Emotional intelligence and empathy are central competencies for building meaningful relationships and for reintegration into social and working life. In prison education contexts—often marked by marginalization, isolation, and affective deprivation—these competencies are frequently underdeveloped or latent, yet they are crucial for any genuine process of personal transformation. Education in prison, therefore, cannot be limited to the transmission of cognitive or vocational content; it must take shape as a relational space in which individuals can rebuild awareness of themselves and others, and train their ability to feel, understand, and regulate emotions.
From this perspective, empathy is not merely a relational virtue but an educational competence that enables the recognition of otherness and the establishment of non-predatory, non-defensive relationships. Hoffman (2000) distinguishes between affective empathy—the ability to emotionally resonate with others—and cognitive empathy—the capacity to adopt another’s point of view. Both are essential for the exercise of citizenship and the construction of non-violent relationships. In prison, however, daily dynamics often discourage empathetic openness, favoring defensive behaviors and psychosocial survival strategies. This is precisely where educational intervention can act deeply, by constructing safe environments in which empathy can be experienced and cultivated.
According to Goleman’s (1995) model, emotional intelligence comprises a range of interrelated abilities, including self-awareness, emotional self-regulation, intrinsic motivation, empathy, and social skills. The development of these dimensions is neither spontaneous nor mechanical; it requires guided experiences, structured reflection, and meaningful educational relationships. Mezirow (2000) described transformative learning as a process triggered by crises or disorienting dilemmas, which challenge established interpretive frames and open the door to profound change. In prison, such dilemmas are often linked to identity redefinition and the need to make sense of the detention experience. Emotional education, in this framework, can provide the categories necessary to process complex emotions and support a process of personal reconstruction.
Play can play a significant role in this process, not as a mere pastime but as a symbolic and rule-based space in which learning takes place through experience. Play allows individuals to explore roles, manage frustration, make decisions, and face the consequences of their actions in a protected setting. Strategic games such as chess, in particular, activate both cognitive and relational skills simultaneously: the player must anticipate the opponent’s moves, develop flexible strategies, accept failure, and reformulate their plan of action. In this sense, play becomes a metacognitive and emotional laboratory.
According to Vygotsky (1978), play is a privileged space for the development of higher psychological functions, such as self-regulation and abstract thinking. In prison education, these functions are often underused, partly due to the lack of symbolic stimuli and the rigidity of the institutional context. Play, by contrast, introduces a dimension of negotiation, creativity, and simulation that can open meaningful breaches in the daily experience of incarcerated individuals. Gee (2003) highlights how play supports implicit learning through interaction with systems of rules, offering an ideal context for testing the effectiveness of one’s actions and reinterpreting failure as a natural part of the process.
The educational relationship that emerges during play is equally important. It is grounded in dynamic, non-hierarchical reciprocity, where the educator becomes a facilitator and co-explorer. Rogers (1961) placed empathy at the heart of the helping relationship, understood as the genuine capacity to understand the other “from within,” without judgment. Play naturally fosters these conditions, offering opportunities to observe, name, and share emotional states within a shared symbolic system.
Promoting empathy and emotional intelligence in prison does not mean simply “teaching emotional regulation,” but rather creating spaces where these competencies can emerge, be recognized, and develop through meaningful experiences. Education here serves not only a reparative but also a generative function: it supports the individual in building a new relationship with themselves and with others, facilitating the reclaiming of their human potential. As an embodied and reflective experience, play can be one of the most powerful tools for initiating this process.
References
- Gee, J. P. (2003). What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.
- Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice. Cambridge University Press.
- Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. Jossey-Bass.
- Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Authored by: SKILL UP
