Examining the effect of prison time on landlords' willingness to rent to exonerees: A test of the stigma‐by‐association framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers posit that stigma-by-association may account for the discrimination that exonerees experience post-release. Exonerees who serve a longer prison sentence may experience more stigma than exonerees who spent less time in prison. Across two studies, we examined whether criminal history (exoneree, releasee, or control) or prison time (5 or 25 years) impacted landlords' willingness to rent their apartment. Authors responded to one-bedroom apartment listings in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada, inquiring about unit availability. The rental inquiries were identical except for criminal history and prison time. Across both studies, results demonstrated that landlords were significantly less likely to respond, and indicate availability, to exonerees and releasees compared to control. Landlords discriminated against exonerees when the exoneree did not mention a formal exoneration (Study 1) and explicitly mentioned that he was exonerated by DNA evidence (Study 2). Prison time had no significant impact. A content analysis of landlords' replies revealed that exonerees and releasees experienced more subtle forms of discrimination compared to individuals without a criminal history. Together, our results demonstrate that individuals who were formerly incarcerated and associated with prison-whether it be for 5 years or 25 years or a rightful or wrongful conviction-experience housing discrimination upon their release.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".