Prisons in the US vs Hong Kong

Example paper completed for:

ilyssa chen
ocean avenue
brooklyn, NY 11229
United States

(who now claims the purchase was unauthorized)

---------------

An Analysis and Comparison of Prison Systems in the U.S. vs. Hong Kong

This paper will compare the widely different correctional systems of the United States and Hong Kong. The U.S., because of the size and regional variation of being a large country, obviously has many internal differences: Prisons in rural Kentucky can be vastly different from urban prisons in southcentral Los Angeles. The Hong Kong prison system, on the other hand, is more homogenous, serving as it does the more manageable area of a highly urbanized island. Nevertheless, it is still possible to generalize about the American correctional system in overall terms and to compare that basic model to that of the Hong Kong system. This paper will strive to identify the salient points of each systems, the strengths as well as the weaknesses, and compare and contrast them.

There is one salient aspect makes the American correctional system immediately stand out from all others in the world: It currently has the highest rate of incarceration of any country, locking up 716 people per 100,000 (Center for Prison Studies 2013). What this means is that the U.S. has five percent of the world's population, but a quarter of its prisoners-or morethan 2.2 million (The Economist 2013). Hong Kong, by contrast, pales in comparison, locking up 128 per 100,000, and ranking 121 on the same world ranking (Center for Prison Studies). The reasons behind this are not germane to this paper, but they do indicate that the U.S. has a much larger criminal population, and much of that seems to tie in directly with the American War on Drugs.

Regardless populations generally, another major issue is overcrowding. Both systems are currently overloaded with prisoners, but Hong Kong prisons are especially overcrowded (Human Rights Correspondence School 2013). Maximum security prisons particularly, and the worst example is the Stanley prison, which held 2032 inmats despite a maximum capacity of 1409 (Human Rights Correspondence School). Women's prisons in Hong Kong are also operating at far above capacity, with three women's prisons in 2012 reporting operation at 228, 189, and 178 of capacity (Human Rights Correspondence School). Overall, the Hong Kong correctional system was 1,137 prisoners above the total capacity of 10,963 prisoners (Human Rights Correspondence School).

Overcrowding in American prisons varies greatly from state to state, but at its worst, in California, the situation is just as bad if not worse than in Hong Kong. Overcrowding reached such proportions in California that the state was mandated by state court, then by the U.S. Supreme Court to remedy the situation, by "shedding 30,000 prisoners over the next two years" (Medina 2011). This resulted in roughly 10,000 prisoners not being released, but being shipped to the prison systems of other states (Medina). California is usually regarded as the bellweather state in the U.S., giving an indication of where future trends are heading. The currrent indictions in the correctional department do not look promising.

Just as bad as the overcrowding, is that there is "far too much idleness," according to Matthew Cate, the secretary of the state prison system (Medina). This creates a dangerous and morally corrosive situation in which criminals sit around with nothing to do other than learn criminal skills from other criminals. In enforced idleness situations such as this, inmates are not even receiving the pretense of rehabilitation, but only stagnating in an environment almost guaranteed to make them become worse. Combined with overcrowding, this "leads to greater violence, more staff overtime and a total inability to deal with health care and mental illness issues," according to a former California state prison director (Medina).

The Hong Kong system, as does the U.S., separates its inmates according to sex, and to age (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government 2013). The systems runs compulsionary drug treatment for those convicted of drug-related crimes, with can last up to one year, with a follow-up probationary period of one year. Inmates are also provided psychological services if such are determined to be needed following a compulsory psychological screening (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government). Young inmates (between the ages of 14 and 21) are also required to sit through half-days of classwork (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government). The Hong Kong prison system is also striving to implement non-smoking policies in its jails, in conformance with the increasingly strict antismoking policies of Hong Kong itself, and one of its prisons in 2013 became entirely smoke-free (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government).

While Hong Kong prisons are entirely state run, the trend in the American prison system is towards privitization, a trend that has been greatly criticized in recent years. That is, more and more American prisons are being run by for-profit companies. A RAND study estimates that about eight percent of American prisoners are currently incarcerated in private prisons as of 2011 (Davis, Bozick, Steele, Saunders, and Miles 2013 p. 4).

Another big difference between the two systems is that the American prison system is more ethnically diverse than the Hong Kong prison population. Hong Kong prisons are overwhelming populated with ethnic Chinese, while American prisons are made up of the Caucasian, African-Americans, Latinos, Asian, etc., although the proportion of blacks and Latinos is much higher than their representation of the total population-so disproportionate, in fact, that "there are more black men in the grip of the criminal-justice system-in prison, on probation, or on parole-than were in slavery" (Gopnik 2013).

But American prisoners also seem to have more rights and priveleges than their counterparts in lockup in Hong Kong. For example, inmates in Hong Kong are prohibited from making phone calls (Human Rights Correspondence School). They can only receive visits from family or friends or others (only with special permission) twice a month, with no more than 3 at a time, for a duration of half an hour; some prisons also permit two additional monthly visits (Human Rights Correspondence School.) American prisoners have considerably more visitations privileges in general, especially with regard to phone calls, but again there is a huge variation in the policies that different states and individual prisons adopt.

Conditons in American jails again vary very much, but conditions in Hong Kong jails are considered generally to be "not too bad" (Human Rights Correspondence School). However, there is also a heavy gang, or Triad, presence, mainly composed of Hong Kong citizens, in order to protect themselves from Chinese nationals (Human Rights Correspondence School). American prisoners are notorious for vast arrays of different prison gangs, including the Aryan Brotherhood (a neo-Nazi white supremacist group), the Black Guerrilla Family, and Nuestra Familia, each of which is essentially a racially-based and extremely violent gang (U.S. Department of Justice 2013). California, incidentally, is also regarded as "the birthplace for every major prison gang in the country," according to state secretary Cates (Medina).

In contrast to the American and particularly the Californian culture of prison idleness, overcrowding, and gang-infested criminality, the Hong Kong jails strive to keep their inmates active, by keeping their prisoners "purposely and gainfully occupied for maintaining prison stability" (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government). The prison system tries to achieve this by rehabilitation services, as well as industrial and vocational training (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government). The Hong Kong system puts a vast majority of its inmates to work, making "office furniture, staff uniforms and leather acccoutrements, hospital linen, filter masks, fiberglass litter containers, traffic signs, slabs and kerbs for infrastructure projects" (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government). The system also runs accredited vocational programs that lead to credentials that inmates can then put to use when they are released (Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government).

American prisoners also have vocational opportunities, which again vary widely, but are increasingy recognized as having an excellent effect on combatting recidivism. A recent RAND meta-analysis showed that vocational training in particular was successful in helping released inmates integrate more smoothly and permanently into civilian life after been released, and had a 28 percent higher chance of gained employment after being released (Davis, Bozick, Steele, Saunders, and Miles, 2013 p. xvii). However, the problem with many U.S. programs is that unlike the counterparts in Hong Kong, these programs are not mandatory (p. 4). Inmates in many states have the freedom to not participate, and there is not a uniform consensus on essentially forcing prisoners to stay active, and opposed to the conditions of idleness lamented above by the state prisoner secretary in California.

Overall, the question is which of these systems, the American or the Hong Kong, is more effective. Comparing the two can be incredibly difficult, because of the massive variations that extend across the American system, versus the relative sameness and small, self-contained nature of the Hong Kong system. But in the end, the Hong Kong system seems to be the more efficient of the two. True, it is also the easier to run. Hong Kong is an island-city, and it is easier to run a prison system on an urbanized island that it is to provide rehabilitation for 2.2 million prisoners, or the largest prison population in the world. There are fewer negative variables at work in the Hong Kong prisons, too. Racial problems, though they certainly exist, between Hong Kong citizens and mainland Chinese, as well as mainly prisoners of other nearby Asian countries, is not as complex and varied as the ethnic problem and conflicts that can occur in American jails. This also means that the prison gang problem is therefore more monolithic in Hong Kong jails, as opposed to the widespread proliferation of gangs in American prisons.

But the problems that affect both is overcrowding, and this is an endemic problem that contravenes the basic mandate of modern prisons to rehabilitate rather than to merely punish. Both systems are deficient in this respect, and overcrowding as seen above, leads to poor outcomes, increased violence, results essentially in an education in further criminality, and also results in poor health outcomes, worsened mental health for those with existing mental health issues, and in the end is ultimately bad for society in that the inmates from overcrowded jails are more likely to carry diseases, commit crimes, become unemployed, and generally present an antisocial nuisance to the communities they are released into. So this is big challenge for both of these systems-to reduce overcrowding so that these other problems can be avoided or at least dealt with more effectively.

References

Center for Prison Studies. (2013.) "Entire world-Prison Population Rates per 100,000 of the national population." Center for Prison Studies, the University of Essex.

Davis, Lois, Bozick, Robert, Steele, Jennifer, Saunders, Jessica, and Miles, Jeremy. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education." RAND.

Gopnik, Adam. "The Caging of America." The New Yorker. Web.

Hong Kong Special Administrative Regional Government. (February 2013.) "Hong Kong: The Facts: Correctional Services." Hong Kong Information Services Department. Retrieved from csd.gov.hk

Human Rights Correspondence School. (2013.) "Lesson 2: Case studies of Hong Kong, Thailand and Malaysia with regard to prison conditions and the complaint mechanisms for prisoners." Asian Human Rights Commission. Retrieved 1 December 2013 from Human Rights Correspondence SchoolAsian Human Rights Commission

Medina, Jennifer. "In California Prison, Bunk Beds Replace Pickup Games." The New York Times. Web.

The Economist. "One nation, behind bars." The Economist. Web.

U.S. Department of Justice. "Prison Gangs." U.S. Department of Justice.

Data Collection Methods

You are required to critically discuss how various data collection methods affect the validity, reliability and generality of research findings. You must limit your discussions to research within the field of the social sciences.

Introduction

There have been widespread debates amongst social scientists over what ought to be the ideal data collection method to be used in order to ensure that the validity and reliability of results of a study are not tampered with. Social scientists can either choose qualitative or quantitative data collection methods for the studies which they carry out. For the most part, the choice of data collection method is determined either by the researcher's personal conviction about which of the two data collection methods is more efficient or the nature of the subject to be analysed.

Irrespective of the researcher's personal choice, there are some studies that include measurements and for the most part require quantitative data collection methods. Most marketing experts prefer to make use of quantitative data collection methods because they prefer to measure the data which they use to base their decisions.

Marketing research is often carried out to determine a company's marketing strategy, which most often includes millions of pounds that have been put at stake. For this reason, many companies prefer to have highly reliable results that can be as close as possible to the reality on the ground. This does not in any way imply that quantitative data collection is more reliable than qualitative methods (Fricker, 2008). It is difficult to measure some phenomena in the social sciences. For example, if a researcher wants to carry out a study on the behavioural patterns of Muslims in a particular community, it might be difficult to accurately measure some phenomena. He or she could opt for qualitative research that might not include questionnaires or seek to measure phenomena in numerical terms. The goal of this study is to analyse the various ways through which data collection methods could influence the reliability and validity of the results of social science research.

Quantitative Data Collection Method

Quantitative data collection methods refer to the use of structure data collection instruments; such as the use of questionnaires which include a set of response categories that have been predetermined by the researcher and from which respondents can choose answers. This approach relies on random sampling and makes it easier to gather data that can be easily compared, summarise and even generalised. Quantitative research includes the testing of a hypothesis which has been drawn from a theory. Quantitative research most often includes well structured interviews. The researcher asks respondents a particular set of questions and writes down the answers. Alternatively, the researcher could hand out the same questionnaires with the same questions to different respondents to fill out. Face-to-face interviews have been touted by many researchers because they help to build a rapport between the respondent and researcher. As such, respondents can easily provide much information to the researcher. Face to face interviews often have high response rates because those who accept to take up the interview provide more information than they would have otherwise provided if interviewed over the phone. However, face to face interviews are expensive and time consuming considering the fact that the researcher ha to physically move from one location to the next. This becomes even more complex when the research includes a large sample. Telephone interviews are less expensive and also less time consuming to carry out. However, it has a major weakness which includes the fact that the researcher cannot build the kind of rapport that is built in face to face interview. This can affect the validity of the results of the study especially when the research has to do with subjects that people sometimes shy away from such as sexual issues.

Strengths of Qualitative Data Collection

Qualitative data collection methods have been acclaimed for their ability to provide precision results in social science research (Pawluch et al, 2005). This method makes use of quantitative and reliable measurements which can be easily compared over a specified period of time. One of the most important qualities when it comes to measuring validity and reliability of research results is precision. For this reason, some social scientists prefer to use quantitative data collection techniques. It is relatively easier to maintain control over data collected with the use of questionnaires and which include figures to measure indices. The sampling and research design method makes it possible to set standards which can be maintained through out the data collection process. Questionnaires help to standardise the research data because all respondents are exposed to the same questions and have to choose from predefined answers included on the questionnaires.

Standardization Helps to Make the Results More

Quantitative studies are replicable because the same standards that are used to collect data in one area can be accurately used in another location (Lindlof & Taylor, 2002). This is because the data collection tool remains the same with same questions and predefined answers in studies that do not make use of open ended questions. Unlike other forms of data collection such as verbal interviewing and focus group discussions in which the direction of the conversations can be derailed by something happening in that environment (Patton, 2002). Focus group discussions have a major disadvantage in that the answers provided by some participants are influenced by what they have heard others say during the session. This affects the validity and reliability of the results of the study because some of the data which is used to determine the outcome of the study does not truly reflect the opinions of the participants (Hunter & Erin, 2008). On the other hand, the use of questionnaires helps to collect more accurate data because each respondent answers the questions as an individual. For this reason, it s less likely that the opinions of other respondents to affect other participants in the study.

Quantitative data collection is easier to analyse with the use of computer software like SPSS. Analysing data for studies which include a huge sample number, such as thousands of questionnaires is a complex procedure which can include errors and take a long time to analyse manually. However, quantitative studies which include numerical values are easy to analyse with accuracy using computers. Qualitative data collection procedures are complex to standardise. This is because respondents are expected to answer questions without predefined answers. As such, it is difficult to encode the questions and enter the data into a computer for rapid and accurate analysis. Such data can be easily compared to previous studies and analysed from time to time in comparison to other factors. This makes quantitative data collection method a commendable choice when it comes to gathering, analysing and reporting research data.

Limitations of Quantitative Data Collection Procedure

Considering the complex nature of human experience, it is not easy to effectively control and measure the various variables that are analysed in a study (Hunter & Erin, 2008). If respondents are called upon to answer a questionnaire from MacDonald's which seeks to analyse the quality of a burger. The questionnaire might not be able to best gather the information which McDonald's needs. This is because some of the questions include in the questionnaire have to do with relative concepts. For instance, if respondents are asked to describe the sugar content of a burger, they can only do so based on their relative sense of taste. There is no precise measurement meter in the brain that can measure the taste of sugar in percentages. Those who taste the burger might only be able to describe the sugar content using the adjectives such as, sweet, too sweet or not sweet. However, what respondent A might consider to be too sweet might just be sweet for respondent B. These variations can lead to the questioning of the validity of the findings of a study.

Different people interpret things differently. As such, it is only by explaining further questions that respondents might be able to clarify researchers about the true meaning of the answers which they provide during studies. Unfortunately, most quantitative studies do not take this into account because most of the questionnaires are too rigid and do not give respondents the opportunity to properly express themselves. Even when questionnaires have open ended questions, most researchers depend too much on the questionnaires to the extent that they even fail to ask follow up questions where necessary. This can be a limitation in the sense that the questionnaire does not address every issue in the field. In order to properly collect data from the field, researchers need to use flexible methods making it possible to easily adapt to situations in the quest to gather data from respondents. This can affect the validity of the findings of a study. This is because human beings have varying opinions and behavioural patterns. The answers which they sometimes write on questionnaires might not exactly reflect what they intend to say. At times, some respondents choose and answer from the predetermined answers suggested on the questionnaire just because there is no other answer which exactly describes their opinion about the subject.

Qualitative Data Collection

Quantitative data collection methods refer to a combination of ways in which social scientists collect research data aimed at gaining a deeper understanding of human behaviour. Qualitative data collection is done through interviews, observations, field notes, focus group discussions, narratology, classical ethnography and storytelling. Most studies that make use of qualitative research seek to uncover trends, behavioural patterns and other phenomena that are difficult to measure numerically. Qualitative data collection methods have been the method of choice for many social scientists who want to gain and insider's view into the issues which they set out to investigate when it comes to studies that investigate phenomena linked to behavioural patterns.

Strengths of Qualitative Data Collection

Qualitative data collection helps to see beyond what other social scientific procedures fail to see. Collecting data via discussion with a villager in an impoverished African country, a researcher can gain a better inside about the way of life and challenges of those who live in that community. Designing a questionnaire in Coventry to be administered in that village might miss out on so many points. To begin with, the questionnaires would likely have predetermined answers that have been suggested by the researcher based on his or her understanding of the subject under investigation. This could limit the quality and quantity of data collect and analysed to arrive at the findings of the study. On the other hand, a qualitative study would suggest having discussions with members of that community. The discussions would not be limited to the questionnaires. This would give more room for the respondents to give more information, touching even issues that the researcher would not have imagined if he or she designed a questionnaire.

Qualitative data collection leads to the collection of data which can help the researcher to identify many aspects about the topic under analysis such as the possible effects, causes and relationships between different phenomena. Meanwhile quantitative studies provide leads to possible answers that a respondent can provide qualitative study leaves more room for respondents to express themselves. This leads the researcher to make intriguing discoveries based on what he or she meets in the field, and not what he or she had in mind before going to the field (Patton, 2002). Instead of focusing on figures and statistics, qualitative research includes more narration and discussions that can enable the researcher to understand more about the broad subject that the study set out to analyse. An example is that a study to find out the various reasons why workers in agricultural establishments come late to work would throw more light about the community and the way of life of the members of that community in general. This is because during the data collection procedures, respondents would provide much necessary background information to the researchers. This background information prepares researchers to better understand and interpret phenomena about the studies.

Limitations of Qualitative Data Collection

One of the major criticisms of qualitative data collection is that it some times lacks adequate validity. It is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity considering the subjective nature of most of the data gathered using qualitative methods. Data gathered need to be interpreted in the light of the situation and context in which the respondent provided the data. This makes it difficult to make comparisons or general information collected via this procedure. This can question the validity and reliability of the findings of a particular study. For instance, if a child in Coventry complaints that he is studying in difficult conditions, he or she might mean that he or she is using the same old shoes he or she used the previous year. Another child who lives in a village in Kenya might say that he is studying in difficult conditions because he has not had shoes or text books in school. Suffering becomes a relative concept and cannot be generalised or compared. The two children mentioned in the example above are living in obviously very different circumstances. But both of them use the word "suffering" to describe their conditions.

The length of time required for data collection and analysis in a qualitative study is lengthy and expensive. The researcher also has huge influence in the outcome of the study. The manner in which a researcher moderates a focus group discussion session can affect the direction in which the discussion flows. For this reason, the view points of the researcher have to be removed when reporting the findings; otherwise, it becomes easy for the researcher to include his or her viewpoint when reporting the findings of the study. This can influence the validity and reliability of the study.

Conclusions

The above analysis will help me to complete my research in this module to acceptable standards so as to ensure that the findings reported at the end of my study can be reliable and valid. I would like to keep the margin of error in my study to the lowest possible minimum so as to ensure that the information that I report in my findings is authentic and can contribute a wealth of knowledge to other HRM practitioners and scholars. In order to ensure that the reliability and validity of my study is not jeopardised, I will take the following steps:

- I would make use of quantitative data collection methods. After a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, I have resolved that a quantitative data collection procedure would enable me to arrive at accurate findings at the end of my study.

- I would ensure that my questionnaires also include open ended questions and gives room to respondents to write what they think about the subject at the end of the questionnaire. This would help the respondents to raise issues which I fail to address when designing the questionnaires.

- I will also design my questionnaires after preliminary discussions with a handful of members of the sample population. This encounter would help me to have a better background about the issues to be addressed by the questionnaires in particular and the study in general, thereby improving the validity of the study.

- I will also make sure that I take of time to talk with the respondents so that what ever information they write in the questionnaires would be interpreted in the light of their intentions. For the purpose of clarity, I will keep my questionnaire simple and straight forward to minimise the chances of misinformation.

- I will have several qualitative consultations with members of the population under study. This would help to deepen my knowledge and understanding of the issues that I would see to uncover during the study. This would help me to better interpret the questionnaires.

References

Bethlehem, J. & Biffignandi, S. (2012) Handbook of Web Surveys. Wiley Handbooks in Survey Methodology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons
Creswell, J. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Diriwchter, R. & Valsiner, J. Qualitative Developmental Research Methods in, Their Historical and Epistemological Contexts, FQS, Vol 7, No. 1,

Fricker, R. D. (2008). "Sampling Methods for Web and E-mail Surveys" In Fielding, N.; Lee, R. M.; Blank, G.. The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods, London: SAGE. pp. 195-216

Given, Lisa M. (2008) The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications

Groves, R.M.; Fowler, F. J.; Couper, M.P.; Lepkowski, J.M.; Singer, E.; Tourangeau, R. (2009) Survey Methodology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. "Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging influences" In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.)Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Holliday, A. R. (2007) Doing and Writing Qualitative Research, 2nd Edition. London: Sage Publications

Hunter, Laura and Erin, Leahey. (2008) "Collaborative Research in Sociology: Trends and Contributing Factors". American Sociologist 39:290-306

Loseke, Donileen R. & Cahil, Spencer E. "Publishing qualitative manuscripts: Lessons learned". In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice: Concise Paperback Edition, pp. 491-506. London: Sage

Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. Qualitative communication research methods: Second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Mahoney, J & Goertz, G. (2006) A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research, Political Analysis, 14, 227-249

Mellenbergh, G.J. (2008) "Surveys". In Adèr, H.J.; Mellenbergh, G.J.. Advising on Research Methods: A consultant's companion, Huizen, The Netherlands: Johannes van Kessel Publishing. pp. 183-209

Patton, M. Q. Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd edition), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Pawluch D. & Shaffir W. & Miall C. Doing Ethnography: Studying Everyday Life. Toronto, ON Canada: Canadian Scholars' Press.