Table 3.

Effect of Consequence Frame and Narrative Compared to Exposure to Only Consequence Frame on Social Stigma and Support for Less Punitive Policies

	Predicted Percent Agreement[95% Confidence Intervals]
	All Frames		Public Safety Frame		Social Justice Frame		Impact on Children Frame
	No Narrative	Narrative	No Narrative	Narrative	No Narrative	Narrative	No Narrative	Narrative
Willing to Move Next Door	38 % [34,43]	41% [38,44]	36% [28,44]	44 % [39,49]	37% [30,44]	36% [31,41]	41% [33,49]	42 % [36,47]
Perceived Ability to Rehabilitate	68 % [63,72]	71% [69,74]	69 % [61,76]	70% [65,75]	62% [55,70]	74%* [70,79]	72% [66,79]	70% [65,75]
Eliminating Mandatory Minimum Sentencing	53 % [48,57]	53% [50,56]	52% [44,60]	53% [48,59]	54% [46,62]	52% [47,58]	52% [44,60]	54% [48,59]
Removing SNAP Bans	43 % [39,48]	48% [45,51]	39% [32,46]	46% [41,51]	47% [39,54]	49% [44,55]	44% [37,52]	48% [42,53]
Removing Public Housing Restrictions	43 % [39,47]	47% [44,50]	38% [30,46]	49%* [44,54]	43% [35,50]	48% [42,53]	48% [40,56]	45% [40,51]
Enacting Ban-the-Box	52% [47,56]	51% [48,54]	46% [39,54]	51 % [46,57]	55% [47,63]	51% [46,57]	54% [46,61]	49% [44,55]

^*:p-value<0.05 Different predicted percentage after exposure to consequence frame and narrative compared to exposure to only consequence frame.