The purpose of this study was to investigate how individuals incarcerated who were denied parole navigated the parole process and their subsequent denial for release. This study used in-depth qualitative interviews with 66 men and women who were currently incarcerated and denied parole. The results illustrated how their experiences with the parole process affected their perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. The degree of fairness and legitimacy were also interconnected with how they internally processed the decision as well as how they perceived their prospects for release. Implications are that if individuals perceive the parole hearings as not legitimate, they may be less willing to participate in the process and instead chose to max out their time.
AnnisonH.CondryR. (2022). The pains of hope: Families of indeterminate sentenced prisoners and political campaigning by lay citizens. British Journal of Criminology, 62(5), 1252–1269. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azac039
2.
BandesS. A. (2016). Remorse and criminal justice. Emotion Review, 8(1), 14–19.
3.
BestB. L.WodahlE. J.HolmesM. D. (2014). Waiving away the chance of freedom: Exploring why prisoners decide against applying for parole. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58(3), 320–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X12470812.
4.
BottomsA.TankebeJ. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. The Journal of Criminal and Criminology, 102(1), 19–170.
5.
CaplanJ. M. (2007). What factors affect parole: A review of empirical research. Federal Probation: A Journal of Correctional Philosophy and Practice, 71(1), 16–19.
6.
CohenS.TaylorL. (2003). Escape attempts: The theory and practice of resistance in everyday life. Routledge.
7.
ConleyJ. A.ZimmermanS. E. (1982). Decision making by a part-time parole board: An observational and empirical study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9(4), 396–431.
8.
ConnorD. P. (2016). How to get out of prison: Views from parole board members. Corrections, 1(2), 107–126.
9.
CottonR. F. (2008). Time to move on: The California Parole Board’s fixation with the original sentence. Law & Policy Review, 27(1), 239–247.
10.
CreswellJ.PothC. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
DalyK. J. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies & human development. Sage.
13.
ElionV. H.MegargeeE. I. (1979). Racial identity, length of incarceration, and parole release decision making. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 16(2), 232–245.
14.
GreeneJ.DalkeI. (2021). You’re still an angry man: Parole boards and logics of criminalized masculinity. Theoretical Criminology, 25(1), 639–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480620910222
15.
Hannah-MoffatK.YuleC. (2011). Gaining insight, changing attitudes and managing ‘risk’: Parole release decisions for women convicted of violent crimes. Punishment & Society, 13(2), 149–175.
16.
HuebnerB. M.BynumT. S. (2008). The role of race and ethnicity in parole decisions. Criminology, 46(4), 907–938.
17.
LambertS. D.LoiselleC. G. (2008). Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(2), 228–237.
18.
MacDougallC.BaumF. (1997). The devil’s advocate: A strategy to avoid groupthink and stimulate discussion in focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 532–541.
19.
MartelJ. (2010). Remorse and the production of truth. Punishment & Society, 12(4), 414–437.
MichelL. (1999). Combining focus groups and interviews: Telling how it is; Telling how it feels. In BarbourR.KitzingerJ. (Eds.), Developing focus group research (pp. 36–46). Sage.
23.
MoydO. (1986). Racial disparities inherent in America’s fragmented parole system. Criminal Justice, 36(1), 6–12.
24.
OstermannM. (2011). Parole? Nope, not for me: Voluntarily maxing out of prison. Crime & Delinquency, 57(5), 686–708.
25.
PaparozziM. A.CaplanJ. M. (2009). A profile of paroling authorities in America: The strange bedfellows of politics and professionalism. The Prison Journal, 89(4), 401–425.
26.
PattonM. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage.
ReitzK. R.RhineE. E. (2020). Parole release and supervision: Critical drivers of American prison policy. Annual Review of Criminology, 3(1), 281–298.
29.
ReitzK. R.RhineE. E.LukacA.GriffithM. (2022). American prison-release systems: Indeterminacy in sentencing and the control of prison population size. University of Minnesota Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice.
30.
RhineE. E. (2012). The present status and future prospects of parole boards and parole supervision. In PetersiliaJ.ReitzR. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sentencing and corrections (pp. 627–656). Oxford University Press.
31.
RhineE. E.PetersiliaJ.ReitzK. R. (2017). The future of parole release. Crime and Justice, 46(1), 279–338.
32.
RhineE. ESmithW. R.JacksonR. W. (1991). Paroling authorities: Recent history and current practices. American Correctional Association.
33.
RiveraR. (2020). Traumatized to death: The cumulative effects of serial parole denials. The City of University of New York Law Review, 23(2), 25–39.
34.
RubinA. T. (2021). Rocking qualitative social science. Stanford University Press.
SchwartzapfelB. (2015). Parole boards: Problems and promise. Federal Sentencing Report, 28(2), 79–84.
38.
ShantzL. R.FrigonS. (2009). Aging, women and health: From the pains of imprisonment to the pains of reintegration. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 5(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449200802692045
39.
SofferM.AjzenstadtM. (2010). The multidimensionality of “pains of imprisonment” among incarcerated women in Israel. Women & Health, 50(6), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2010.510388
40.
SykesG. (1958) The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton University Press.
41.
TylerT. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99.
42.
UgelvikT. (2014). Paternal pains of imprisonment: Incarcerated fathers, ethnic minority masculinity and resistance narratives. Punishment & Society, 16(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474513517020
43.
WarrJ. (2016). The prisoner: Inside and out. In JewkesY.BennettJ.CreweB. (Eds.), Handbook on prisons (2nd ed., pp. 586–604). Routledge.
44.
West-SmithM.PogrebinM. R.PooleE. D. (2000). Denial of parole: An inmate perspective. Federal Probation, 64(3), 3–10.
45.
YangY. (2019). Measuring hope in jail inmates with substance use problem. Federal Probation, 83(2), 21–26.
46.
ZhongR.BaranoskiM.FeigensonN.DavidsonL.BuchananA.NonanaH. V. (2014). So you’re sorry? The role of remorse in criminal law. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 42, 39–48.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
