“One adjustment centre in which disruptive inmates were segregated ended up by spawning its own segregation unit to deal with those beyond its reach. The 'complicated Chinese box effect' which results 'with inmates in the innermost box ideally required to traverse each enclosing one on the way to relative freedom' is very much the way most prison systems are developing. As Messinger notes, the 'logic' of the segregation strategy is simple enough: 'identify potential troublemakers as early as possible, try to bring them to heel, if you fail, segregate them.' Whether this works or not in minimising disruption, what is clear is that 'the strategy of segregation leads to more segregation'. Given the organizational imperative of control, officials point out quite plausibly that other strategies are ineffective: force can only sometimes be used (in riots or disturbances) and anyway cannot make inmates want to do things: motivation through punishments and rewards are limited and one cannot freely select into or reject from the institution. With restrictions on the legitimate use of force, the control issue - which dominates the daily routine of prison officials at all levels - resolves itself into motivating prisoners to do things the management wants or else neutralizing the recalcitrants. ... Out of a combination of internal system demands and external pressures, then, the Chinese box effect will slowly develop. The prisoner in the innermost box- the segregation wing, the isolation block - can look forward not to release, but, if he satisfies the staff that he is "prepared to co-operate", transfer to the next box.” - Stanley Cohen, “Prisons and the future of control systems: from concentration to dispersal,” in Fitzgerald, M. et aL (eds), Prisoners in Revolt. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1977. p. 222.