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 investigate 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. 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, 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 to 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 on real parole hearings further revealed that parolees who received parole mentioned more dispositional, and less situational, factors than those whose parole request was rejected. According to the authors, parole commissioners should be cognizant of this cultural mismatch effect because what is regarded as a neutral standard during parole hearings may be driven by a culturally specific norm.
PNAS Nexus
A cultural explanation for parole decisions in the United States
30-Jun-2026
R.L.B. is one of the creators/developers of LIWC-22, which was used in the supplementary analyses.