Bias in Hiring Applicants With Mental Illness and Criminal Justice Involvement: A Follow-Up Study With Employers

• Author: Robert D. Morgan,Ashley B. Batastini,Sean M. Mitchell,Angelea D. Bolaños
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854817693663
• Published date: 01 June 2017
• Date: 01 June 2017
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817693663

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2017, Vol. 44, No. 6, June 2017, 777 –795.

DOI: 10.1177/0093854817693663

© 2017 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

777

BIAS IN HIRING APPLICANTS WITH MENTAL

ILLNESS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

INVOLVEMENT

A Follow-Up Study With Employers

ASHLEY B. BATASTINI

ANGELEA D. BOLAÑOS

ROBERT D. MORGAN

SEAN M. MITCHELL

Texas Tech University

Negative employer perceptions of job candidates with psychiatric and criminal backgrounds is one factor contributing to high

unemployment rates among these groups. The current study replicated and extended Batastini et al., which evaluated stigma-

tizing beliefs toward hypothetical job applicants who had a known psychiatric and/or criminal history or neither (i.e., healthy

control), as well as the effectiveness of a brief training component to mitigate biased attitudes. However, the current study

addressed two major limitations of the original study by (a) including participants (N = 259) who reported current, past, or

expected hiring experience and (b) including employer benefits in the training component. Results were generally consistent

with prior research suggesting that people with psychiatric and criminal histories experience greater stigma from employers;

however, the brief educational training component demonstrated minimal impact on reducing negative attitudes regardless of

the applicant’s identified psychiatric or criminal background.

Keywords: stigma; mental illness; criminal justice; employment; hiring

Stigma refers to the negative outcomes that occur when a social, economic, or other char-

acteristic label is attributed to an individual or a group of individuals sharing a particu-

lar quality (Hayward & Bright, 1997; Link & Phelan, 2001). Stigmatized groups or

individuals are more likely to be deprived of certain life opportunities when compared with

their nonstigmatized counterparts (e.g., Corrigan, 2004; Corrigan & Shapiro, 2010; Corrigan

& Watson, 2002; Overton & Medina, 2008). Persons with mental illnesses (PMI) with and

without criminal justice (CJ) involvement are vulnerable populations who often experience

AUTHORS’ NOTE: Batastini was located at Texas Tech University during the time this research was con-

ducted. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ashley B. Batastini, University of

Southern Mississippi, 118 College Drive #5025, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-5025; e-mail: Ashley.Batastini@usm.

edu.

693663CJBXXX10.1177/0093854817693663CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIORBatastini et al. / HIRING ATTITUDES FOLLOW-UP

research-article2017

778 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

barriers to job attainment and maintenance (Graffam, Shinkfield, & Hardcastle, 2008;

Varghese, Hardin, Bauer, & Morgan, 2009)—both of which are key components to success-

ful mental health recovery and community reintegration (Bonta & Andrews, 2007; Dunn,

Wewiorski, & Rogers, 2008; Graffam, Shinkfield, Lavelle, & Hardcastle, 2004; Stuart,

2006). Therefore, the current study aimed to examine the association between stigmatizing

attitudes and employment-related outcomes using hypothetical job applicants with and

without mental illness (MI) and/or CJ involvement.

While PMI work to manage their psychiatric symptoms, they must also work to over-

come misconceptions about their illness (Corrigan & Watson, 2002; Rüsch, Angermeyer, &

Corrigan, 2005). Even if an individual is able to effectively manage his or her psychiatric

symptoms enough to maintain stable employment, he or she may still face discrimination

from employers when actually attempting to secure viable employment opportunities

(Corrigan, 2004; Rüsch et al., 2005). For example, Hand and Tryssenaar (2006) found that

employers were less willing to hire an applicant with MI compared with their non-MI coun-

terparts. In addition, employers expressed a greater concern regarding certain characteris-

tics of the applicants with MI (e.g., emotional control, persistence, resolving conflict) that

might interfere with their work performance than other applicants (Hand & Tryssenaar,

2006). Furthermore, 36% of employees with psychiatric symptoms reported being the tar-

get of on-the-job discrimination within the last 5 years (McAlpine & Warner, 2002). Given

these stigmatizing beliefs, PMI experience disproportionately high rates of unemployment

and often earn lower salaries than employees without psychiatric illness (Alexander & Link,

2003; Burke-Miller et al., 2006; Cook et al., 2006; Link, 1982; Link & Phelan, 2001;

Overton & Medina, 2008).

Individuals with a history of CJ involvement seem to face similar difficulties. According

to the U.S. Department of Justice (n.d.), more than 10,000 people are released from state

and federal prisons every week. With current shifts in the “tough-on-crime” culture in the

United States (e.g., moving away from mandatory sentencing), this number will likely

increase. Yet, nearly 60% of CJ-involved individuals in the United States are unemployed 1

year post-release from incarceration (Petersilia, 2001). Other data indicate a 35% unem-

ployment rate for ex-prisoners 8 months after their release (Visher, Debus-Sherrill, &

Yahner, 2011), whereas the average 12-month unemployment rate for the general popula-

tion in the same year was 8.9% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). It has been estimated that

the number of Americans with a criminal record is equivalent to the number of Americans

who possess a 4-year college degree (Friedman, 2015). In sum, high rates of unemployment

bear poorly on the reduction of psychiatric and criminal recidivism rates for these popula-

tions (Duran, Plotkin, Potter, & Rosen, 2013; Harer, 1994; Rauma & Berk, 1987).

For people with criminal and/or psychiatric histories, challenges in seeking employment

opportunities can arise from employer bias. For example, more than 60% of employers

indicated that they would be unlikely to hire an individual with a criminal record (Holzer,

Raphael, & Stoll, 2002). Similarly, employers evidenced significant negative biases when

making hiring decisions about applicants with a criminal history when compared with those

without a criminal history (Varghese et al., 2009). This result is further compounded by

additional racial biases of employers, such that Whites tend to have more job success than

ethnic minorities (Pager, 2003). Taken together, it appears that a criminal record negatively

affects the employability of CJ-involved individuals (Decker, Ortiz, Spohn, & Hedberg,

2015; Pager, 2003; Pager, Western, & Sugie, 2009). Moreover, people with intellectual or