To assess public support for families impacted by incarceration, we embedded a vignette experiment in a YouGov survey (N = 1,300) posed as a social media post asking for help for a family facing housing instability. We manipulated the reason for hardship, who are impacted in the family, the race of the affected family, and number of “likes” on the post. Respondents are less likely to support direct (donating and volunteering) or government (tax for short-term housing assistance) action if the family is in need due to current or former incarceration rather than a car accident, whether at fault or not. Respondents also express less sympathy for families impacted by incarceration and open-ended responses suggest stigma by association among other explanations.
AlexanderM. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.
2.
AlwardL. M.CaudyM. S.ViglioneJ. (2020). Assessing the relative influence of individual attitudes, social supports, and neighborhood context on reentry outcomes: What changes matter most?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(11), 1487–1508.
AnsolabehereS.SchaffnerB. F. (2014). Does survey mode still matter? Findings from a 2010 multi-mode comparison. Political Analysis, 22(3), 285–303.
5.
AronowP. M.BaronJ.PinsonL. (2019). A note on dropping experimental subjects who fail a manipulation check. Political Analysis, 27(4), 572–589
6.
BobbittM.NelsonM. (2004). The front line: Building programs that recognize families’ role in reentry. Vera Institute of Justice.
7.
BryanB.FarooqiH. (2024). Maternal wealth implications of child incarceration: Examining the upstream consequences of children’s incarceration for women’s assets, homeownership, and home equity. Demography, 61(6), 1845–1870.
8.
BurrowA. L.RainoneN. (2017). How many likes did I get? Purpose moderates links between positive social media feedback and self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 232–236.
9.
BurtonA. L.CullenF. T.BurtonV. S.JrGrahamA.ButlerL. C.ThieloA. J. (2020). Belief in redeemability and punitive public opinion: “Once a criminal, always a criminal” revisited. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(6), 712–732.
10.
CalimanC. R.BerryessaC. M. (2025). Analyzing the impacts of race, addiction, drug type, and criminal record on public support for criminalized and medicalized sentencing approaches toward illegal drug use. Journal of Experimental Criminology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-024-09657-2
11.
ChenY. H.VîlcicăE. R.WardJ. T.MaynardM.EberhardtC.OlaghereA. (2024). Legitimacy of parole as a consequence of policy shock: The lived experiences of incarcerated persons during the parole moratorium in Pennsylvania, US. Law & Policy, 46(3), 246–276.
12.
CoddH. (2000). Age, role changes and gender power in family relationships: The experiences of older female partners of male prisoners. Women & Criminal Justice, 12(2–3), 63–93.
13.
ComfortM. (2007). Punishment beyond the legal offender. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3(1), 271–296.
14.
ComfortM. (2008). Doing time together. Love and family in the shadow of the prison. University of Chicago Press.
15.
CondryR. (2006). Stigmatised women: Relatives of serious offenders and the broader impact of crime. In HeidensohnF. (Ed.) Gender and justice: New concepts and approaches (pp. 96–120). Willan.
16.
CondryR. (2007). Families shamed: The consequences of crime for relatives of serious offenders. Willan.
17.
CondryR.KotovaA.MinsonS. (2016). Social injustice and collateral damage: The families and children of prisoners. In JewkesY.BennettJ.CreweB. (Eds.), Handbook on prisons (pp. 622–640). Routledge.
18.
CondryR.MinsonS. (2021). Conceptualizing the effects of imprisonment on families: Collateral consequences, secondary punishment, or symbiotic harms?Theoretical Criminology, 25(4), 540–558.
19.
CondryR.SmithP. S. (2018). The sociology of punishment and the effects of imprisonment on families. In CondryR.SmithP. S. (Eds.), Prisons, punishment, and the family: Towards a new sociology of punishment (pp. 1–26). Oxford University Press.
20.
CreswellJ. W.CreswellJ. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
21.
CullenF. T.ButlerL. C.GrahamA. (2021). Racial attitudes and criminal justice policy. Crime and Justice, 50(1), 163–245.
22.
CullenF. T.FisherB. S.ApplegateB. K. (2000). Public opinion about punishment and corrections. Crime and Justice, 27, 1–79.
23.
DavisM. H. (1996). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Westview Press.
DeWittS. E.DenverM. (2020). Criminal records, positive employment credentials, and race. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 57(3), 333–368.
26.
FishmanL. T. (1988). Prisoners and their wives: Marital and domestic effects of telephone contacts and home visits. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 32(1), 55–66.
27.
FleissJ. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley.
28.
GaddisS. M. (2017). How black are Lakisha and Jamal? Racial perceptions from names used in correspondence audit studies. Sociological Science, 4, 469–489.
29.
GarlandD. (2023). The current crisis of American criminal justice: A structural analysis. Annual Review of Criminology, 6(1), 43–63.
30.
GiuffreA. (2023). The impact of legal-financial obligations on relationships with family, friends, and acquaintances: A qualitative study of community supervised men with sexual and nonsexual offense convictions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 50(5), 747–765.
31.
GiuffreA.TappK.HuebnerB. M.KrasK. R.SlocumL. A. (2024). Cyclical pathways to probation violations: Housing, financial capabilities, and COVID-19. Corrections, 9, 576–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2024.2320413
32.
GoffmanE. (1963). Stigma. Prentice-Hall.
33.
GottschalkM. (2015). Razing the carceral state. Social Justice, 42(2), 31–51.
34.
GrahamA.PickettJ. T.CullenF. T. (2021). Advantages of matched over unmatched opt-in samples for studying criminal justice attitudes: A research note. Crime & Delinquency, 67(12), 1962–1981.
35.
HalseyM.DeeganS. (2015). ‘Picking up the pieces’: Female significant others in the lives of young (ex) incarcerated males. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 15(2), 131–151.
36.
HanM. C. (2021). Thumbs down on “likes”? The impact of Facebook reactions on online consumers’ nonprofit engagement behavior. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 18(2), 255–272.
37.
HannanK. R.CullenF. T.GrahamA.JonsonC. L.PickettJ. T.HanerM.SloanM. M. (2023). Public support for second look sentencing: Is there a Shawshank redemption effect?Criminology & Public Policy, 22(2), 263–292.
38.
HardingD. J.MorenoffJ. D.WyseJ. J. (2019). On the outside: Prisoner reentry and reintegration. University of Chicago Press.
39.
HaruvyE. E.Popkowski LeszczycP. T. (2024). Social media and nonprofit fundraising: The influence of Facebook likes. European Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 33–65.
40.
HickertA.PleggenkuhleB.HuebnerB. M. (2024). Changing places: The role of household and community context in long-term patterns of recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 41(6), 790–814.
41.
HickertA.ShiL.ShawO.YanS. (2025). Do direct and courtesy prison stigma hinder support for a startup business? A vignette experiment. Journal of Experimental Criminology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-025-09664-x
42.
HorbergE. J.KrausM. W.KeltnerD. (2013). Pride displays communicate self-interest and support for meritocracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(1), 24–37.
43.
JohfreS. S. (2020). What age is in a name?Sociological Science, 7, 367–390.
44.
KinderD. R.SandersL. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. University of Chicago Press.
45.
KirkD. S.WakefieldS. (2018). Collateral consequences of punishment: A critical review and path forward. Annual Review of Criminology, 1(1), 171–194.
46.
LeeH.CullenF. T.BurtonA. L.BurtonV. S.Jr. (2022). Millennials as the future of corrections: A generational analysis of public policy opinions. Crime & Delinquency, 68(12), 2355–2392.
47.
LeeK.LeeB.OhW. (2015). Thumbs up, sales up? The contingent effect of Facebook likes on sales performance in social commerce. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(4), 109–143.
48.
LightR.CampbellB. (2007). Prisoners’ families: Still forgotten victims?Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 28(3–4), 297–308.
49.
LinW. (2013). Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining Freedman’s critique. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 7, 295–318.
50.
LiuL.VisherC. A. (2021). Decomposition of the role of family in reentry: Family support, tension, gender, and reentry outcomes. Crime & Delinquency, 67(6–7), 970–996.
MarínE.TurneyK.MonrealA. B. (2025). Forgotten family relationships: How incarcerated brothers experience sibling support. Journal of Marriage and Family. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.13125
53.
MaruschakL.BronsonJ.AlperM. (2021). Parents in prison and their minor children: Survey of prison inmates, 2016. https://www.bjs.ojp.gov
54.
McGinleyM.JonesC. (2018). Growing up with parental imprisonment: Children’s experiences of managing stigma, secrecy and shame. Practice, 30(5), 341–357.
55.
McKenzieD. (2017). Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: Experimental evidence from a business plan competition. American Economic Review, 107(8), 2278–2307.
56.
MeyerM. H.KandicA. (2021). How social policies affect grandparent care work. In WilmothJ.LondonA. (Eds.), Life-course implications of US public policy (pp. 114–123). Taylor & Francis.
57.
MillerR. J. (2021). Halfway home: Race, punishment, and the afterlife of mass incarceration. Little, Brown.
58.
MochonD.JohnsonK.SchwartzJ.ArielyD. (2017). What are likes worth? A Facebook page field experiment. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(2), 306–317.
NovickR.SociaK. M.PickettJ. T. (2022). Asymmetric compassion collapse, collateral consequences, and reintegration: An experiment. Justice Quarterly, 39(7), 1475–1498.
61.
PickettJ. T. (2017). Blame their mothers: Public opinion about maternal employment as a cause of juvenile delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 12(4), 361–383.
62.
PleggenkuhleB.HuebnerB. M.KrasK. R. (2016). Solid Start: Supportive housing, social support, and reentry transitions. Journal of Crime and Justice, 39(3), 380–397.
63.
RocheS. P.PickettJ. T.GertzM. (2016). The scary world of online news? Internet news exposure and public attitudes toward crime and justice. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32, 215–236.
64.
RubinA. T. (2021). Rocking qualitative social science: An irreverent guide to rigorous research. Stanford University Press.
65.
Russell-BrownK. (2009). The color of crime (Vol. 45). NYU Press.
66.
SaldañaJ. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). Sage.
67.
ShiL.DenverM. (2025). The transferal of criminal record stigma in the employment context: Evidence from conjoint and vignette experiments, Criminology, 63, 89–121.
68.
ShiL.SilverJ. R.HickertA. (2022). Conceptualizing and measuring public stigma toward people with prison records. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 49(11), 1676–1698.
69.
SimmonsA. D.BoboL. D. (2015). Can non-full-probability internet surveys yield useful data? A comparison with full-probability face-to-face surveys in the domain of race and social inequality attitudes. Sociological Methodology, 45(1), 357–387.
70.
SinhaG. A.UmamaheswarJ. (2024). Hidden takings and the communal burden of punishment. Hofstra Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper Forthcoming.
71.
SmithP.GrahamA.CullenF. T.PickettJ.JonsonC. L.HannanK. R.PompocoA. (2024). Public support for universal second look sentencing: A research note. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/tuq5y
72.
SmithT. W. (2005). Altruism and empathy in America: Trends and correlates (GSS Topical Report No. 38). National Opinion Research Center.
73.
SugieN. F.ZatzN. D.AugustineD. (2020). Employer aversion to criminal records: An experimental study of mechanisms. Criminology, 58(1), 5–34.
74.
TascaM. (2016). The gatekeepers of contact: Child–caregiver dyads and parental prison visitation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(6), 739–758.
75.
UmamaheswarJ. (2024). The construction of capital among family members of people in prison. The British Journal of Criminology, 64(6), 1259–1274.
Van TeunenbroekC.BekkersR.BeersmaB. (2021). They ought to do it too: Understanding effects of social information on donation behavior and mood. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 18(2), 229–253.
78.
WacquantL. (2012). The wedding of workfare and Prisonfare in the 21st century. Journal of Poverty, 16(3), 236–249.
79.
WakefieldS. (2022). Incarceration, families, and communities: Recent developments and enduring challenges. Crime and Justice, 51(1), 399–434.
80.
WakefieldS.WildemanC. (2014). Children of the prison boom: Mass incarceration and the future of American inequality. Oxford University Press.
81.
WarrenC. A. B.KarnerT. X. (2010). Discovering qualitative research methods: Field research, interviews, and analysis (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
82.
XuY.WangY.McCarthyL. P.HarrisonT.DohertyH. (2022). Mental/behavioural health and educational outcomes of grandchildren raised by custodial grandparents: A mixed methods systematic review. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(6), 2096–2127.
ZagefkaH.NoorM.BrownR.De MouraG. R.HopthrowT. (2011). Donating to disaster victims: Responses to natural and humanly caused events. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(3), 353–363.
85.
ZagefkaH.NoorM.BrownR.HopthrowT.de MouraG. R. (2012). Eliciting donations to disaster victims: Psychological considerations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15(4), 221–230.
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.
