The Role of Emotions in Fieldwork: A Self-Study of Family Research in a Corrections Setting.

Introduction Prisons and jails are by definition closed environments that pose special challenges for researchers (Byrne, 2005; Hart, 1995). These challenges can be ethical, in terms of ensuring the adequate protection of a vulnerable class of human subjects in the case of studying prisoners, as well as pragmatic relative to adapting to the institutional restrictions of correctional settings (Quina, Varna Garis, Stevenson, Garrido, Brown, Richman, et al., 2007). Typically, human subjects Institutional Review Board (IRB) processes and informed consent procedures are quite rigorous in prison and jail based research due to concerns about coercion and incarcerated persons' limited capacity for voluntary informed consent (Moser, Arndt, Kanz, Benjamin, Baylees, Reese, et al., 2004). For example, researchers must obtain additional human subjects' permission (beyond their respective universities) from state or federal agencies responsible for the oversight of a particular system of jails and prisons and gain the cooperation of the facility itself. Subsequently, researchers are subject to the regulations of a particular facility which generally involves surrendering certain personal rights they may enjoy on the outside (e.g., security search prior to entering, movement restrictions). Here we extend the discourse on research in corrections settings to focus more fully on the experience of the researcher in terms of how gaining access and spending time in a relatively closed environment is deeply affecting. Academic and corrections systems are quite distinct. The punitive and restrictive environment within the custody and control mission of the correctional system clashes with the environment of open inquiry associated with the research mission of the university system (Byrne, 2005). These differences necessitate adaptations on the part of the researchers in order to work in corrections settings and comply with multiple regulations (Quina et al., 2007). Such adaptations can include not utilizing videotapes, audiotape or computer assisted technology in data collection, or being precluded from compensating participants due to prison or jail policy. Despite the many challenges inherent in conducting research in a corrections setting, the process can be a transformative learning experience (cf., Quina et al.). We contend that a central mechanism of this transformation involves researchers' intense emotional responses to the often uninviting environmental conditions of prisons and jails, the sense of restrictiveness and loss of privilege that comes with entering the setting and being subject to prison rules, and the intimate proximity of the researcher and the researched inherent in fieldwork. This last point is particularly important because as the distance between researchers and participants is dissolved, their experience becomes our experience catalyzing very real and profound emotions. In this paper, we seek to further explore the ways in which fieldwork in a jail setting was transformative and how a shift in experience can ultimately transform scholarship examining prisoners and their family members. We do this via qualitative content analysis of our field notes which were written while conducting interviews and participant observation of caregivers with children who were visiting an incarcerated family member at a local jail. The Context of our Fieldwork: The Visitation Waiting Room In discussing our emotional experience in the jail setting, as well as articulating elements of our transformation as researchers, it is essential to first specify the context of the imprisoned, and more specifically visitation areas. Suffice it to say that both the incarcerated person, who is under "state control," and his or her family, are embedded in a broad sociocultural network that stigmatizes imprisonment (Braman, 2004; Davies, 1980). Stigma intensifies the possibility of risk and has unique disruptive effects for the parents themselves, as well as their family members because of the demoralization and social isolation that comes with the prison experience (Golden, 2005; Lowenstein, 1986; Western & McLanahan, 2000). …