Forgiving 7.0/4 6.0/3.5 6.5/4 8.17/7 7.67/5 Helpful 9.0/7 9.0/8.5 9.0/8 *10.64/12 *8.60/7 Honest 2.0/1 3.0/1 2.5/1 *6.00/3 *3.85/1 Imaginative 15.0/17.5 14.0/16.5 14.5/17 15.90/18 16.09/18 Independent 9.0/7 6.0/3.5 7.0/5 *8.50/8 *10.33/12 Intellectual 11.0/12 14.0/16.5 11.0/11. 5 *11.00/13 *12.86/16 Logical 14.0/16 10.0/11 12.0/14. 5 *12.67/16 14.82/17 Loving 4.0/2 9.0/8.5 5.5/3 11.00/14 8.40/6 Obedient 15.0/17.5 15.0/18 15.0/18 12.92/17 12.13/15 Polite 11.0/12 12.0/13.5 12.0/14. 5 10.32/11 9.42/11 Responsible 5.0/3 5.0/2 5.0/2 6.64/5 6.58/4 Self-controlled 10.0/9.5 11.0/12 10.0/10 *7.27/6 *9.40/10

•indict.. . s i g n i f i c a n t d i « . , . „ c . ( m . d i w


+This Michigan category represents Cochrane's (1971) prison sample.

This NORC sample vas drawn by Cochrane (1971) to serve as a matched

control group.



48

Taking into consideration the alteration in RVS forms

(D versus G), it was assumed that this instrument was

improved by replacing "happiness" (a global and somewhat

vague item) with "health" (a more specific term). In this

design, "health" was strongly endorsed by those groups

tested with Form G, and "happiness" was strongly endorsed by

those groups tested with Form D.

The terminal values preferred by the female groups were

similar to those of their male counterparts. The only

salient difference between the male and female groups was

that "wisdom" was strongly preferred by all of the female

prison groups while this item was strongly valued by only

one male prison group. Consistent with the male value

systems, the female prison groups also discounted "a world

at peace."

Among the instrumental value systems of the male

groups, there were three common values listed by all of the

groups: "honest," "ambitious" and "responsible." These

values were preferred by both the prison groups as well as

those members of the general population. Cochrane (1971)

believed that the endorsement of "honest" could be

indicative of the conflict between the prisoners' values and

behavior, which could be used as additional material for

dissonance reduction studies.

It was also worth noting that the items "forgiving" and

"loving" were preferred by three of the four prison groups

49

but not by the general population sample. This result may

be interpreted as a function of the punishment and

incarceration of the prison groups. Finally, "courageous"

was favored by the general population sample, but not

preferred by any of the prison groups. The RVS defined

"courageous" as standing up for your beliefs, and it

appeared that the prison groups did not consider this value

to be important.

The female instrumental values also appeared to be

similar to those of the male groups which suggested that

different patterns between genders did not exist. However,

one exception was the item "independent," which was endorsed

by two of the prison groups but not by either of the general

population samples. It could be hypothesized that an

extreme sense of independence (self-reliant and self-

sufficient) may leave a woman vulnerable to criminal, or

unconventional, paths toward achieving self-reliance.

The results in this study partially supported some of

Cochrane's findings that inmate value systems differ from

the general population. He enhanced his interpretations by

noting that male and female prison groups "resemble each

other much more closely than they resemble their respective

controls' value system" (1971, p. 78). (For additional

comparisons based on this assumption, refer to Tables 8 and

9, which illustrate the terminal and instrumental values as

reported by males and females.)

50

Survey Item

Table 8

Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Terminal Values

Comparison of Gender

Fort Worth NORC

Median Median

Males Females Males Females (N = 16) (N = 46) (N = 665) (N = 744)

A comfortable life 5.5 11 .0 7 .77 10.02

An exciting life 11.0 14 .0* 14 .62 15.57*

A sense of accomp. 6.0 9 .0 8 .29 9.40

A world at peace 12.5* 9 . 0* 3 .75* 3.00*

A world of beauty 14.0 14 .0 13 .61 13.51

Equality 14.5* 11 .0 8 .87* 8.29

Family security 2.0 3 .5 3 .86 3.78

Freedo 4.0 6 .0 4, .91 6.05

Happiness (Form D) — — 7. .94 7.34

Health (Form G) 4.0 4. .5 — - -

Inner harmony 10.5 8. .5 11. .08 9.83

Mature love 7.5 10. 0 12. 57 12.32

National security 15.5* 14. 5* 9. 21* 9.81*

Pleasure 14.0 14. 0 14. 14 14.97

Salvation 8.5 6. 5 9. 88 7.33

Self-respect 5.0 4. 0 8. 16 7.40

Social recognition 13.0 15. 0 13. 79 15.01

True friendship 8.0 10. 0 9. 63 9.06

Wisdom 9.0 6. 0* 8. 49 7.71*

•Supports the hypothesized difference between groups.

51

Survey Item

Table 9

Fort Worth and NORC Medians for Instrumental Values

Comparison of Gender

Fort Worth NORC

Median Median

Males Females Males Females (M = 16) (N = 46) (fi = 665) (N = 744)

Ambitious 5.0 8.5 5.61 7.33

Broadminded 8.5 11.0 7.20 7.64

Capable 10.5 12.0 8.86 10.10

Cheerful (Form D) 10.41 9.43

Loyal (Form G) 9.5 9.0

Clean 8.5 9.0 9.43 8.13

Courageous 11.5 12.0 7.49 8.06

Forgiving 7.0 6.5 8.23 6.43

Helpful 11.0 9.0 8.35 8.07

Honest 4.0 2.5 3.43 3.21

Imaginative 12.5 14.5 14.28 16.10

Independent 10.5 7.0* 10.17 10.72*

Intellectual 12.0 11.0* 12.77 13.22*

Logical 12.0 12.0* 13.51 14.65*

Loving 7.5 5.5 10.90 8.64

Obedient 15.5 15.0 13.51 13.08

Polite 9.0 12.0 10.85 10.71

Responsible 5.0 5.0 6.58 6.82

Self-controlled 9.0 10.0 9.65 9.55

52

Although Cochrane revealed more differences between the

Michigan prison groups and their matched control groups than

were obtained in this study, this may be attributed to the

qualitative differences between the prison population at

Fort Worth as compared to other prisons. For example, the

inmates at Fort Worth are generally low risk, nonviolent,

and minimum security. However, while not all of the inmates

at Fort Worth are middle-class, white-collar, and educated,

many of the embezzlers did fit this description.

Considering these characteristics, inmates at Fort Worth

(particularly the embezzlers) resemble the general

population far more than they resemble other prison

populations.

Additional Analyses

Because gender was only one of the demographic

variables used to stratify these samples, it was appropriate

to introduce those meaningful findings based on the other

characteristics of these samples: age, race, education,

religion, and income. The selection of these variables was

based on those listed by Rokeach (1968, 1973). This section

concentrates on the salient features of the additional

analyses.

Age. Rokeach (1973) presented a comprehensive analysis

of values as they related to a person's individual

development. He proposed a series of developmental patterns

in which a person's chronological age corresponded with a

53

particular value system. This author included age as a

variable to take into account the influence a person's age

has on his or her value system.

Four major age categories (and their respective N) were

delineated for the Fort Worth samples: 20-29 (N = 10), 30-

39 (N = 28), 40-49 (fi = 12), and 50-59 (JtJ = 12) (see Table

3). Responses to the RVS items for these age categories

were reported in Appendix D as they compared and contrasted

with the data from the NORC sample. As was the case with

many of these findings, one must exercise caution when

comparing the sample from Fort Worth with the NORC sample

because of the difference in size.

Consistent with the previous findings, when the Fort

Worth group and the NORC sample were divided into age

groups, drastic differences in the ranking of the items "a

world at peace," "equality" and "national security"

appeared. Each of the inmate age categories clearly placed

a lower emphasis on these items than the NORC sample, which

added additional support to the conclusion that these

inmates were more self-centered and less concerned for

society.

The item "self-respect" also differentiated between

these age groups. The inmates placed more importance on

this item, which may be indicative of their current struggle

with dissonance. Once a person has endured the process of

criminalization through the criminal justice system he or

54

she may seek self-respect because nobody else appears to

respect them. This experience with the criminal justice

system may also explain the differences on the items

broadminded (defined as open—minded) and "courageous"

(defined as standing up for one's beliefs) in which the Fort

Worth group placed much less importance than the NORC

sample. Upon experiencing punishment and degradation from

the system, one may not be expected to retain an open mind

or feel that it pays to stand up for one's beliefs.

Considering this, one may also understand why the Fort Worth

group favored "forgiving" more than the NORC sample.

Finally, the item "loving" (defined as affectionate and

tender) was ranked higher, which may be a function of

gender, particularly in a co-correctional institution where

members of the opposite sex are constant reminders of

affection and "tenderness.

Race. In one of his studies, Rokeach (1973) found that

race was an important factor in determining a person's value

system. For example, a person who has experienced racial

discrimination may form a value system different from that

of a person who has not endured such degradation.

Taking this into consideration, race was selected as an

additional variable to analyze value systems. For the

purposes of this investigation, blacks were not sufficiently

represented in this investigation. This is not to say that

blacks were not sufficiently represented at F.C.I., Fort

55

Worth, but the target population was the embezzler, and

there were only two black embezzlers (both female) in this

sample (four blacks total, including their matched controls,

see Table 3). Therefore, no inferences about the responses

56

and comparisons with the NORC sample in this section focused

on these two educational categories.

Table 10

Frequency Distributions of Education

Years of Education

Frequency Percent

4 3 4.8

5 2 3.2

7 2 3.2

8 3 4.8

9 1 1.6

10 1 1.6

11 1 1.6

12 23 37.1

13 7 11.3

14 7 11.3

15 6 9.7

16 4 6.5

17 1 1.6

18 1 1.6

Total 62 100.0

Note. M - 12.00; Median = 12.00; SD = 3.178

57

As expected, both of these categories ranked the

following items lower than the NORC sample: "a world at

peace, "equality," "national security," "broadminded,"

courageous," and "loving." The inmates in these categories

Placed more importance on "salvation," and "self-respect."

The differences in the item "self-controlled" (defined as

restrained and self-disciplined) appeared to be masked by

other variables until the sample was stratified by

education. In this case "self-controlled" was ranked lower

by those with "some college" than by the same educational

category in the NORC sample.

Religion. Religion was also included as an additional

variable because of the basic relationship between religion

and values. Religion is assumed to be comprised of an

identifiable set of values and a person's religious

background is assumed to influence his or her value system.

Similar to the variable education, the inmates in this

sample represented two major categories: Catholic (N = 19)

and Baptist (N = 19) (see Table 11 and Appendix G).

Considering this breakdown, the interpretations were limited

to these religious groups as they compared to the same

religions reported by the NORC.

The Catholics and Baptists in the Fort Worth sample

also placed a low priority on "a world at peace,"

"equality," "national security," "ambitious," "broadminded,"

"courageous," and "obedient." On the other hand, both of

58

Table 11

Frequency Distributions of Religion

Value Label Frequency Percent

Catholic 19 30.6

Episcopalian 2 3.2

Lutheran 2 3.2

Presbyterian 3 4.8

Methodist 6 9.7

Baptist 19 30.6

None 1 1.6

Other 10 16.1

these religious groups placed more importance on "mature

love," "self-respect," "independence," and "logical." The

Baptists, as opposed to the Catholics, assigned a higher

value on "loving," and "responsible," and both groups ranked

"wisdom" higher than their respective NORC categories.

An additional finding from this analysis was that the

Catholics appeared to fit Cochrane's model that "pleasure"

is valued more by Michigan prisoners than their matched

control group. In this investigation, the incarcerated

Catholics placed a higher premium on "pleasure" than those

Catholics in the NORC sample.

59

Admittedly there was a major drawback by stratifying a

prison sample by religion. The most obvious problem was

that it was difficult to infer their degree of religiosity

from their stated preference. One may assume that

criminality is an indication of a low degree of religiosity.

However, imprisonment often rekindles a concern for religion

as seen by inmates who embrace Bibles and attend services.

Consequently, it was difficult to determine if such inmates

were sincerely religious or trying to project a "reformed-

character (or both).

Income. An additional variable used to stratify the

inmate sample at Fort Worth was income. Rokeach (1973)

described the basic differences between individuals of

different income brackets. He argued that, when appraising

a person's value system, income should be one of the

variables taken into consideration. As is the case with the

other variables, income may influence life chances and

experiences which, in turn, affect the formation of a value

system.

Table 12 and Appendix H list the 16 income categories

and their respective frequencies. In order to avoid any

negative (or threatened) responses to this income variable

by the inmates, broad categories were used instead of exact

income disclosures. It was assumed that income was a

sensitive issue with these inmates, particularly the

embezzlers. The first six income categories were included

60

so that these responses could be compared and contrasted

with those NORC responses published by Rokeach (1973).

Table 12

Frequency Distributions for Income

Value Label Frequency Percent

0-2,000 4 6.5

2,000-3,999 1 1.6

4,000-5,999 3 4.8

8,000-9,999 1 1.6

10-15K 12 19.4

16-20K 6 9.7

21-25K 10 16.1

26-30K 12 19.4

31-40K 4 6.5

41-50K 3 4.8

51-60K 1 1.6

61-70K 1 1.6

91K + 3 4.8

Total 61 100.0

Note. M = 7.672; Median = 8.000; SD = 3.295.

A serious limitation in usin

Documents

37? THE VALUE SYSTEMS OF INCARCERATED EMBEZZLERS: …/67531/metadc330949/... · criminological theories fail to provide a cogent understanding of embezzlement. In light of this, there