Study links parole outcomes to cultural norms about responsibility
Research in PNAS Nexus suggests parole boards may favor explanations of crime more common among White Americans.
By Tom Brennan · Health & Medicine Correspondent
3 min read
Parole applicants may fare better when they explain their crimes in terms of personal character rather than outside pressures, according to a study published in PNAS Nexus. The researchers said that preference could help explain racial differences in discretionary parole decisions because those styles of explanation vary across cultural groups.
Amrita Kaushik Telidevera and colleagues examined whether parole hearings can reward one cultural understanding of responsibility over others. The study focused on how people describe criminal acts and how those descriptions are received by decision-makers.
According to the researchers, parole boards in 33 states decide whether incarcerated people receive discretionary parole, or early release. Those decisions can turn on subjective judgments, including whether commissioners believe an applicant shows remorse or accepts responsibility for the offense.
The authors said White Americans are generally more likely to explain wrongdoing through dispositional factors, such as personality, character or other internal traits. They said Black, Hispanic and East Asian Americans, drawing on more interdependent cultural traditions, often give more weight to social relationships and surrounding conditions.
Those situational explanations can include a difficult childhood, peer influence or financial strain, the researchers said. In the authors’ view, a person from an interdependent cultural background may see those details as part of a complete and honest account, while parole commissioners using a White American cultural frame may hear them as an attempt to avoid blame.
How the studies tested parole statements
In one experiment, the researchers asked participants to imagine applying for parole after hypothetical arson or drug-selling offenses. Participants selected between statements that emphasized either internal traits or outside circumstances.
The researchers reported that only White American participants favored the dispositional statements. Black, Hispanic and East Asian American participants chose dispositional and situational statements at similar rates.
In a second study, participants wrote their own parole statements. The authors found that White Americans used more language centered on internal traits and less language centered on circumstances than participants from other racial groups.
A further experiment asked participants to act as parole commissioners. The researchers reported that White American participants viewed dispositional explanations more positively than participants from other racial groups did.
Findings from real hearings
The researchers also analyzed actual parole hearings. They found that people who were granted parole referred more often to dispositional factors and less often to situational factors than people whose requests were denied.
The authors said the findings point to a possible cultural mismatch in parole proceedings. Standards that appear neutral during hearings may reflect a culturally specific idea of what responsibility sounds like, they argued.
The study, titled “A cultural explanation for parole decisions in the United States,” was published in PNAS Nexus. The authors said parole commissioners should be aware that different ways of explaining a crime may carry different cultural meanings.
This story draws on original reporting from Phys.org.