Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:27:20.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

31 - The Psychology of Parole Decision-Making

from Part IV - Postconviction Phase Decisions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2024

By
Logan A. Yelderman ,
Jennifer L. Lanterman  and
Monica K. Miller
Edited by
Monica K. Miller ,
Logan A. Yelderman ,
Matthew T. Huss  and
Jason A. Cantone
Monica K. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Reno
Logan A. Yelderman
Affiliation:
Prairie View A & M University, Texas
Matthew T. Huss
Affiliation:
Creighton University, Omaha
Jason A. Cantone
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access

Summary

This chapter discusses the legal and extralegal factors that affect a parole board member’s decision regarding whether or not to release a prisoner on parole. While some states have mandatory parole, others have discretionary parole, which is the most widely cited process for parole release in the US currently. Discretionary parole allows a board to decide if the prisoner should be released based on statutory factors, which are examined in this chapter. However, they might also be influenced by emotions, biases, public/political pressure, and other extralegal factors. The chapter provides an overview of what these extralegal factors are and how they might affect decisions. The chapter also provides an examination of both parole board member and inmate characteristics that influence release decisions, with a focus on if and how they affect risk assessments. The chapter synthesizes this body of research and offers future directions and implications for the legal field. Future research and/or policy implications are discussed.

Keywords

prisonerinmateparoleextralegal factorsemotionbiaspoliticspublic pressure
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making , pp. 476 - 495
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abadinsky, H. (2012). Probation and parole: Theory and practice. Pearson.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. B., Schumacker, R. E. , & Anderson, S. L. (1991). Releasee characteristics and parole success. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17(1–2), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1300/J076v17n01_10.Google Scholar
Anderson, P. R., & Slate, R. N. (2011). The decision-making network: An introduction to criminal justice. Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
Australia Research Data Commons. (2022). Norfolk Island Penal Establishment. State Records Authority of New South Wales. www.nsw.gov.au/.Google Scholar
Berk, R. (2017). An impact assessment of machine learning risk forecasts on parole board decisions and recidivism. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 13, 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-017-9286-2.Google Scholar
Borden, H. G. (1928). Factors for predicting parole success. Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, 19(3), 328–336. https://doi.org/10.2307/1134622.Google Scholar
Bowman, E. L., & Ely, K. (2017). Examining the predictors of parole release in a rural jail population. The Prison Journal, 97(5), 543–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885517728868.Google Scholar
Burns, R., Phillips, S., Leone, M. C., & Kinkade, P. (1999). Perspectives on parole: The board members’ viewpoint. Federal Probation, 63(1), 16–22.Google Scholar
Caplan, J. M. (2007). What factors affect parole: A review of empirical research. Federal Probation, 71(1), 16–19.Google Scholar
Caplan, J. M. (2010). Parole release decisions: Impact of victim input on a representative sample of inmates. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(3), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.02.012.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. S. (1978a). Causal attributions in expert parole decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1501–1511. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.12.1501.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. S. (1978b). Causal theories of crime and their effect upon expert parole decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 2(4), 377–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01038989.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. S., & Payne, J. W. (1977). Crime seriousness, recidivism risk, and causal attributions in judgments of prison term by students and experts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 595–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.5.595.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. S., Wiener, R. L., Coates, D., & Galegher, J. (1982). Evaluation, diagnosis, and prediction in parole decision making. Law & Society Review, 17(1), 199–228.Google Scholar
Clear, T., & Cole, G. (1997). American corrections. Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. (2014). Freedom’s road: Youth, parole, and the promise of Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida. Cardozo Law Review, 35, 1031–1089.Google Scholar
Cromwell, P. F., & del Carmen, R. V. (1999). Community-based corrections (4th ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
Cunius, M. K., Meyer, A. R., Moody, S. A., Cerfoglio, A., & Miller, M. K. (2022, March). The effects of an apology’s timing and type on parole board decision-making. Paper presented at the American Psychology-Law Society conference, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
Cunius, M. K. , & Miller, M. K. (2023, March). The effects of a prisoner’s age and type of crime on parole members’ decision-making. Paper presented at the American Psychology-Law Society conference, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Cunius, M. K. , & Miller, M. K. (in press). The effects of an incarcerated person’s gender identity and crime type on parole members’ decisions. Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society.Google Scholar
Danzinger, S., Levav, J., & Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011). Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 6889–6892. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018033108.Google Scholar
Dawson, R. O. (1966). The decision to grant or deny parole: A study of parole criteria in law and practice. Washington University Law Quarterly, 3, 243–303.Google Scholar
Duffy, S., & Smith, J. (2014). Cognitive load in the multi-player prisoner’s dilemma game: Are there brains in the games? Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 51, 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2014.01.006.Google Scholar
ElBassiouny, A., Ayala, R., & Sircy, K. (2022). Factors influencing mock parole board members: The impact of an incarcerated person’s race/ethnicity, conversion while in prison, and mental health status. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 22(1), 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12286.Google Scholar
Ellis, T., & Marshall, P. (2000). Does parole work? A post-release comparison of reconviction rates for paroled and non-paroled prisoners. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 33(3), 300–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/000486580003300304.Google Scholar
Estrada-Reynolds, V. C., Schweitzer, K. A., Nuñez, N., & Culhane, S. (2016). Male and female parole decisions: Is paying your dues or saying you’re sorry more important? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 23(6), 893–907. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1164640.Google Scholar
Feder, L. (1994). Psychiatric hospitalization history and parole decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 18(4), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499047.Google Scholar
Freiberg, A., Bartels, L., Fitzgerald, R., & Dodd, S. (2018). Parole, politics and penal policy. QUT Law Review, 18(1), 191–215.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Creighton, L. A. (2013). Dual-process theories. In Carlston, D. E. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of social cognition (pp. 282–312). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, D. (1954). A reconsideration of some parole prediction factors. American Sociological Review, 19(3), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087767.Google Scholar
Grattet, R., Petersilia, J., Lin, J., & Beckman, M. (2009). Parole violations and revocations in California: Analysis and suggestions for action. Federal Probation, 73(1), 2–11.Google Scholar
Hannah-Moffat, K., & Yule, C. (2011). Gaining insight, changing attitudes and managing “risk”: Parole release decisions for women convicted of violent crimes. Punishment & Society, 13(2), 149–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474510394961.Google Scholar
Hart, H. (1923). Predicting parole success. Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, 14(3), 405–413.Google Scholar
Hinson, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision making and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.2.298.Google Scholar
Houser, K. A., Vîlcică, E. R., Saum, C. A., & Hiller, M. L. (2019). Mental health risk factors and parole decisions: Does inmate mental health status affect who gets released. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(16), 2950. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162950.Google Scholar
Huebner, B. M., & Bynum, T. S. (2006). An analysis of parole decision making using a sample of sex offenders: A focal concerns perspective. Criminology, 44(4), 961–991. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2006.00069.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huebner, B. M., & Bynum, T. S. (2008). The role of race and ethnicity in parole decisions. Criminology, 46, 907–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00130.x.Google Scholar
Hughes, WT. A., Wilson, D. J., & Beck, A. J. (2001). Trends in state parole, 1990–2000. Bureau of Justice Statistics. bjs.odp.gov.Google Scholar
Ireland, C. S., & Prause, J. (2005). Discretionary parole release: Length of imprisonment, percent of sentence served, and recidivism. Journal of Crime and Justice, 28(2), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2005.9721637.Google Scholar
Kastenmeier, R. W., & Eglit, H. C. (1973). Parole release decision-making: rehabilitation, expertise, and the demise of mythology. American University Law Review, 22(3), 477–526.Google Scholar
Kastenmeier, R. W., & Eglit, H. C. (1975). Parole release decision-making: Rehabilitation, expertise, and the demise of mythology. In Amos, W. E. & Newman, C. L. (Eds.), Parole: legal issues, decision-making, research (pp. 76–129). Federal Legal Publications.Google Scholar
King, R. S., & Maur, M. (2002). State sentencing and corrections policy in an era of fiscal restraint. The Sentencing Project. Washington, DC. www.sentencingproject.org/.Google Scholar
Kuziemko, I. (2013). How should inmates be released from prison? An assessment of parole versus fixed-sentence regimes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 371–424. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs052.Google Scholar
Lacombe, D. (2013). “Mr. S., you do have sexual fantasies?” The parole hearing and prison treatment of a sex offender at the turn of the 21st century. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 38(1), 33–63.Google Scholar
Lanterman, J. L., Miller, M. K., & Moody, S. A. (2022). Public opinions of parole release decisions vary based on age and illness of prisoner. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T. (2020). Emotions, Mental illness, and mock parole release. Unpublished Master’s thesis; Prairie View A&M University.Google Scholar
Lindsey, S. C., & Miller, M. K. (2011). Discretionary release decisions of actual and mock parole board members: Implications for community sentiment and parole decision-making research. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, 18, 498–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2011.625619.Google Scholar
Lynch, M. (2000). Rehabilitation as rhetoric: The ideal of reformation in contemporary parole discourse and practices. Punishment & Society, 2(1), 40–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/14624740022227854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, D. L. (2001). Sentencing and corrections in the 21st century: Setting the stage for the future. National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.37.Google Scholar
Martinson, R. (1974). What works? – Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 35, 22–54.Google Scholar
Maruschak, L. M., & Bonczar, T. P. (2013). Probation and parole in the United States, 2012. Bureau of Justice Statistics. www.bjs.gov/.Google Scholar
Matejkowski, J. (2011). Exploring the moderating effects of mental illness on parole release decisions. Federal Probation, 75(1), 19–26.Google Scholar
Matejkowski, J., Caplan, J. M., & Wiesel Cullen, S. (2010). The impact of severe mental illness on parole decisions: Social integration within a prison setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(9), 1005–1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810372898.Google Scholar
Matejkowski, J., Draine, J., Solomon, P., & Salzer, M. S. (2011). Mental illness, criminal risk factors and parole release decisions. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 29(4), 528–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.991.Google Scholar
Mathews, B., Walker, A., & Rhine, E. E. (2020). Awakening the sleeping giant: The future of paroling authorities in America. Corrections, 5(3), 206–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2018.1470478.Google Scholar
Medwed, D. S. (2007). The innocent prisoner’s dilemma: Consequences of failing to admit guilt at parole hearings. Iowa Law Review, 93(2), 491–557.Google Scholar
Meredith, T., Speir, J. C., & Johnson, S. (2007). Developing and implementing automated risk assessments in parole. Justice Research and Policy, 9(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3818/JRP.9.1.2007.1.Google Scholar
Miller, M. K., Lindsey, S. C., & Kaufman, J. (2014). The religious conversion and race of a prisoner: Mock parole board members’ decisions, perceptions, and emotions. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19, 104–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02063.x.Google Scholar
Morgan, K., & Smith, B. L. (2005a). Victims, punishment, and parole: The effect of victim participation on parole hearings. Criminology & Public Policy, 4(2), 333–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00025.x.Google Scholar
Morgan, K. D., & Smith, B. (2005b). Parole release decisions revisited: An analysis of parole release decisions for violent inmates in a southeastern state. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(3), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2005.02.007.Google Scholar
Morgan, K. D., & Smith, B. (2008). The impact of race on parole decision‐making. Justice Quarterly, 25(2), 411–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820802024986.Google Scholar
National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals (1975). The parole grant hearing. In Amos, W. E & Newman, C. L. (Eds.), Parole (pp. 5–21). Federal Legal Publications.Google Scholar
National Parole Resource Center (2012, June). Vignettes from the national parole resource center learning sites. Bureau of Justice Assistance. http://nationalparoleresourcecenter.org/nprcdocuments/NPRC%20Vignettes.pdf.Google Scholar
Nevada Board of Parole Commissions (2011, June). Operation of the board. http://parole.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/parolenvgov/content/Hearings/OperationOfTheBoard.PDF.Google Scholar
Newman, D. J. (1975). Parole. In Amos, W. E & Newman, C. L. (Eds.), Parole: Legal issues, decision-making, research (pp. 22–75). Federal Legal Publications.Google Scholar
Newman, J. O., Genego, W. J., Goldberger, P. D., & Jackson, V. C. (1975). Project: Parole release decisionmaking and the sentencing process. The Yale Law Journal, 84(4), 810–902. https://doi.org/10.2307/795394.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, D. J. (2015). Elaboration likelihood model. In Donsbach, W. (Ed.), Concise encyclopedia of communication (pp. 168–169). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M. (2011). Parole? Nope, not for me: Voluntarily maxing out of prison. Crime & Delinquency, 57(5), 686–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710372194.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M. (2015). How do former inmates perform in the community? A survival analysis of rearrests, reconvictions, and technical parole violations. Crime & Delinquency, 61(2), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710396425.Google Scholar
Oudekerk, B., & Kaeble, D. (2021). Probation and parole in the United States, 2019. Bureau of Justice Statistics. bjs.ojp.gov,Google Scholar
Paparozzi, M. A., & Guy, R. (2009). The giant that never woke: Parole authorities as the lynchpin to evidence-based practice and prisoner re-entry. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 25, 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986209344561.Google Scholar
Petersilia, J. (1999). Parole and prisoner reentry in the United States. Crime and Justice, 26, 479–529. https://doi.org/10.1086/449302.Google Scholar
Petersilia, J. (2000). Parole and prisoner reentry in the United States. Perspectives, 24, 32–46.Google Scholar
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1996). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Westview Press.Google Scholar
Reitz, K. R., & Rhine, E. E. (2020). Parole release and supervision: Critical drivers of American prison policy. Annual Review of Criminology, 3, 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011419-041416.Google Scholar
Rhine, E. E., Petersilia, J., & Reitz, K. R. (2015). Improving parole release in America. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 28(2), 96–104.Google Scholar
Ruhland, E. L. (2020). Philosophies and decision making in parole board members. The Prison Journal, 100(5), 640–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520956566.Google Scholar
Schumacker, R. E., Anderson, D. B., & Anderson, S. L. (1990). Vocational and academic indicators of parole success. Journal of Correctional Education, 41(1), 8–13.Google Scholar
Schwalbe, C. S. J., & Koetzle, D. (2021). What the COVID-19 pandemic teaches about the essential practices of community corrections and supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(9), 1300–1316. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211019073.Google Scholar
Senate Research Center (1999). Parole: Then & now. https://senate.texas.gov/_assets/srcpub/ib0599.pdf.Google Scholar
Schlager, M. D., & Robbins, K. (2008). Does parole work? – revisited: Reframing the discussion of the impact of postprison supervision on offender outcome. The Prison Journal, 88(2), 234–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885508319164.Google Scholar
Shammas, V. L. (2019). The perils of parole hearings: California lifers, performative disadvantage, and the ideology of insight. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 42(1), 142–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12275.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24, 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 322–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00461.x.Google Scholar
Solomon, A. L., Kachnowski, V., & Bhati, A. (2005). Does parole work? Analyzing the impact of postprison supervision on rearrest outcomes. The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
Southern Center for Human Rights (2012). Parole handbook: A guide to the parole consideration process for people in Georgia prisons and their families. www.schr.org/files/post/ParoleHandbook.pdf.Google Scholar
Steen, S., & Opsal, T. (2007). Punishment on the installment plan: Individual-level predictors of parole revocation in four states. The Prison Journal, 87(3), 344–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885507304526.Google Scholar
Ten Bensel, T., Gibbs, B., & Lytle, R. (2015). A propensity score approach towards assessing neighborhood risk of parole revocation. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(2), 377–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9269-z.Google Scholar
Tewksbury, R., & Connor, D. P. (2012). Predicting the outcome of parole hearings. Corrections Today, 74(3), 54–56.Google Scholar
Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles (2013). Parole/mandatory supervision information. www.tdcj.texas.gov.Google Scholar
Todorov, A., Chaiken, S., & Henderson, M. D. (2002). The heuristic-systematic model of social information processing. In Dillard, J. P., & Pfau, M. (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 195–211). Sage.Google Scholar
Tonry, M. (2005). Obsolescence and immanence in penal theory and policy. Columbia Law Review, 105(4), 1233–1275.Google Scholar
Travis III, L. F., & Stacey, J. (2010). A half century of parole rules: Conditions of parole in the United States, 2008. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 604–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.04.032.Google Scholar
Veysey, B. M., Ostermann, M., & Lanterman, J. L. (2014). The effectiveness of enhanced parole supervision and community services: New Jersey’s Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative. The Prison Journal, 94(4), 435–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885514548007.Google Scholar
Wan, , W., Poynton, , S., van Doorn, , G., & Weatherburn, , D. (2014). Parole supervision and re-offending: A propensity score matching analysis. Report to the Criminology Research Advisory Council.Google Scholar
West-Smith, M., Pogrebin, M. R., & Poole, E. D. (2000). Denial of parole: An inmate perspective. Federal Probation, 64(2), 3–10.Google Scholar
Williams III, F. P., McShane, M. D., & Dolny, H. M. (2000). Predicting parole absconders. The Prison Journal, 80(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885500080001002.Google Scholar
Yelderman, L. A., Estrada-Reynolds, V., & Lawrence, T. I. (2022). Release or denial: Evaluating the roles of emotion and risk in parole decisions. Psychological Reports, 125(4), 2088–2108. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211007929.Google Scholar
Yelderman, L. A., Lawrence, T. I., Lyons, C. E., & DeVault, A. (2021). Actor-observer asymmetry in perceptions of parole board release decisions. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 28(5), 623–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1821826.Google Scholar
Young, K. M., Mukamal, D. A., & Favre-Bulle, T. (2016). Predicting parole grants: An analysis of suitability hearings for California’s lifer inmates. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 28(4), 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2016.28.4.268.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×