Research: How prison shapes inmates’ sense of agency and outcome processing

A thought provoking paper from Belgium invites us to think more deeply about what restrictive environments may do to the brain and to participation.

The study explored sense of agency, the feeling that “I am the one doing this”, and outcome processing, how the brain registers what happens after an action, in people living in prison compared with controls living in the community. The findings suggested that inmates showed reduced sense of agency in free choice situations, but increased sense of agency when acting under orders. Outcome processing also appeared more preserved in open prison settings than in more restrictive regimes.

This matters because the authors describe prison as an impoverished environment with reduced autonomy, limited stimulation, and fewer opportunities for initiative. They argue that such conditions may alter cognitive processes that are fundamental to behavioural regulation and social functioning.

Through a sensory integration and processing lens, this is highly relevant.

This is not an Ayres Sensory Integration study. However, it adds to a wider body of thinking showing that the brain does not develop or function in isolation from sensory, relational, and occupational context. If environments repeatedly restrict movement, novelty, choice, meaningful activity, and the opportunity to connect action with consequence, we should not be surprised if agency, executive function, and participation are affected. The paper itself links these processes with attention, executive functions, goal directed behaviour, and social functioning.

This also links closely with the PEAR Lens™.

Person reminds us to consider the embodied nervous system, not as a problem in isolation, but as a person adapting to context.

Environment asks what the setting is affording or constraining in sensory, social, and cognitive terms.

Activity asks whether the person has real opportunities to initiate, choose, plan, and experience meaningful consequence.

Relational response asks what repeated experiences of coercion, control, collaboration, or trust may be teaching the person’s brain and body about safety, action, and participation.

Seen through PEAR, this paper is not simply about individual impairment. It is about what happens when person, environment, activity, and relational response repeatedly interact in ways that narrow agency.

The wider practice message is important for prisons, mental health services, secure settings, schools, and any system where autonomy is limited.

Participation does not grow through control alone.

Human beings need sensory, relational, and occupational conditions that support agency, support reflection, and help the brain connect action with consequence in ways that feel real.

That is why sensory informed, neuroaffirming, participation focused practice matters.

#OccupationalTherapy #SensoryIntegration #SensoryProcessing #PEARLens #Participation #MentalHealth #TraumaInformedCare #PrisonHealth #Neuroscience #ayressensoryintegration