The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Ban the Box

IF 6.3 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Steven Raphael
{"title":"The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Ban the Box","authors":"Steven Raphael","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-061020-022137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I review the growing body of research that either directly assesses the effect of Ban the Box (BTB) on the employment prospects of those with criminal histories, tests for spillover effects operating through statistical discrimination, or assesses the labor-market impacts of related screening practices. I begin with a theoretical discussion that works through how widespread reluctance to hire those with criminal histories is likely to generate market-level employment and earnings penalties for various groups of workers, and how the size and distribution of these penalties likely depend on the information available to employers. I then turn to a review of research over the past 15 years or so that either directly assesses the impact of BTB or addresses highly related and relevant research questions. The weight of the empirical evidence suggests that BTB does not improve the employment prospects of those with criminal histories at private-sector employers, although there is some evidence of an improvement in employment prospects in the public sector. Regarding spillover effects operating through statistical discrimination, several studies indicate that BTB harms the employment prospects of African-American men. Furthermore, research on the effects of credit checks, occupational licensing, and drug testing appears to indicate that more information available to the employer improves the employment prospects of African Americans. Collectively, these findings imply that in the absence of objective information, employers place weight on stereotypes about the characteristics of black workers that are generally negative and inaccurate.","PeriodicalId":51759,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-CRIMINOL-061020-022137","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

I review the growing body of research that either directly assesses the effect of Ban the Box (BTB) on the employment prospects of those with criminal histories, tests for spillover effects operating through statistical discrimination, or assesses the labor-market impacts of related screening practices. I begin with a theoretical discussion that works through how widespread reluctance to hire those with criminal histories is likely to generate market-level employment and earnings penalties for various groups of workers, and how the size and distribution of these penalties likely depend on the information available to employers. I then turn to a review of research over the past 15 years or so that either directly assesses the impact of BTB or addresses highly related and relevant research questions. The weight of the empirical evidence suggests that BTB does not improve the employment prospects of those with criminal histories at private-sector employers, although there is some evidence of an improvement in employment prospects in the public sector. Regarding spillover effects operating through statistical discrimination, several studies indicate that BTB harms the employment prospects of African-American men. Furthermore, research on the effects of credit checks, occupational licensing, and drug testing appears to indicate that more information available to the employer improves the employment prospects of African Americans. Collectively, these findings imply that in the absence of objective information, employers place weight on stereotypes about the characteristics of black workers that are generally negative and inaccurate.
禁用盒子的预期和意外后果
我回顾了越来越多的研究,这些研究要么直接评估禁止盒子(BTB)对有犯罪史的人的就业前景的影响,要么通过统计歧视测试溢出效应,要么评估相关筛查做法对劳动力市场的影响。我首先进行了一场理论讨论,探讨了普遍不愿雇佣有犯罪史的人可能会对不同群体的工人产生市场层面的就业和收入惩罚,以及这些惩罚的规模和分布可能取决于雇主可获得的信息。然后,我回顾了过去15年左右的研究,这些研究要么直接评估BTB的影响,要么解决高度相关的研究问题。实证证据的分量表明,BTB并没有改善那些有犯罪史的人在私营部门雇主的就业前景,尽管有一些证据表明公共部门的就业前景有所改善。关于通过统计歧视产生的溢出效应,几项研究表明,BTB损害了非裔美国男性的就业前景。此外,关于信用检查、职业许可和药物测试影响的研究似乎表明,雇主可以获得更多信息,可以改善非裔美国人的就业前景。总的来说,这些发现意味着,在缺乏客观信息的情况下,雇主重视对黑人工人特征的刻板印象,这些刻板印象通常是负面和不准确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annual Review of Criminology
Annual Review of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Criminology provides comprehensive reviews of significant developments in the multidisciplinary field of criminology, defined as the study of both the nature of criminal behavior and societal reactions to crime.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信