Effect of Framing of Reentry Program on Perceptions of Ex-Offenders

Abstract

We examine the effect of the framing of reentry programs on participants' perceptions of ex-offenders.

An exception to the rule: Belief in redeemability, desistance signals, and the employer’s decision to hire a job applicant with a criminal record

“…The survey was approximately equally distributed with 50.95% of respondents receiving the White Australian ex-offender job applicant vignette and 49.05% receiving the Indigenous Australian ex-offender job applicant vignette. The vignette description, an adaptation of Snider and Reyson's (2014) and Savage's (2003), read as follows:…”

“…The measurement items in the survey instrument were selected on the basis of their distinct ability to support the theoretical aims of this research relating to employers' willingness to hire an ex-offender job applicant (Snider & Reyson, 2014), ex-offenders' socio-demographic attributes ), employers' socio-demographic attributes and organisational-context characteristics (Lukies et al, 2011); belief in redeemability (Maruna & King, 2009); and signals of desistance (Fahey, et al, 2006). Survey participants were recruited via a three-step recruitment strategy comprising an introductory telephone call inviting participation, followed immediately by an email sent to those agreeing to participate, which provided a link to the ESHO survey, then a follow up reminder email two weeks after the initial contact (Dillman, Smyth & Christian, 2009;Sauermann & Roach, 2013).…”

“…After reading the vignette description, respondents were asked to rate their agreement with the statement "I would hire John for this job". Response categories were 1 "strongly disagree", 2, 3, 4 "neither agree or disagree", 5, 6, 7 "strongly agree" (Snider & Reyson, 2014).…”

“…Compared to other job applicants, the single unique attribute that differentiates ex-offenders is a criminal record (Holzer, Raphael & Stoll., 2004;Snider & Reyson, 2014). Consequently, employers encounter an array of additional considerations in their hiring decisions, beyond the usual gamut regarding objective factors relating to skills, qualities, education, formal qualifications and work history (Sabol, 2007, Visher et al, 2011.…”

Reducing Discrimination and Fostering Prosociality Towards Ex‐Prisoners in Nigeria and the United States

“…Ex-prisoners around the world face stigma and discrimination upon release from prison in many areas of life. In both countries much research highlights the existence and issue of societal stigmatization, labeling, and discrimination against ex-prisoners (Brown, 2016;Celinska, 2000;Cnaan et al, 2008;Geiger, 2006;Hirschfield & Piquero, 2010;Kethineni & Falcone, 2007;LeBel, 2012;Ogbozor et al, 2006;Osayi, 2013;Pogrebin, West-Smith, Walker, & Unnithan, 2014;Shobola & Ajeigbe, 2015;Snider & Reysen, 2014;Thompson & Cummings, 2010;Ugwuoke, 2010), which exacerbates the reentry challenge. Discrimination elevates psychological stress, deteriorates well-being and self-esteem (Aneshensel, 1992;LeBel, 2012;Thoits, 2010), and can severely impede the motivation and ability to return to a law-abiding life after release from prison (Aresti, Eatough, & Brooks-Gordon, 2010;Haney, 2001;Obioha, 2011;Ugwuoke, 2010).…”