Early penology literature identified some of the ‘pains’ of prison life prisoners are faced with (e.g., Sykes, 1958). How prisoners adapt to and cope with these pains can have detrimental effects on their general well-being and psychological distress. Prisoners are much more likely than the general population to experience stress, anxiety and depression, which increases their risk of self-harm and suicide (e.g., Cooper & Berwick, 2001). It is therefore important to find ways to improve prisoners’ well-being and reduce distress while in prison. Some prisoners may ‘act out’ by disregarding staff directives and prison rules as a way to regain and maintain some degree of personal power and control when faced with the reality of their environment. In doing so, the order required to maintain a healthy and stable prison is compromised. Staff-prisoner relationships are consistently shown to be important for maintaining order in prisons. However, order not only relies on what staff do, but on prisoners voluntarily cooperating with staff and willingly complying with prison rules and procedures. A growing body of literature demonstrates procedural justice to be effective for improving prisoners’ well-being and psychological distress, and reducing prisoner misconduct (e.g., Beijersbergen et al., 2014, 2015; Reisig & Mesko, 2009). However, little has been done to examine for whom, and under what conditions, procedural justice may be most effective. Research in other regulatory contexts (e.g., taxation, policing) has begun to examine the role of motivational postures in the relationship between procedural justice and compliance behaviours. Motivational postures measure the extent of social distancing people place between themselves and authorities (Braithwaite, 2003, 2009). The current study uses Braithwaite’s (2003) motivational posturing framework to understand whether procedural justice has different effects on cooperation and compliance behaviour for prisoners in Australia. Utilising self-report survey data from 177 male prisoners, and official prison records from 129 of those respondents, in four maximum security prisons in Queensland, Australia, this thesis addresses six research questions. Results from this research demonstrate that: 1) prisoners who view staff as procedurally just also report higher levels of general well-being and lower levels of psychological distress; 2) prisoners who view staff as procedurally just are also more likely to perceive them as legitimate, and are more willing to cooperate with staff and comply with prison rules and procedures; 3) perceived staff legitimacy (i.e., obligation to obey staff) partially mediates the relationship between procedural justice and cooperation, and fully mediates the relationship between procedural justice and compliance; 4) Braithwaite’s five motivational posturing styles are present among Australian prisoners; 5) procedural justice is positively related to deference postures (i.e., commitment) and negatively related to defiance postures (i.e., resistance, disengagement and game-playing); and finally, 6) three of the five motivational postures (i.e., commitment, resistance and disengagement) were found to have either mediating and/or moderating effects on the relationship between procedural justice and self-reported cooperation, self-reported compliance and actual compliance. This thesis provides important contributions to procedural justice and motivational posturing literature, and has important implications for developing evidence-based best-practices for prison staff to more effectively engage with and manage prisoners.