Uncovering Racialized Language and Differential Outcomes in Juvenile Lifer Parole Hearings

• In Event: Advances in Qualitative Methods II

Abstract

This interdisciplinary study is an examination of the mechanics and dynamics of parole board hearings. It applies linguistic techniques, specifically conversational analysis (CA), to the examination of parole board hearings. This paper is the first of a multi-step project that seeks to understand how dangerousness is radicalized, how biases operate within the context of parole hearings, and their relation to case outcomes across participants of various races. Using unique data from the Massachusetts Parole Board (transcripts, hearing videos, and parole decisions), we first examine the linguistic structure of parole board hearings and assess the potential of CA in examining institutional ceremonies. Previous examinations of structured proceedings (such as courtrooms) have shown promising insight. The semi-structured nature of parole hearing differentiates it from formal proceedings, yet question/answer interactions remain a major part. We focus on this dialogical process to understand its mechanics and potential influence on case outcomes. We provide recommendations for how these insights could inform hearing practices. Future projects will examine the transfer of knowledge from parolee to parole board, the role of race in natural language interactions, and how remorse and culpability are extracted.

Authors

• Aisulu Kulbayeva, Northeastern University

• Michel-Ange Siaba, Northeastern University

• Heather Paterson, Northeastern University

• Simon Singer, Northeastern University

• Ruth Stuart, Northeastern University