ABSTRACT
Literature that discusses correction officer social distance from inmates usually does so by relating social distance to the officer’s authority and his rule enforcement behavior. In this view, an officer who places little social distance between himself and inmates is an officer whose authority has been corrupted by pressures from inmates. To the extent that corruption occurs, it follows that the guard lacks the ability to enforce institutional rules and
regulations.1 Here an officer’s inability to enforce rules or to offer favors for compliance (low social distance) indicates corrupted authority: Corrupted authority means low social distance (to gain compliance) and an inability to enforce rules. Each concept is both an indicator and cause of the others. These relationships among social distance (an attitude), authority (a status) and rule enforcement (a behavior) are assumed to exist, but these implicit relationships have yet to be explored systematically.
