Correction to: Reluctant to embrace innocence: an experimental test of persevering culpability judgments on people’s willingness to support reintegration services for exonerees

Abstract

This correction provides minor changes to the original article-none of which alter the message of the research. The last update provides further clarity about the conditional indirect relationship. & The statistics associated with the race x crime interaction supporting the Culpability-Confidence Hypothesis are F(1, 167) = 4.02, p = .047, η p 2 = .02. & The effect size statistics for the simple effect test comparing people's culpability confidence of the White to the African-American exoneree wrongfully accused of embezzlement should read, d = .44, 95% CI of d [.02, .86]. & The confidence interval around the effect size for the simple effect test comparing people's culpability confidence of the White to the African-American exoneree wrongfully accused of physical assault should read, 95% CI of d [-.27, .61].

Righting a Wrongful Conviction: A Mixed Method Approach to Examining Exonerees’ Reintegration

“…It is also possible that crime influences participants' perceptions of exonerees as a result of the interaction of crime with other characteristics such as race (Scherr et al, 2018a) or gender (Cardoso et al, 2020) rather than the severity or type of crime. For example, Scherr, Normile, and Sarmiento (2018b) examined perceptions of White and Black exonerees wrongfully convicted of a race-stereotypic crime, and found that White exonerees wrongfully convicted of embezzlement were perceived more negatively, and rated as less deserving of reintegration support than Black exonerees wrongfully convicted of assault (Scherr, Normile, & Sarmiento, 2018b).…”