RANDOM ASSIGNMENT,THE LEAST FAIR OF THEM ALL: PRISONERS’ATTITUDES TOWARD VARIOUS CRITERIA OF SELECTION*

This study examines perceptions of fairness and attitudes of offenders toward random assignment as compared to other selection methods used in evaluation research for allocating benefits or assigning inmates to programs. Three hundred and forty-eight inmates in three federal institutions were randomly selected and presented questionnaires which surveyed their attitudes toward four selection procedures: random assignment; need; merit; and first come, first served. By a large margin, selection according to need was chosen most frequently as the fairest method, followed in order by merit; first come, first served; and random assignment. In addition, all groups who did not choose random assignment as the fairest selection method consistently rated it as the least fair of the four. The results and analysis suggest that researchers who wish to test innovative programs using randomized experiments need to in form the participants of the meaning and value of randomization.