A recent peer-reviewed paper related to wrongful convictions
is titled, “Stigma and wrongful conviction: all exonerees are not perceived
equal.” It was published this year in the Psychology,
Crime & Law journal and written by Kimberley A. Clow and Amy-May Leach.
The paper describes the study on how exonerees are
perceived differently based on their conviction.
The study had four conditions in which participants were
randomly assigned, three experimental and one control. In the experimental
conditions, participants read a fake newspaper article about an individual’s
exoneration after spending 10 years in prison. These articles mentioned how the
individual was convicted due to either a false confession, eyewitness error, or
an informant. The control participants read no article.
After reading the articles, participants had to answer a
questionnaire, which asked about their perceptions of the individual in terms
of competence, warmth, aggression, and innocence. In addition, participants had
to answer questions about their emotional reactions to the individual, and if
they believed the exoneree should receive government assistance. Other
questions were more open ended and asked participants how and why they believe
wrongful convictions occurred.
Overall, the findings showed that the exoneree who falsely
confessed was perceived more negatively than other exonerees. For example,
participants rated the false confession exoneree as less competent and warm,
someone who should not receive government assistance. In addition, three out of
the eighty-five participants in the experimental conditions believed the
individual was guilty because of the false confession. However, instead of
expressing anger towards the individual who falsely confessed, participants
felt more pity.
The study proves that exonerees have to deal with
stigmatization once they are released from prison, and that the level of stigma
depends on how they were convicted. It is important to be aware of this stigma
in order to stop it. Some people may not understand why a person would give a
false confession but at the same time, they do not know about the conditions in
which the person was in either. Maybe the exoneree was under stress during the
investigation caused by the police just trying to find out the truth. Stopping
this stigma can in part relieve exonerees from the difficulties of adjusting
to life after prison.
Here is the link if you would like to read the article.
Reference
Clow, K. A. & Leach, A. (2014). Stigma and wrongful
conviction: All exonerees are not perceived equal. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21 (2), 172-185.
Your article shows scenarios of criminals who tell the wrong convictions are more likely to have failed to control anger. I have not really been interested in studying psychology of criminals, but this research sounds really realistic and I feel very involved in the research. I would like to more about many methods that the researcher tries to relieve criminals' stress and anxiety.
ReplyDeleteThis blog post is interesting in the way that a study was done for the reason of seeing how people perceive exonerees and how they differ. I do not know much about forensic science or anything like that but this seems pretty neat to read and to learn more about. It is interesting though that the people felt more pity than anger towards the person that was convicted. I feel like if I was someone in this test I would have been more angry than sorry for that person. It is good to see people have a more forgiving personality towards people who do anything wrong.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting article, I've not ever really thought about how stigmatized exonerees can be. I feel that it is wrong to stigmatize them for a wrongful convictions, but at the same time, I think that sometimes it can be called for to receive negative thoughts, especially if you purger yourself on the stand and claim to have done something you did not. I understand that sometimes it feels like the right thing to do because of threats by the actual criminal mobsters, or to protect a family member. I do agree with your idea that we should all try to keep an open mind though because at the end of the day, agreeing to go to prison for any reason must indicate that there was some sense of danger in that person's life at the time if they did not agree to go for a crime that they did not commit.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting article, I've not ever really thought about how stigmatized exonerees can be. I feel that it is wrong to stigmatize them for a wrongful convictions, but at the same time, I think that sometimes it can be called for to receive negative thoughts, especially if you purger yourself on the stand and claim to have done something you did not. I understand that sometimes it feels like the right thing to do because of threats by the actual criminal mobsters, or to protect a family member. I do agree with your idea that we should all try to keep an open mind though because at the end of the day, agreeing to go to prison for any reason must indicate that there was some sense of danger in that person's life at the time if they did not agree to go for a crime that they did not commit.
ReplyDeleteI really like how you clearly stated an enumerated the four conditions of the study. You explained the study in a methodological way, which made it easy to follow and comprehend. The thought of being wrongfully accused for a crime and having to waste away in prison for something you didn't do I pretty frightening. Especially now that the news is continually hyping stories of police brutality and dishonesty. If we can't trust out legal system to always get the answer correct, how much faith can we truly have in the system? It is virtually impossible to create a system with 100% accurate convictions, so what mechanisms can we employ to help the wrongfully accused?
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting study. For one side it shows how people stigmatize exnorees (of course in a negative way) which in theory is very wrong. But at the same time i believe that it is human nature to have such assumptions. Under the circumstances the persons in this test were, i think i would have perceived these exonerees in the exact same way. How do you think these kind of assessments could be done in a more fair way?
ReplyDelete