SEMIOTICS

Deductive linguistic analysis

Semiotics “the study of signs” Ferdinand de Saussure Semiotics involves the study not only of

what we refer to as 'signs' in everyday speech, but of anything which 'stands for' something else. – words– images – sounds– gestures – objects

In Other Words:

A feminist semiotic analysis of parole decision making for federally sentenced women in Canada.

Objectives

To describe the language differences between the parole hearing decisions of federally sentenced women who were granted parole and the decisions of women who were refused parole between October 1, 1999 and March 31, 2000.

Compare the entire population of women’s regular parole hearing decisions (N=42) from October 1, 1999 through March 31, 2000 with an equivalent random sample number of men’s decisions from the same time period (n=42).

Source of Data

Written parole decisions obtained through the Decision Registry.

- public domain (available through written application).

- contains the exact wording for the hearing reasoning that the Parole Board provides to the individual up for review.

- All identifiers removed.

Theory: Semiotics

Language

Discourse (social process in which texts are embedded) SEMIOSIC PLANE

Text (concrete material object produced in discourse) MIMETIC PLANE

POWER POWER

Theory: Lacan’s Discourse of the Master

Discourse of the Master

Master Signifier Knowledge Position: Agent Position: Receiver/other

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge

Reifi

catio

n

Data Analysis

QSR NUD*ist

RESULTS

Decision Demographics Parole Decision by Gender

29 21 50

69.0% 50.0% 59.5%

13 21 34

31.0% 50.0% 40.5%

42 42 84

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Count

% within GENDER

Count

% within GENDER

Count

% within GENDER

granted

denied

parole decision

Total

Female Male

GENDER

Total

Demographics Cont’d:Type of Crime Committed by Gender

Note differences in manslaughter and sex offences.

Count

1 1 2

2 1 3

2 2

1 1

2 1 3

2 2

10 1 11

3 7 10

5 4 9

8 12 20

3 3 6

2 7 9

3 3 6

42 42 84

DUI causing death

assault

attempted murder

criminal negligence

import narcotics

involuntary homicide

manslaughter

missing

property

robbery

second degree murder

sex offense

trafficking

initialcrimecommitted

Total

Female Male

GENDER

Total

Demographics Cont’dSecurity Classification by Gender

30 19 49

73.2% 50.0% 62.0%

8 17 25

19.5% 44.7% 31.6%

3 2 5

7.3% 5.3% 6.3%

41 38 79

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Count

% within GENDER

Count

% within GENDER

Count

% within GENDER

Count

% within GENDER

minimum

medium

maximum

securityclassification

Total

Female Male

GENDER

Total

Semiotic Analysis

Discourse of the Master Applied to Parole Decision-Making

Master Signifier Knowledge Psychologists, Parole Officers, Case Management Team Parole Board members

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge Individual up for parole

Reifi

catio

n

Semiotic Analysis Cont’d

Discourse of the Master Applied to Parole Decision-Making

Master Signifier Knowledge Psychologists, Parole Officers, Case Management Team Parole Board members

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge Individual up for parole

Reifi

catio

n

Semiotic Analysis Cont’dPsychological Reports Mental health disorder mentioned in 60% of

women’s decisions, only 36% of men’s. Types of disorders… Research does not support psychological treatment

reducing recidivism in women, yet my research suggests that even in cases where therapy appears to be ineffective, the National Parole Board of Canada is imposing it upon women asking for conditional release.

Triggers for Offending/Needs

Women Men

community function

criminal attitudes

associations

education/employ

personal/emotional substance abuse

marital/family

community function

criminal attitudes

associations

education/employ

personal/emotional

substance abuse

marital/family

Semiotic Analysis Cont’d

Discourse of the Master Applied to Parole Decision-Making

Master Signifier Knowledge Psychologists, Parole Officers, Case Management Team Parole Board members

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge Individual up for parole

Reifi

catio

n

Semiotic Analysis Cont’dParole Board Knowledge Overt Moralizing: - “After beginning to abuse cocaine, you began

your descent into hell and committed a more serious crime: the current sentence.”

Lack of Understanding v. Lack of Remorse:- National Parole Board tends to focus on a

woman’s cognitive understanding and focus on a man’s display of emotional remorse. This may be a reflection of the Board’s undermining of a woman’s intelligence and of a man’s emotional awareness, which is clearly based on hegemonic knowledge.

Semiotic Analysis Cont’dParole Board Knowledge Vulnerability:“Your impressionability, naivety and magical

thinking made you agree to become involved in drug trafficking, with the complicity of your sister, whom you claim to have influenced.”

Programs:- Correlation regardless of gender with being granted

parole and successfully completing correctional/community programming…despite previous research findings.

Semiotic Analysis Cont’dParole Board Knowledge

Familial Ideology:- Three times more likely to have statements

regarding family in women’s decisions.

Victim Labeling: Mentioned Past/Present Victimization

Women Denied: 33%

Women Granted: 66%

Men Denied: 15%

Men Granted: 40%

Semiotic Analysis Cont’d

Discourse of the Master Applied to Parole Decision-Making

Master Signifier Knowledge Psychologists, Parole Officers, Case Management Team Parole Board members

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge Individual up for parole

Reifi

catio

n

Left-out Knowledge Women’s Decisions:- lack of subject statements in denied decisions: “insufficient

evidence of change”. Subject statements needed corroboration of agents.

Men’s Decisions:- more subject statements, but also more evidence of rejection

due to lack of agent support:

“You have told the Board that you have been on psychiatric medication since you were at _ for a bi-polar disorder. Your Parole Officer (Institution) appears to know nothing of this and there is no psychiatric information on your file. Thus the Board is unable to determine whether you have been formally diagnosed with bi-polar disorder and what impact such a diagnosis might have on your overall assessment of risk.

Semiotic Analysis Cont’d

Discourse of the Master Applied to Parole Decision-Making

Master Signifier Knowledge Psychologists, Parole Officers, Case Management Team Parole Board members

S1 S2 $ a

Slashed Subject Left-out knowledge Individual up for parole

Reifi

catio

n

Slashed Subject/Reification Slashed Subject: recognized less for being

in control of what he or she says and how he or she says it than for being regulated through the activity of speech.

Reification: the slashed subject, after feeling powerless in the previous exchanges, adapts her/his language to conform to the discourse of the agents using their master signifiers and the knowledge of the receivers.

Reification WOMEN: reify their statements using the

master signifiers of risk, protection of the public, and reintegration/rehabilitation and frame them in statements emphasizing psychological disorders, family situation and victimization.

- “At your hearing you were very candid with the Board about your psychological vulnerability to intoxicants and your awareness that you must be vigilant about abstinence. Although you have a tendency to deflect responsibility for your behaviour onto external circumstances, ultimately you recognize that the choice remains with you.”

Reification Cont’d MEN: focus on the master signifiers of risk,

protection of the public, and reintegration, often framed in testimony emphasizing programming.

- “You were forthright with regard to your substance abuse problem. You understand that programming will take priority over employment upon release into the community.”

Conclusion

Without critically examining the language that the National Parole Board uses and the origins of this language, we are ignoring the silencing of the subject up for parole.

The language of release created by the National Parole Board through the intersection of psychological, legal and correctional jargon cannot be interpreted by individuals outside of these fields, creating a discourse of release.