ABSTRACT
The contemporary and widespread use of supermaximum—colloquially referred to as “supermax”—incarceration has proponents, who argue that it is necessary and effective, and opponents, who argue that placing individuals in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours or more per day with little access to programming or visitation constitutes inhumane treatment. Despite debates about and increased research on supermaxes, many questions remain. This chapter aims to advance efforts to understand supermax incarceration and to place corrections on a more evidence-based foundation. It discusses variation and ambiguity in the goals of this incarceration, the main methodological approaches taken to examining it, the state of evidence about its use and impacts, critical research gaps, and steps that can be taken to advance research, policy, and practice. A central conclusion is that research evidence to date is highly incomplete and that addressing basic questions—such as who enters this housing and why, for how long, what effects it has on inmates, families, and correctional systems, and what alternatives exist—will go a long way to creating greater understanding about this specialized type of incarceration as well as to creating more accountability and evidence-based practices.
