The Social Mile - How (Psychosocial) ICT can Help to Promote Resocialization and to Overcome Prison

There is currently uncertainty in the research community as to how ICT can and should be designed in such a way that it can be convincingly integrated into the everyday lives of prison inmates. In this paper, we discuss a design fiction that closes this research gap. The descriptions and results of the study are purely fictitious. Excluded is the State of the Art as well as the description of the legal situation of prisons in Germany. The analysis of the fictional study data designed here thus refers to the real world in order to derive ethical guidelines and draw practical conclusions. It is our intention to use these results as a possible basis for further research. The paper presents results of an explorative study dealing with the design, development and evaluation of an AI-based Smart Mirror System, Prison AI 2.0, in a German prison. Prison AI 2.0 was developed for daily use and voluntarily tested by eight prisoners over a period of 12 months to gain insight into their individual and social impact, with an emphasis on its ability to actively support rehabilitation. Based on qualitative data, our findings suggest that intelligent AI-based devices can actually help promote such an outcome. Our results also confirm the valuable impact of (Psychosocial) ICT on the psychological, social and individual aspects of prison life, and in particular how prisoners used the Smart Mirror system to improve and maintain their cognitive, mental and physical state and to restore social interactions with the outside world. With the presentation of these results we want to initiate discussions about the use of ICT by prisoners in closed prisons in order to identify opportunities and risks.

[1]  Erving Goffman,et al.  Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates , 1961 .

[2]  Volker Wulf,et al.  Towards an integrated organization and technology development , 1995, Symposium on Designing Interactive Systems.

[3]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Determining Causes and Severity of End-User Frustration , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[4]  Han Dorussen,et al.  Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Expert Interviews , 2005 .

[5]  Florian Knauer.  Strafvollzug und Internet : Rechtsprobleme der Nutzung elektronischer Kommunikationsmedien durch Strafgefangene , 2006 .

[6]  M. Warren.  The digital vicious cycle: Links between social disadvantage and digital exclusion in rural areas , 2007 .

[7]  Joseph Dute,et al.  Council of Europe. Recommendation Rec(2006)7 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on management of patient safety and prevention of adverse advents in health care. , 2008, European journal of health law.

[8]  Horst Entorf.  Crime and the Labour Market: Evidence from a Survey of Inmates , 2008 .

[9]  Yvonne Jewkes,et al.  Cavemen in an Era of Speed-of-Light Technology: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Communication within Prisons , 2009 .

[10]  Horst Entorf,et al.  Crime and the Labour Market: Evidence from a Survey of Inmates , 2009, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[11]  M. Foucault,et al.  Überwachen und Strafen , 2009 .

[12]  Gloria Pérez Serrano,et al.  Las TIC promotoras de inclusión social , 2011 .

[13]  Volker Wulf,et al.  Engaging with practices: design case studies as a research framework in CSCW , 2011, CSCW.

[14]  Catherine Y. Chang,et al.  The Relationship Between Supervisee Stress, Coping Resources, the Working Alliance, and the Supervisory Working Alliance , 2012 .

[15]  Silke Heimes.  Warum Schreiben hilft: Die Wirksamkeitsnachweise zur Poesietherapie , 2012 .

[16]  Ron Wakkary,et al.  Steampunk as design fiction , 2012, CHI.

[17]  Ann Hackmann,et al.  Semi-Structured Interview for Intrusive Imagery , 2012 .

[18]  Halina Wawzyniak.  Ist die Verweigerung eines Internetzugangs im Strafvollzug rechtmäßig , 2012 .

[19]  R. Eynon,et al.  Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement , 2013 .

[20]  Ben Kirman,et al.  CHI and the future robot enslavement of humankind: a retrospective , 2013, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[21]  Anna Kuchment,et al.  To save everything click here: The folly of technological solutionism. , 2013 .

[22]  Laura Varela-Candamio,et al.  e-Prisons and New Technologies: ICT as a Mechanism of Social Inclusion of Prisoners , 2013, Int. J. Knowl. Soc. Res..

[23]  Timo Hartmann,et al.  The ideology of the future in design fictions , 2013, Digit. Creativity.

[24]  Eva Knutz,et al.  The poetics of design fiction , 2013, DPPI.

[25]  Derek Hales,et al.  Design fictions an introduction and provisional taxonomy , 2013, Digit. Creativity.

[26]  Paul Dourish,et al.  “Resistance is futile”: reading science fiction alongside ubiquitous computing , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[27]  Mark Blythe,et al.  Research through design fiction: narrative in real and imaginary abstracts , 2014, CHI.

[28]  Cameron Tonkinwise,et al.  To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism , 2014 .

[29]  R. Subramanian,et al.  Sentencing and Prison Practices in Germany and the Netherlands: Implications for the United States (Vera Institute of Justice, October 2013) , 2014 .

[30]  Stuart Reeves,et al.  Alternate endings: using fiction to explore design futures , 2014, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[31]  Volker Wulf,et al.  Designing Socially Embedded Technologies in the Real-World , 2015, Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

[32]  Jussi P. P. Jokinen.  Emotional user experience: Traits, events, and states , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[33]  S. Yelavich.  Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming , 2015 .

[34]  Carlinda Leite,et al.  LIFELONG LEARNING THROUGH E-LEARNING IN EUROPEAN PRISONS: RETHINKING DIGITAL AND SOCIAL INCLUSION , 2015 .

[35]  Isabel Novo-Corti,et al.  Collaborative learning in environments with restricted access to the internet: Policies to bridge the digital divide and exclusion in prisons through the development of the skills of inmates , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Mark Blythe,et al.  Solutionism, the Game: Design Fictions for Positive Aging , 2015, CHI.

[37]  Victoria Knight.  Remote Control: Television in Prison , 2016 .

[38]  M. Foucault,et al.  Überwachen und Strafen. Die Geburt des Gefängnisses , 2016 .

[39]  Sally Coates,et al.  Unlocking potential : a review of education in prison , 2016 .

[40]  Bianca C. Reisdorf,et al.  A brave new world: The problems and opportunities presented by new media technologies in prisons , 2016 .

[41]  Victoria Knight,et al.  Digital transformation for prisons , 2017 .

[42]  Volker Wulf,et al.  Grounded Design – a praxeological IS research perspective , 2017, J. Inf. Technol..

[43]  John Bowers,et al.  Building A Better Bumphone: Designing Around Prison Phone Use , 2018, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[44]  Roisin McNaney,et al.  Potentials of HCI for Prisons and Incarcerated Individuals , 2018, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[45]  Volker Wulf,et al.  The High Cost of Free Services: Problems with Surveillance Capitalism and Possible Alternatives for IT Infrastructure , 2019, LIMITS.

[46]  Pat Kane,et al.  The new capitalism that remakes minds , 2019, New Scientist.

[47]  Konstantin Aal,et al.  Digital Participation in Prison - A Public Discourse Analysis of the Use of ICT by Inmates , 2019, Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact..

[48]  Shoshana Zuboff.  The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power , 2019 .