| The United States incarcerates more people per capita than all but one nation (Seychelles) in the world (World Prison Brief, 2016). In 2014, an estimated 1.5 million adults were incarcerated in U.S. prisons, translating to an imprisonment rate of 612 inmates per 100,000 adult U.S. residents (Carson, 2015). To supervise these inmates, an estimated 475,000 individuals are employed in more than 1,800 state and federal correctional institutions (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017; Stephen, 2008). These individuals are an important resource because they are charged with the myriad tasks necessary to operate a secure, safe, and humane prison. These staff members are also an expensive resource; more than $70 billion is spent annually on U.S. prisons (Kincade, 2017), and between 70% and 80% of the operating budget for a typical prison is for staff (Camp & Gaes, 2002; Tewksbury & Higgins, 2006). In light of the importance and cost of staff, it is no surprise that there has been a growth in research focusing on prison staff. One area in the literature has been how workplace factors affect the job satisfaction of staff. Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences” (p. 1300). Muchinsky (1987) viewed job satisfaction as an emotional, affective response resulting from the extent to which people derive pleasure from their jobs. Lu, Barriball, Zhang, and White (2012) saw job satisfaction as a global affective orientation a person has toward his or her job. Simply, job satisfaction is “the extent to which people like or dislike their jobs. As it is generally assessed, job satisfaction is an attitudinal variable” (Spector, 1997, p. 2). Past correctional research has found that job satisfaction is an important work concept. Job satisfaction among correctional staff has been found to be associated with reduced work absenteeism, lower levels of job burnout, decreased turnover intent/turnout, increased support for inmate participation in rehabilitation programs, higher life satisfaction, greater commitment to the prison organization, an increased likelihood of engaging in prosocial work behaviors (i.e., going above what is expected), improved work performance, and greater creativity and support for organizational change (Byrd, Cochran, Silverman, & Blount, 2000; Farkas, 1999; Fox, 1982; Griffin, Hogan, Lambert, TuckerGail, & Baker, 2010; Jurik & Winn, 1987; Lambert, 2004, 2010; Lambert, Edwards, Camp, & Saylor, 2005; Lambert, Hogan, Paoline, & Baker, 2005; Leip & Stinchcomb, 2013; Matz, Wells, Minor, & Angel, 2012; Robinson, Porporino, & Simourd, 1997; Whitehead & Lindquist, 1986; Wright, 1993). In light of the salient outcomes associated with it, it is important to identity the variables that help shape the job satisfaction of prison staff. In addition to utilitarian reasons, there are humanitarian reasons to study the variables that raise or lower job satisfaction, including making the job more enjoyable and pleasant for prison staff (Yang, Brown, & Moon, 2011). |