All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Imprisoned Imperceptions: Inaccuracy in Incarceration Demographic Stereotypes
Unformatted Document Text:  Incarceration Beliefs Table 2 Raw discrepancies between the estimated and actual proportions for prison population and accuracy estimates Social Groups Actual Estimate Raw Discrepancy df t n ≤10% n 10.1 – 20% n >20% U.S. Population in Prison 0.76 22.09 21.33(19.59) 340 20.13*** NA NA NA Female 7 22.79 15.79(16.11) 335 17.96*** 142 64 130 High School Graduate 56 31.32 -24.68(19.76) 340 23.06*** 64 63 214 Mentally Ill 15 32.05 17.05(23.58) 334 13.23*** 138 68 129 White 35 29.68 -5.31(17.28) 340 5.68*** 155 94 92 Black 40 47.39 7.39(20.24) 340 6.74*** 153 79 109 Latino 14 23.36 9.26(14.82) 342 11.57*** 184 94 65 ***p<.001 Column 1 presents the individual social groups. Column 2 presents the actual proportion of the social group in the U.S. prison population. Column 3 presents participants’ average estimates of these proportions. This measure is simply the numerical average of each participant’s estimate of that social group’s proportion in the population. This is the overall average of the sample estimates, and, therefore, represents the consensual stereotype. Column 4 presents the raw discrepancy score. This is simply the difference between the actual proportion in Column 2 and the estimated proportion in Column 3. This value represents accuracy at the group level, because it compares the mean of the group estimate to the criterion. Column 5 presents degrees of freedom from the single sample t-tests performed on the raw discrepancy scores, and column 6 presents the results of that analysis. Column 7 indicates the number of participants who accurately perceived the social group. Column 8 indicates the number of participants who had a near miss in their accuracy for the social group. Column 9 indicates the number of participants who inaccurately perceived the social group. 34

Authors: Ragusa, Laura.
first   previous   Page 34 of 38   next   last



background image
Incarceration Beliefs
Table 2
Raw discrepancies between the estimated and actual proportions for prison population and accuracy estimates
Social Groups
Actual Estimate
Raw 
Discrepancy
df
t
10% 
10.1 – 20% 
n
 >20%
U.S. Population in Prison
0.76
22.09
21.33(19.59)
340
20.13***
NA
NA
NA
Female
7
22.79
15.79(16.11)
335
17.96***
142
64
130
High School Graduate
56
31.32
-24.68(19.76)
340
23.06***
64
63
214
Mentally Ill
15
32.05
17.05(23.58)
334
13.23***
138
68
129
White
35
29.68
-5.31(17.28)
340
5.68***
155
94
92
Black
40
47.39
7.39(20.24)
340
6.74***
153
79
109
Latino
14
23.36
9.26(14.82)
342
11.57***
184
94
65
***p<.001
Column 1 presents the individual social groups. Column 2 presents the actual proportion of the social group in the U.S. prison 
population. Column 3 presents participants’ average estimates of these proportions. This measure is simply the numerical average of 
each participant’s estimate of that social group’s proportion in the population.  This is the overall average of the sample estimates, and, 
therefore, represents the consensual stereotype.  Column 4 presents the raw discrepancy score.  This is simply the difference between 
the actual proportion in Column 2 and the estimated proportion in Column 3. This value represents accuracy at the group level, because 
it compares the mean of the group estimate to the criterion. Column 5 presents degrees of freedom from the single sample t-tests 
performed on the raw discrepancy scores, and column 6 presents the results of that analysis. Column 7 indicates the number of 
participants who accurately perceived the social group. Column 8 indicates the number of participants who had a near miss in their 
accuracy for the social group. Column 9 indicates the number of participants who inaccurately perceived the social group.
34


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 34 of 38   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.