Cultural frameworks may contribute to racial differences in parole decisions

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

Parole candidates may be evaluated more favorably when they discuss their crimes using cultural frames more common among White Americans than among Black, Hispanic and East Asian Americans, according to a study.

In 33 states, a board of parole commissioners reviews and determines incarcerated individuals' applications for discretionary parole, or early release. Whether parole is granted depends in part on subjective factors, such as whether the commissioners find the parole candidates sufficiently remorseful or whether they perceive them as taking responsibility for their crimes.

Amrita Kaushik Telidevera and colleagues investigated whether cultural differences in what counts as an acceptable explanation for criminal acts can help explain racial disparities seen in rates of such early release. In general, White Americans are more likely to emphasize dispositional factors—such as one's own personality, character and other internal attributes—when explaining crimes, whereas people from interdependent cultural traditions, such as Black, Hispanic and East Asian cultures, often emphasize the role of social relationships and the surrounding environment. Their work is published in PNAS Nexus.

Such explanations might include a difficult childhood, peer pressure or financial hardship. According to the authors, in interdependent cultures, a full and truthful account of a crime may include the situational factors that contributed to the act, whereas parole commissioners operating within a White American cultural framework may interpret such explanations as a refusal to take responsibility.

The authors asked study participants to apply for parole for hypothetical crimes of arson or drug selling. Participants chose between dispositional and situational statements to offer to the parole commissioners. Only White American participants preferentially chose the dispositional statement to submit. Black, Hispanic and East Asian American participants chose the two types of statements with equal frequency.

In another study in which participants wrote their own statements, white Americans used more dispositional and less situational language, compared with members of other racial groups. Finally, in a study in which participants played the role of parole commissioners, dispositional explanations were perceived more favorably by White Americans than by members of other racial groups.

Analyses