Stepping Beyond the Bars: A Comparative Analysis of Personality Traits in Previously Incarcerated Males and Females

The current study sought to explore differences in a previously incarcerated individual’s personality traits based on biological sex. It was posited that within a population of individuals who were formerly incarcerated, males would demonstrate a greater prevalence of personality traits that have been previously associated with involvement in the criminal justice system, compared to females. A total of 2,400 previously incarcerated people from Wave IV of The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (ADD Health) were asked questions related to personality traits. Previously incarcerated females had significantly higher levels of impulsivity than females not previously incarcerated, whereas previously incarcerated males had marginally lower levels of impulsivity compared to males not previously incarcerated. Previously incarcerated females exhibited significantly more sympathy than male counterparts. More years incarcerated after age 18 was correlated to impulsivity in females. Altogether, this research suggests that there are traits specifically associated with formerly incarcerated males or females and should be studied to further understand correlates of criminal and redemptive behaviors

Abudabbeh, N.N.

Each Chapter will have a unique component here so that the authors and editors can share private information back and forth. Chapters will be organized by Cultural Pioneer

A multi-site collaborative study of the hostile priming effect

In a now-classic study by Srull and Wyer (1979), people who were exposed to phrases with hostile content subsequently judged a man as being more hostile. And this “hostile priming effect” has had a significant influence on the field of social cognition over the subsequent decades. However, a recent multi-lab collaborative study (McCarthy et al., 2018) that closely followed the methods described by Srull and Wyer (1979) found a hostile priming effect that was nearly zero, which casts doubt on whether these methods reliably produce an effect. To address some limitations with McCarthy et al. (2018), the current multi-site collaborative study included data collected from 29 labs. Each lab conducted a close replication (total N = 2,123) and a conceptual replication (total N = 2,579) of Srull and Wyer\u27s methods. The hostile priming effect for both the close replication (d = 0.09, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.22], z = 1.34, p =.16) and the conceptual replication (d = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.15], z = 1.15, p =.58) were not significantly different from zero and, if the true effects are non-zero, were smaller than what most labs could feasibly and routinely detect. Despite our best efforts to produce favorable conditions for the effect to emerge, we did not detect a hostile priming effect. We suggest that researchers should not invest more resources into trying to detect a hostile priming effect using methods like those described in Srull and Wyer (1979)

A Multi-Site Collaborative Study of the Hostile Priming Effect

In a now-classic study by Srull and Wyer (1979), people who were exposed to phrases with hostile content subsequently judged a man as being more hostile. And this “hostile priming effect” has had a significant influence on the field of social cognition over the subsequent decades. However, a recent multi-lab collaborative study (McCarthy et al., 2018) that closely followed the methods described by Srull and Wyer (1979) found a hostile priming effect that was nearly zero, which casts doubt on whether these methods reliably produce an effect. To address some limitations with McCarthy et al. (2018), the current multi-site collaborative study included data collected from 29 labs. Each lab conducted a close replication (total N = 2,123) and a conceptual replication (total N = 2,579) of Srull and Wyer’s methods. The hostile priming effect for both the close replication (d = 0.09, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.22], z = 1.34, p = .16) and the conceptual replication (d = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.15], z = 1.15, p = .58) were not significantly different from zero and, if the true effects are non-zero, were smaller than what most labs could feasibly and routinely detect. Despite our best efforts to produce favorable conditions for the effect to emerge, we did not detect a hostile priming effect. We suggest that researchers should not invest more resources into trying to detect a hostile priming effect using methods like those described in Srull and Wyer (1979)