Wrongful conviction and selection: perceptions of exonerees navigating societal reintegration

The current study examined how the wrongfully convicted are perceived when applying for a job or university scholarship. We varied criminal status (guilty/“offender” vs. wrongfully convicted/“exoneree”), crime type (murder vs. assault vs. robbery), applicant type (employment vs. scholarship) and gender (male vs. female) to determine what factors are considered (intentionally or unintentionally). Participants (N = 869) were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk and were presented with the opportunity posting, application and a series of questionnaires concerning their perceptions of the applicant. Overall, females were more likely to be chosen; those applying for a scholarship were more likely to be chosen; the exoneree was more likely to be chosen compared to the offender and those convicted of robbery or assault were more likely to be chosen. Specific to the current study, when the applicant was a female offender applying for a scholarship, she was rated as having more appeal compared to the male applicant. Additionally, when a female applicant was applying for a scholarship and was convicted of murder, she was viewed more positively compared to the male applicant. This study draws on research from forensic psychology and industrial-organizational psychology to discuss the intersectionality of barriers to successful reintegration of exonerees post-exoneration.