Improving Employment and Reducing Recidivism Among Prison Offenders Via Virtual Interview Training Tool (MICHR)
Phase: NA
Conditions: Criminal Behavior
Sponsor: University of Michigan

Page 1 of 29 
 
 
 
 
PROTOCOL TITLE: 
Improving Employment and Reducing Recidivism among Prison Offenders via Virtual 
Interview Training Tool  
 
 
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: 
Name: Matthew J. Smith, PhD, MSW, MPE, LCSW 
Department: School of Social Work 
Telephone Number:  (734) 764-3309 
Email Address: mattjsmi@umich.edu 
VERSION DATE: June 6, 2020 
 
ClinicalTrials: NCT04140942 
 
 
 

Page 2 of 29 
 
This protocol is the exact protocol that was approved and used for HUM00155161. There are  
only a few differences between the current protocol and HUM00155161. First, the current 
protocol will enroll participants into the randomized controlled trial (RCT) who are 25 years or 
older (HUM00155161 participants in the randomized controlled trial are 18-24 years old). 
Second, the current protocol will enroll 60 participants into the RCT (compared to 150 
participants in HUM00155161). Third, the current protocol is funded for 12-months by MICHR 
(via funding from NIH). Lastly, the current protocol is only for the randomized controlled trial 
(rather than HUM00155161 which includes enrolling staff into an implementation evaluation).
 
 
1.0 Purpose of the Study:  
 
Goals and Objectives. Our goal is to conduct a confirmatory effectiveness RCT (and an 
implementation evaluation [39]) of Virtual Reality Job Interview Training (VR-JIT) by 
comparing employment and recidivism outcomes of offenders receiving vocational services 
as usual (SAU) plus VR-JIT (SAU+VR-JIT) with the outcomes of offenders receiving only 
services as usual (SAU-only). To meet the criteria in the funding announcement, our plan 
calls for participants to include offenders who are at moderate to high risk for reoffending 
(with an emphasis on violent-crime reoffending) who are currently enrolled in a Vocational 
Village. We are well prepared to conduct this study because our team has extensive 
experience with evaluating VR-JIT in several settings (schools and mental-health service 
providers) and has previously collaborated with the Michigan Department of Corrections, 
which administers the Vocational Villages. 
 
Objective 1. Evaluate whether SAU+VR-JIT, compared with SAU-only, enhances 
employment outcomes and reduces recidivism among this population (i.e., 
effectiveness). At the individual level, we hypothesize (H) that SAU+VR-JIT trainees, 
compared with SAU-only trainees, will have higher employment rates (H1), greater 
improvement in job-interview skills (H2), and reduced recidivism (H3) by six-month and 
twelve-month follow-up. At the system level, we hypothesize that SAU+VR-JIT will be more 
cost-effective than SAU-only (H4). 
Subobjective 1. Explore whether 
use of the computerized VR-JIT 
system frees up SAU staff time for 
non-interview-practice-related 
vocational training, relative to SAU-
only (system level). 
 
Objective 2. Evaluate the mechanisms of employment outcomes and explore the 
mechanisms of recidivism.  

Page 3 of 29 
 
Based on Corbiere’s model [19], we hypothesize that interview-skill improvement and 
measured role-play interview performance will mediate the effect of interview training on 
employment outcomes (H5; Figure 
1). Also, we will explore whether 
employment and mental health 
outcomes mediate the relationship 
between interviewing skills and 
recidivism at six-month and twelve-
month follow-up (Figure 2). We will 
also explore if mental health and life stress mediate the relationship between employment 
status and recidivism at six- and twelve-month follow-up. 
 
1.1 Virtual Reality Job Interview Training (VR-JIT). This is an immersive simulation that 
allows trainees to have a virtual conversation with, and influence the behavior of, a simulated 
character [45–47]. Our previous studies suggest that virtual reality simulation training is 
engaging, and as a result, trainees will practice willingly for hours [27–30]. The VR-JIT 
simulation far exceeds typical interview training by combining video, speech recognition, and 
nonbranching logic (described below) to create an interactive environment in which trainees 
encounter complex social cues 
and realistic interpersonal 
exchanges with a virtual hiring 
manager.  
VR-JIT was designed as part 
of a collaborative partnership 
between SIMmersion LLC and 
our research team to improve 
interview skills using 
behavioral-learning principles 
[48, 49]. These principles help develop sustainable changes in behavior [25, 26]. Table 1 
identifies the specific learning principles that our team adapted from behavioral-learning 
theory to guide the development of VR-JIT using SIMmersion’s proprietary technology. 
Our team developed the VR-JIT learning objectives, which were characterized using 
terminology from the literature [20]. The job-related interview content objectives target 
dependability, negotiating skills (e.g., asking for a day off), teamwork, and honesty (e.g., 
following company policies). The interviewee performance objectives target comfort level 
during the interview, sharing information in a positive way, sounding interested in the position, 
sounding professional, and establishing a rapport with the interviewer. VR-JIT includes the 
following components to help the trainee achieve the learning objectives:  
 
2.0 Background / Literature Review / Rationale for the study: 
 
2.1 Recidivism Is a Major Public-Safety Concern. Recidivism and reincarceration among 
those released from prison are among the most pressing public-safety issues facing many 
communities today. More than 600,000 state and federal ex-offenders reenter the community 
The image part with relationship ID rId11 was not found in the file.

Page 4 of 29 
 
annually [1]. According to the 2018 Bureau of Justice Statistics, 44% of released prisoners 
were rearrested during the first year after release, 68% within three years, 79% within six 
years, and 83% within nine years [2]. These data suggest that more work is needed for the 
prison system to optimally provide rehabilitation and foster deterrence from future crime.    
2.2 Employment Is an Important Protective Factor against Recidivism. Unemployment is 
often recognized as the leading mechanism of recidivism [3]. Moreover, unemployed 
offenders are approximately twice as likely to recidivate as employed offenders [4], though 
several other criminogenic risk factors contribute to recidivism (e.g., criminal history, 
antisocial behavior, poverty, age, race, and limited housing options) [5–7]. Among ex-
offenders who recidivate, employed ex-offenders stay in their communities for twice as long 
as unemployed ex-offenders [8]. Research suggests that employed ex-offenders are less 
likely to engage in predatory crime and use drugs and alcohol (which are known risk factors 
for recidivism) [9]. Gainful employment also enables ex-offenders to secure housing, pay their 
rent and utilities, and network within their communities [10, 11]. And maintaining employment 
reduces the incentive to commit crimes for monetary gain [12], which in turn helps reduce 
recidivism [10]. Unfortunately, ex-offenders have a difficult time obtaining employment after 
release [13], and only 25% of ex-offenders are employed within 12 months of reentry [14]. 
Therefore, finding ways to increase employment rates during reentry after prison is an urgent 
public-safety need.   
2.3 Vocational Services Are Needed to Facilitate Employment among Offenders. The need to 
implement vocational services to support ex-offenders has received national attention; only 
half of all state prisons offer vocational services to support reentry [15]. The U.S. Department 
of Justice hosted a “National Reentry Week” in 2017 to provide 550 coordinated reentry-
training events (e.g., job-interview practice and job fairs) [16]. Recently, a systematic review 
of the literature evaluated the effectiveness of seven vocational service programs for ex-
offenders that met a high standard of scientific rigor (a randomized controlled trial [RCT]) for 
evaluation. The findings suggested that programs such as the Center for Employment 
Opportunities, a comprehensive employment program to support ex-offenders in New York 
City, had promising results in reducing recidivism, whereas the aggregate evidence from 
across all seven trials did not demonstrate significant improvements in reducing recidivism 
over the last decade [17]. However, some standalone programs lacked either randomization 
or control groups, but had more-promising reductions in recidivism. Thus, there is still 
promise that vocational services can reduce recidivism, but much more effort is needed to 
evaluate the impact of vocational services on recidivism using scientifically rigorous methods 
of evaluation [17].  
2.4 Job-Interview Training Is Critically Lacking in Vocational Services in General, and 
Especially in Prisons. In an adaptation of the theory of planned behavior [18], Corbiere et al. 
found that active job-search behavior (e.g., job interviewing) was the most proximal factor to 
employment [19]. Nearly all vocational services support practicing job-interview skills 
because hiring managers ask questions to assess a candidate’s work skills [20] and social 
effectiveness (e.g., employable skills, ability to work hard) [21, 22]. And the ability to 

Page 5 of 29 
 
effectively discuss one’s prior conviction is a crucial element of the interview that can 
determine whether one receives a job offer.  
2.5 Critical Gaps in the Evidence Base for Interview Training Remain. Although job-interview 
training is commonly offered by vocational services, the methods used to train people in job-
interview skills in the field of vocational rehabilitation are not evidence-based. The gold 
standard for programming to support employability among individuals receiving public 
services is supported employment [23]. But the job-interview training methods delivered by 
supported employment rely on vocational counselors conducting mock job interviews (i.e., 
role-play training) with clients. However, the counselors are not trained to ask open-ended 
interview questions to facilitate thoughtful responses during the mock interviews, give 
feedback on clients’ levels of anxiety or confidence about interviewing, act like hiring 
managers, or offer feedback on clients’ responses to improve their interview skills [24]. Also, 
counselors offer only one or two mock interviews before each client’s real-life job interview.  
Given that a job interview is a complicated social process that requires reading social cues, 
developing articulate responses to questions, and establishing rapport with the interviewer 
(among other skills) [20], it is not realistic to think that a person can become highly effective 
at interviewing after practicing only a few times. Behavioral-learning principles suggest that 
training sustainable changes in behavior requires repeated practice and high-level, rewarding 
feedback [25, 26]. Thus, a major gap in vocational services is the lack of evidence-based 
practice used to facilitate job-interview training. All these challenges (minimal job-interview 
training taking place during vocational services, reliance on non-evidence-based job-training 
practices, interpersonal challenges that may require additional interviewing practice, and the 
real barrier that a criminal record poses to obtaining a job) are exacerbated for individuals in 
the justice system. There are no RCTs evaluating interventions focused on job interviewing 
for reentering prisoners, which is the primary goal of the proposed study.  
2.6 Closing the Job-Interview Training Gap in Vocational Services in General, and Especially 
in Prisons. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) funded our team to develop and 
evaluate Virtual Interview Training (VR-JIT) for non-justice-involved individuals with mental 
illness in a series of lab-based efficacy RCTs (R44 MH080496). Briefly, VR-JIT is a 
computer-based job-interview simulation in which trainees repeatedly practice interviewing 
with a virtual hiring manager. Each interaction is facilitated with speech-recognition software 
and lasts approximately 25 minutes; there are 10 to 15 hours of unique virtual job interviews 
available. Our efficacy evaluation suggests that VR-JIT improved interview skills in five 
cohorts of adults with various disorders (depression, schizophrenia, PTSD, autism, addiction) 
[27–31] and increased their likelihood of getting job offers more than twofold within six 
months of completing VR-JIT [28, 31–33] (i.e., 14–25% of controls received job offers, 
compared with 48–54% of VR-JIT trainees).  
Based on this work, our team received funding from the NIMH to evaluate the effectiveness, 
cost-effectiveness, and implementation of delivering VR-JIT to adults with severe mental 
illness receiving community-based vocational services (R01 MH110524), and funding from 
the Kessler Foundation to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation 

Page 6 of 29 
 
of delivering VR-JIT to 1,000 high school students with disabilities receiving transition 
services. Our preliminary data in this recent work showed similar increases in interview skills 
and a twofold increase in job attainment by the eight-month follow-up [34, 35]. Thus, we have 
deep expertise at evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of VR-JIT. In addition, we 
received funding from the NIMH to adapt VR-JIT to meet the needs of transition-age youth 
(ages 16 to 26) with autism (R34 MH111531), and we are using internal funds to include 
additional modifications to support justice-involved individuals. 
Job interviewing is a social skill that everyone can use, and VR-JIT is a generalizable training 
through which several groups have improved their skills and achieved greater access to 
employment. Therefore, we hypothesize that VR-JIT can also assist job-seekers with current 
or prior involvement with the justice system. Based on the current lack of interview services 
and of evidence-based practice delivered by prison reentry programming, we propose to 
evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and conduct an initial implementation 
evaluation of VR-JIT as a tool to enhance the existing services delivered in prison settings.   
3.0 Inclusion and exclusion criteria: 
To evaluate the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of VR-JIT in a randomized controlled 
trial (RCT) comparing vocational-services-as-usual with VR-JIT added on (VSU+VR-JIT) to 
VSU only. Overall, we will recruit 60 individuals who are enrolled in the Ionia and Jackson 
Vocational Villages of the Michigan Department of Corrections. 
The inclusion criteria for villagers are: 
• 25 years or older 
• Identified as at moderate to high risk for reoffending with violent crimes (determined at 
the time of enrollment in the Vocational Village via the COMPAS Risk Assessment 
Classification Instrument [60]) 
• Within three months of their earliest release date 
• Actively enrolled in a Vocational Village 
• Have at least a 4th grade reading comprehension 
The exclusion criteria for villagers are: 
• Has uncorrected hearing or visual problem that prevents him or her from using the 
training 
• Has a medical illness that compromises their cognition (for example, moderate to 
severe traumatic brain injury). 
The process to be enrolled at the Vocational Village is as follows: prisoners can apply to be in 
the Vocational Village by submitting an application and answering several short essay 
questions. The applicants are then screened by education staff for the content of the 
application and many other factors such as proximity to their release date, misconduct 
history, and core program needs. The Vocational Village is different from a general 
population prison and is considered a subpart of the correctional facility.  
 

Page 7 of 29 
 
4.0 Recruitment: 
 
There will be a few recruitment methods utilized to reach out to potential participants from the 
Vocational Village. First, inclusion and exclusion criteria will be shared with MDOC, Michican 
Department of Corrections Leaders and/or Teachers at the Vocational Village. MDOC 
Vocational Village staff will then identify a list of potential participants. We will then send 
Leaders and/or teachers a prepared flyer and/or letter to be distributed to those who might be 
eligible based off of the criteria. MDOC Vocational Village staff will use their own 
assessments in order to assess age, reading level, COMPAS Risk Assessment, possible 
impairments, etc. These assessments are for admittance to the Vocational Village as well as 
inclusion in this research study. After the flyer and/or letter is provided to villagers, study staff 
will schedule an information session with those identified villagers. The research team will 
inform villagers about the study during that time.  
 
We will approach everyone who meets these eligibility requirements and will stress to the 
prison staff that we need to include and approach everyone equally without any “cherry-
picking” by administration. We will also stress the voluntary nature of the study and the 
importance for all prison staff to be impartial. We believe that this method of recruitment will 
be the most fair in order to reach a wide potential of participants who will be able to utilize the 
virtual interview tool. 
 
The MDOC administration estimates that we will be able to recruit approximately 60 villagers 
that meet inclusion criteria within a 12-month recruitment window. Using a 2:1 randomization 
model, we expect to enroll approximately 40 villagers in the SAU+VR-JIT group and 20 
villagers in the SAU-only group. The Vocational Village will have no role in determining which 
arm participants are enrolled in; that process will be randomized and up to the University of 
Michigan staff. 
 
5.0 Consent Process  
 
A. Consent Procedures: Villagers will review the consent form in a group setting with 
research staff and questions will be answered. Then villagers will review the consent 
individually with a University of Michigan study staff member. Each participating villager will 
receive a participant identification number (PIN). 
 
B. Consent Team. The consent process will be conducted by the study team staff who have 
up to date PEERS training for the protection of human subjects’ research.  
C. Consent Timeline. The consent process will require approximately 10 minutes to read and 
up to 15 minutes to discuss to make sure that the participants fully understand the extent of 
their involvement in the study. Total is estimated 25 minutes. 
D. Re-Consenting will occur only if the study protocol involves changes in the data collection 
process, if there is a change in risk level for participation, or if instructed to for any other reason 
by the IRB. 

Page 8 of 29 
 
 
6.0 Procedures Involved: 
 
A. Study Settings 
This study will collect human subject’s data from villagers at the Richard A. Handlon 
Correctional Facility, a level II, medium security prison in Ionia, Michigan and Parnall 
Correctional Facility located in Jackson, Michigan. Personal information about locations or 
districts that participate will not be shared without their expressed consent. 
 
B. Study Design 
We will conduct a single-blind randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of VR-
JIT by comparing a vocational services-as-usual group to a group actively using the 
intervention. We will then conduct a 6-month and 12-month follow-up interview with the 
participants to evaluate their community 
outcomes. Services as usual job-training at 
the village includes full days of training and 
classroom instruction intended to mimic a 
typical workday outside prison walls and to 
provide villagers marketable skills. They can 
receive training in areas such as machining, 
carpentry, and welding. 
 
C. Study Intervention  
SIMmersion, LLC designed VR-JIT to enhance job interview skills for adults with SMI (severe 
mental illness). The job-related interview content objectives target: 1) conveying oneself as 
dependable, 2) negotiating skills (e.g., asking for a day off), 3) team work, and 4) honesty 
(e.g., following company policy). The Interviewee performance objectives target: 1) comfort 
level during the interview, 2) sharing information in a positive way, 3) sounding interested in 
the position, 4) sounding professional, and 5) establishing a rapport with the interviewer. 
SIMmersion designed VR with the following components to help learning:  
 
C.1.a Electronic Learning (e-learning): Interactive e-
learning screens (Figure A.) display critical information 
needed to prepare for a job interview such as creating a 
resume, researching a position, types of questions to ask, 
advice on how to disclose a disability, and an emphasis on 
effective skills for interacting with the interviewer (e.g., 
dealing with emotionally provocative questions).  
 
The image part with relationship ID rId11 was not found in the file.
Figure B.  
Figure A. 
Figure B.  

Page 9 of 29 
 
C.1.b VR Interface and “Molly Porter”: After using the e-learning module, trainees will 
navigate the program to begin the simulated 
interviews with a virtual human resource staff at a 
department store named “Molly Porter.” She is 
sitting in her office and the trainee has joined her for 
an interview. When “Molly” speaks, the program 
enters Full Screen mode (Figure B) so that she is 
speaking directly to the trainee without any 
distractions on screen. When she finishes asking 
her question, the program returns to the interface in 
Figure C where trainees speak a pre-scripted 
response of their choosing (see C.1.d). 
 
 
“Molly” has three difficulty levels: easy (e.g., friendly), medium 
(e.g., direct), and hard (e.g., stern or asks illegal questions). She 
uses “memory” and her behavior is driven by an advanced “emotional model.” For example, if 
a trainee responds inappropriately to several questions, “Molly” may become dismissive and 
end the interview, but if the trainee continually answers appropriately, “Molly” may become 
more friendly and encouraging. Based on the trainee’s statement, the software must then 
choose a reply for “Molly.” Selection is based on three factors: 1) difficulty, 2) the history of 
the conversation, and 3) “Molly’s” evolving relationship with the trainee, driven by trainee 
responses. Each factor will be used to compute conditional probabilities associated with each 
possible reply and one is selected. “Molly” stays true to her character and the emotional state 
created during the play, and thus, may behave differently each time the system is used.  
 
Figure C displays the layout of the interview interface. Buttons at the top of the screen control 
the interface. The yellow text displays various statements that can be spoken to respond to 
“Molly’s” questions. The interview transcript can be accessed through a tab in the middle of 
the screen. The trainee may change the topic during the conversation using buttons to the left 
of the yellow text. An on-screen coach appears in the bottom right of the interface. The 
trainees can take notes and review prior questions (white and gray boxes). 
C.1.c Video Clips: A professional actor portrayed “Molly” during the video-recorded sessions. 
The videos were separated into >1,000 question and response clips that are played during 
the simulated interview. Trainees talk with “Molly” using a microphone and voice recognition 
software. This method exposes trainees to an interactive environment and helps them learn 
to react to an interviewer’s social cues.  
 
C.1.d Pre-scripted Statements and Voice Recognition: A panel of vocational experts 
supervised hundreds of responses to standard interview questions written by professional 
scriptwriters during the initial SBIR grant award. The scriptwriters worked with the scientific 
team to compose realistic dialogue that provides trainees with opportunities to practice the 
skills identified in the learning objectives. Trainee statements included a wide variety of 
natural choices with 5-15 potential responses that vary in appropriateness of their content. 
Figure D. 
Coach 
The image part with relationship ID rId11 was not found in the file.
Figure C.  
Figure C.  

Page 10 of 29 
 
This method allows trainees to choose and learn from their responses. VR uses voice 
recognition technology so trainees can practice speaking the pre-scripted responses to 
difficult questions in a stress-free environment. Then, trainees can use the rehearsed 
answers in real interviews. 
 
C.1.e Non-branching Logic: SIMmersion’s PeopleSIMTM technology uses non-branching 
logic; which allows trainees to behave and speak freely within the confines of a safe 
simulation. Most social simulations, in contrast, use branching logic where trainees select a 
response from a list of options, which terminate when all options are exhausted. This 
approach minimizes repeated use to a few trials. SIMmersion’s technology integrates the 
video clips and non-branching logic to enable “Molly” to vary her memory, emotion, and 
personality. This variation supports hours of unique repeated practice and naturalistic 
conversations with Molly. 
 
C.1.f Job Coach and Help Buttons: Trainees receive in-the-moment feedback from an on-
screen coach (Figure D.) who provides nonverbal cues regarding the trainee’s choice of 
questions and statements. If further clarification is needed, the trainee can click “help” buttons 
that provide additional detail to clarify the interview question or the trainee’s response 
statement. For example, the coach gives the trainee a “thumbs down” sign if an inappropriate 
response is selected (Figure D.). If the trainee is unclear about the negative feedback, he or 
she can click the help button to get a more detailed written and verbal explanation about why 
the statement was inappropriate (e.g., “This statement focuses on a negative character trait; 
try focusing on your strengths”).  
 
C.1.g Individualized Customization: Prior to starting VR interviews, trainees complete an 
online job application, which includes questions about employment history and work skills. 
Trainees will specify one of eight different jobs (cashier, stock clerk, customer service, 
maintenance/grounds, janitorial, food service, inventory, or security). This “on-line” 
application procedure is based on applications currently in use by employers such as Target 
and Home Depot. This practice prepares trainees to accurately complete online applications. 
Additionally, the application data will populate the list of questions from which “Molly” will 
draw.  For example, a trainee may apply for a customer service position on the application, 
yet identify previous experience in inventory; Molly may ask, “I see from your resume that you 
have experience in inventory and are applying for a customer service position. Why are you 
looking to make that change?” This innovative feature allows trainees to customize their 
interview experiences to better prepare themselves for future interviews. 
 
C.1.h VR Transcripts: During or after the interview, trainees can view a transcript that replays 
individual exchanges or the entire conversation. If trainees are using the speech recognition 
feature, the transcript will also replay his or her recorded voice. This feature lets the trainee 
hear (and reflect upon) the tone of voice used to ask questions and make statements. The 
transcripts are color coded to reflect helpful, unhelpful, and neutral responses. Participants 
can click on the response to receive detailed information about why a response was helpful 
for hurtful to their job interview and learn how “Molly” understood their responses.  

Page 11 of 29 
 
 
C.1.i Scoring and Summary Feedback: After each virtual interview, trainees receive scores in 
eight categories (based on the learning objectives). The scores are scaled from 0-100 and 
are computed via an algorithm, which accounts for the types of responses provided by the 
trainee throughout the course of the interview. Participants view this scoring feedback and if 
they score 80 or higher they are informed, “You got the job! You made a great impression on 
“Molly” and she decided to offer you the job.  Congratulations!” (See VR Training Manual in 
Supporting Documents for Screen Shots). Trainees also receive feedback summaries of what 
they did well and where they need improvement. This feedback helps trainees understand 
the subtleties of their interview skills. 
 
D. Study Visit Procedures  
 
Leaders and/or Teachers at the participating locations will review their records to screen 
which of the villagers meet eligibility criteria in terms of age, reading level, whether or not they 
are at moderate to high risk for reoffending with violent crimes, within three months of their 
earliest release date, and actively enrolled in a Vocational Village. Villagers will be excluded if 
they have an uncorrected hearing or visual problem that prevents him or her form using the 
training or has a medical illness that compromises their cognition (for example, moderate to 
severe traumatic brain injury). 
 
Once villagers are identified, study staff will provide a flyer and/or letter to Leaders and/or 
Teachers to distribute to villagers. Then, study staff will arrive at the appropriate facility to go 
over consent form documentation. The consent form will be handed out individually and 
reviewed in a group format in order to minimize the structure of the vocational village 
classroom settings. Villagers will be provided time to read over the consent and ask 
questions. They are allowed to sign at this session if they choose. They can also wait until the 
first study visit date, where an individual will review the consent form with them individually a 
second time and answer any questions they may have. If allowed by prison staff, they will be 
provided a copy of the consent forms for their records. 
 
Leaders and Teachers (staff involved in training) at the Vocational Villages will also be 
recruited to participate. They will assist with identifying potentially eligible villagers, complete 
some brief surveys, and help assist with teaching the Virtual Interview Training to the 
villagers. Leaders and Teachers will also sign consent forms if they choose to participate, and 
will receive a copy of the consent form for their records. 
 
The Principal Investigator will be present at the facilities (SMT and MTU) for first-time data 
collection visits or whenever new procedures are being implemented. Additionally, senior 
study team members (full-time study staff who hold a bachelor’s or master’s degree will be 
present on all data collection trips within the prison. These are non-student staff members. 
Everyone will also carry a letter from the MDOC Offender Success Administrator, Kyle 
Kaminski, that states video-recorded participant data are not to be reviewed by MDOC staff 
on site at SMT and MTU. 

Page 12 of 29 
 
 
D.1 Study Visit 1 & 2: Baseline Data Collection with Village Participants 
During the first study visit, study staff will administer consent as previously noted. This 
process should take about 25 minutes. Next, consented villagers will complete a few short 
surveys, one on their background, a DSM-5 Level 1 symptom measure, and a brief 
psychological distress survey (SCL-10-R) [93, 94]. The DSM-5 Level 1 symptom measure 
was created to aid in a comprehensive mental status assessment by measuring mental 
health symptoms [93]. The SCL-10-R is a 10-item checklist of psychological distress based 
on the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90) [93].They will also complete a practice interview with 
study staff that will be audio and video recorded. The practice interview can last around 20 
minutes. Afterwards, they will complete some self-report measures on their anxiety, 
motivation, and self-efficacy. Each of these surveys will be about five minutes each. The first 
study visit should be approximately 75 minutes. These tasks will be divided to two days. 
 
D.2 Village Participants will be randomized into the VR-JIT group or the control group. 
At a ratio of 2:1(VR-JIT:Control) vocational villagers will be informed whether they are active 
in the Intervention Group or Control Group. The Control Group will continue their educational 
services as usual. MDOC will share the consented villager’s recruitment information, such as 
their reading level, COMPAS score, etc., with UM research staff. They will do this via 
REDCap or MBox, both encrypted and secruite websites, or via UM phone, or in person with 
UM research staff. 
 
D.3 Study Visit 3: Training Orientation with Village Participants 
Participants randomized to the VR-JIT group will receive a 45-minute orientation to use the 
virtual training program. Study staff may be on site to facilitate this training session with 
Teachers. This session will be audiorecorded in order to monitor fidelity of the training. We 
will plan to audiorecord the first three sessions, and then randomly select approximately 20% 
of the following sessions to continue the fidelity monitoring process.  
Villagers will train with the educational content.  
Villagers will use 1 class period for orientation to learn to navigate and participate in the 
virtual interview. 
 
D.4 Implementation of Intervention: 
Villagers will complete up to 3 virtual job interviews per class period, or approximately 15 
interviews over the course of the study. 
 
Consent 
(25 minutes)
Background  
Survey
(10 minutes)
DSM-5 & SCL-
10-R
(15 minutes) 
Practice 
Interview 
(20 minutes)
Self-Report 
Measures  
(20 minutes)

Page 13 of 29 
 
D.5  Study Visit 3: Post Data Collection with Village Participants 
All consented villagers in both groups (intervention and control) will complete a post-test 
employment survey, a practice interview with study staff that will be audio and video 
recorded, as well as some self-report measures. The practice interview can last up to 20 
minutes. They will also be asked to complete a survey about their intervention and services-
as-usual (SAU) use, and a survey assessing their acceptability and usability of the VR-JIT 
program, which should be around 10 minutes. This study visit should be approximately 60 
minutes. 
 
 
D.6  6-Month and 12-Month Follow-Up with Village Participants  
All participants will complete a follow-up survey, and the DSM-5 and SCL-10-R survey again. 
This should be approximately 15 minutes. Research staff will obtain contact information from 
MDOC so we can contact participants for their follow-up. The survey will be done via phone, 
email, or in-person depending on participant preference or their location. Participants will be 
compensated $20 for each follow up survey that is completed. Also, the UM research team 
will request a bimonthly data pull from MDOC to obtain follow up data from participants if they 
cannot be reached by UM staff. 
 
E. Participant Timelines 
Villagers enrolled in the randomized controlled trial will complete all study visits within 
approximately 5 weeks of enrolling in the study Their participation will be complete after 
completing the 12-month follow-up 
 
F. Vulnerable Population Safeguards 
To reduce coercion or undue influence a private and safe place to consent villagers will be 
provided by The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) at the Vocational Village. 
There will be no advantages or disadvantages provided to villagers for their participation. 
Villagers are notified that participation in this research will not have any influence on 
incarceration status to include in probation and parole decisions. With limited risks present in 
this research there is no requirement for a follow up examination after the completion of the 
study.  MDOC will provide information on villagers reading level to inform the accessibility 
and understandability of all research material. It is expected that all villagers will be able to 
comprehend and understand the study. If we encounter a villager who may lack 
comprehension, we will not include them in the study.  
7.0 Multiple sites 
Post-Test 
Employment 
Survey
(5 minutes)
Practice 
Interview 
(20 minutes)
Self-Report 
Measures
(20 minutes) 
Acceptability 
& Useability 
Survey
(10 minutes)
Intervention 
Use/SAU 
Survey
(5 minutes)

Page 14 of 29 
 
This is a multi-site project funded by discretionary funding where the Principal Investigator is 
Dr. Matthew Smith located at the University of Michigan.  
 
A. University of Michigan School of Social Work is the coordinating site where all data will 
be entered, cleaned, stored, and analyzed. 
 
B. The Vocational Village located at Richard A. Handlon Correctional Facility, a level II, 
medium security prison in Ionia, Michigan is research site number 1. This vocational 
village can have up to 165 vocational trade students, 27 vocational trade tutors and 12 
building trade workers. The villagers are housed together to promote a therapeutic, 
positive, and productive learning environment. At this site, we will recruit research 
participants to participate in this research study. Although data will be collected at this 
site, research staff will transfer the collected data in a locked box to the UM research 
site for processing. 
 
C.  When new research sites become available the IRB will be notified and appropriate 
IRB documentation will submitted. 
 
 
 
8.0 Risks to Participants: 
This study involves villagers completing a battery of clinical, and role-play assessments.  
 
There is minimal risk associated with participation in this study for villagers beyond potential 
boredom from navigating and using the computer program. All villagers will complete the 
studying within their vocational village setting. There are some sensitive questions that will be 
asked of participants (e.g. substance use), and possible emotional distress at some of the 
questions as well. Participants are allowed to skip over any questions they do not wish to 
answer.  
 
Breach of confidentiality may be another potential risk. To mitigate this risk, participant files 
will only be referenced with a personal identification number (PINs). The document linking 
PINs to identifying information for participants will be password-protected and stored on a 
secure server protected by firewalls, or in REDCap, an encrypted and secure database 
website. Moreover, all videos of participant interviewing skills will be stored on a server that is 
password protected and secured behind firewalls. 
 
There is a small risk that prison staff will attempt to access data. However, all effort will be 
made to prevent this. All surveys will only have PINs, so even if prison staff somehow sees 
completed surveys or forms, they will be unable to identify who completed them. Prison staff 
will not be expected to collect or view any of the survey information collected by study 
participants during the visits.  
 
Confidentiality and safety procedures will be in full compliance with the University of Michigan 
policies. However, as with any research study, there is a risk of breach of confidentiality. The 

Page 15 of 29 
 
prison staff will not be able to access the data provided by participants. If somehow they are 
able to access the data due to error, they will not be able to tell who the data belongs to as it 
will only be identified by a PIN. 
 
When obtaining consent, participants are notified that they may stop participating at any time 
without repercussion. If consent is revoked in writing, the consent specifies the right to use or 
share information previously obtained as needed for the purpose of the study.  
 
9.0 Potential Benefits to Participants:  
 
Participants completing the intervention could possibly learn some new strategies to be more 
successful at Job Interviewing.  
 
Results from this study may lead to a better understanding of helping improve job interview 
skills for justice involved individuals. It is therefore possible that results of this study may aid 
in intervention strategies for this population. 
 
 
10.0 Provisions to Protect the Privacy Interests of Participants: 
 
To minimize stress and fatigue during testing, participants will be assessed in an encouraging 
and accepting atmosphere. They can take breaks during the assessment process and may 
discontinue the assessment if they do not wish to continue. The research team have been 
trained in the administration of the research measures and have undergone training 
procedures to help minimize the stress this may cause.  
 
The research assessments and intervention/SAU survey use will be conducted in a private or 
semi-private computer lab or educational room setting for the villagers. For teachers, the 
feedback form will be conducted in a setting of the participant’s choosing. All methods of 
correspondence with teachers and leaders will be secure, including telephone, voicemails, 
text messages, or email. This correspondence will likely include scheduling times for 
research staff to visit the vocational village, timeline check-ins, as well as survey reminders. 
All participants will provide informed consent with respect to their preferred method of 
communication. In addition, we will use a personal identification number (PIN) to protect 
participant privacy by labeling all study documents with the PIN rather than any identifying 
information. The use of the PIN will help keep participant enrollment confidential. Teachers, 
leaders, and villagers will all be assigned this PIN. 
 
Access to protected information will be limited to the PI and research team members. There 
will be a document located on the UM servers (password protected behind firewalls) that links 
PINs to study participant names. REDCap may also be used to link this information. The PI 
and research team will have access to this file in order to coordinate study visits and track 
participant progress to complete the study. REDCap, a HIPAA compliant and encrypted 
database may also be used to host protected participant information. 

Page 16 of 29 
 
 
While testing participants at the villages, we will record data on either secure electronic 
equipment (local computing devices) or paper forms. This will be dependent on vocational 
village protocols. It is likely that all data will originally be on paper forms and then transferred 
to REDCap or secure UM server. If collected on a device, data will be uploaded to the server 
and removed from the device as soon as possible. All precautions will be taken to protect the 
electronic devices from theft or loss. 
 
All forms and materials will be kept in a locked file in a locked room accessible only to 
research personnel at University of Michigan, not vocational village staff. Confidentiality 
procedures will be in full compliance with University of Michigan policies.  Any confidential 
data obtained at the study site will be transferred back to the School of Social Work via a lock 
box to be secured into a locked file and in a locked room. 
 
11.0 Confidentiality and Data Management: 
 
Due to the funding from this project awarded by MICHR (from funds provided to MICHR by 
NIH),this research holds a Certificate of Confidentiality from the National Institutes of Health. 
 
Description of Security measure to Protect Data Sources. Paper research records will be 
created and labeled with the PIN, where participants may provide consent and complete 
study measures. The document linking the subject PINs to identifiers will be maintained on a 
secure UM server at the School of Social Work. All study data will be stored in a locked 
cabinet within a locked office at the school. These records will serve as the source for 
electronic data entry. Research records will be transferred via a locked box to the UM 
research team where the data will be cleaned, re-entered into the electronic database, and 
the paper copies again stored in a locked drawer in a locked room. All records will be de-
identified after study completion. No research data or records will be accessible to or shared 
with MDOC employees. 
 
All participant documents at UM will be labeled with the participant’s PIN. Each page of each 
document will be labeled with the PIN. Documents will be organized into a study binder that is 
also labeled with the participant PIN. All Binders and Study Documents will be stored in 
locked file drawers within a locked room.  
 
Quality Assurance Measures. All participants will be recruited using strategies, documents, 
and text approved by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board (IRB). The 
research team will regularly hold meetings to discuss the effectiveness of approved 
recruitment strategies and if new strategies should be reviewed by the IRB and then 
implemented. The PI will regularly audit accrual to ensure that participants meet eligibility 
criteria and that the study enrollment is consistent with the projected enrollment targets 
agreed upon with MICHR. In addition, the study coordinator will audit all study files to ensure 
that all required study data is completed on each form, and that there is no missing data. The 
REDCap system is accessible via a virtual private network that is password protected and 

Page 17 of 29 
 
behind firewalls. The data will be transported from the schools to UM in a locked storage box. 
To protect confidentiality, all data will be numerically coded using a personal identification 
number (PIN), and information linking the PIN to the subject’s name will be kept in a secured 
file cabinet and office and/or on REDCap. In addition, computer data files will be stored on 
password-protected computers and communication among the staff will use PINs, not names. 
No information concerning data will be presented with participant names. The biostatistician 
and project coordinator will also perform all necessary checks and controls to ensure the 
reliability and validity of the data, including monitoring data collection and collection 
procedures, data storage, data management, and data analysis.   
 
12.0 Study Team Training for Data Collection within a Prison Setting 
 
All study team staff members who will be working inside the vocational village prison settings 
will attend an information session with the PI, co-I’s, lab manager, or study coordinator 
reviewing the protocol in detail, as well as the unique circumstances that may occur within the 
vocational villages. Staff will also review an additional training document and meeting as a 
method to support participant confidentiality. Additionally, study staff will also be trained to do 
the following: 
 
If Any Deviation From Protocol Occurs: 
If you are on site at one of the prisons and an incident occurs that deviates from out set 
protocol, please do the following: 
1) As soon as you are out of the facility, IMMEDIATELY call the Principal Investigator 
Mattew Smith and notify him of the situation. Follow given instructions accordingly. 
a) If PI Matt Smith is not available, call Co-Investigator Jamie Mitchell. 
b) If co-investigator Jamie Mitchell is not available, call Co-Investigator Shannon Blajeski. 
c) If co-investigator Shannon Blajeski is not available, call Team Manager Katherine 
Tucker. 
d) If Katherine Tucker is not available, call Study Coordinator Brittany Ross. 
 
If MDOC Staff Asks to Review Our Research Data: 
Our research data is protected from MDOC review and should NOT be looked at by MDOC 
staff. However, if you are on site and MDOC staff asks if they can review video footage or 
tells you that you cannot leave the facilities without the data being reviewed, please do the 
following: 
1) Inform MDOC staff that we have a letter from Kyle Kaminski, the MDOC Offender 
Success Administrator, stating that our research data is protected and is not to be 
reviewed by any staff at SMT or MTU.  
2) Show MDOC staff printed letter from Kyle Kaminski and allow them to read it.  
3) If MDOC staff is unsatisfied with the letter and/or still resisting, ask them to please call an 
in-house staff member who knows about our research and who can explain to them that 
our data is NOT to be reviewed and that this has been approved by the director. 
a) If an in-house staff member is not available, ask them to call a Prison Supervisor. 
b) If a Prison Supervisor is not available, ask them to call the Village Principal. 

Page 18 of 29 
 
c) If the Village Principal is not available, ask them to call the Warden/Assistant 
Warden/Deputy Warden.  
 
 
13.0 Data Analysis 
 
H1: SAU+VR-JIT trainees will have higher employment rates than SAU-only by T3. To test 
H1, we will use multiple logistic regression and a Wald chi-square test of the coefficient to its 
standard error, to compare the adjusted employment proportions in the two conditions 
(attained a job = 1 vs. failed to attain a job or censored with a job = 0, between T1 and T3). 
Our MICHR-funded pilot trial does not have the resources to be an appropriately powered 
trial but instead we are using this pilot to estimate an effect size to use in a future adequately 
powered trial. 
 
H2: SAU+VR-JIT trainees will have greater improvement in job-interview skills than SAU-only 
by T2. To test H2, we will conduct a repeated-measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) 
with pretest and post-test interview scores as the repeated measures and treatment group as 
the fixed factor. Our MICHR-funded pilot trial does not have the resources to be an 
appropriately powered trial but instead we are using this pilot to estimate an effect size to use 
in a future adequately powered trial. 
 
H3: SAU+VR-JIT trainees will have greater reductions in recidivism than SAU-only between 
T1 and T3. To test H3, we will compare recidivism percentages between SAU+VR-JIT and 
SAU-only at T3. Our MICHR-funded pilot trial does not have the resources to be an 
appropriately powered trial but instead we are using this pilot to estimate an effect size to use 
in a future adequately powered trial. 
 
2.2.6 Analyses to Test Objective 2 are Based on Corbiere et al.’s [19] Model of Employment 
H5: Improved interviewing skills will mediate the relationship between VR-JIT (number of 
completed virtual interviews) and employment outcomes (i.e., obtaining employment). To test 
H5, we will test first for a significant SAU+VR-JIT impact on interview skills compared with 
SAU-only, then check for treatment by mediator interaction [81], then evaluate the product of 
the two coefficients [82] with bootstrapped confidence intervals [83].  
 
Participants, Measures, Procedures, and Analyses.  
 
A mixed-method process evaluation will entail conducting surveys and semi-structured 
interviews with villagers and teachers.  
 
Surveys will be provided to N = 40 villagers randomized to VR-JIT to assess the acceptability 
and usability of VR-JIT. We will use items adapted from the Consolidated Framework for 
Implementation Research (CFIR) [43, 44]. Surveys adapted using CFIR will also be provided 
to the estimated N = 10 teachers from the Vocational Village (whom we will train to deliver VR-
JIT) to assess provider views on VR-JIT acceptability, delivery strategies, and sustainability. 

Page 19 of 29 
 
 
Exploratory Data 
We will explore potential mechanisms for VR-JIT effectiveness (i.e., improved interview skills, 
attain a job), by first analyzing mediators (i.e., interview skills, self-confidence, and anxiety) and 
moderators using boot strapping (for mediators)48 and linear regression (for moderators)49. 
Second, we will explore potential mechanisms for a lack of improvement in interview skills and 
failure to attain a job) by examining group differences and associations between groups who 
did or did not have poor outcomes. Third, we will collect exploratory implementation data by 
interviewing vocational counselors and school administrators (N=10) about: 1) potential 
barriers and facilitators for VR-JIT implementation and scalability; and 2) how VR-JIT might 
reduce staff time required to deliver services. We will analyze this exploratory implementation 
data iteratively using thematic analysis and the constant comparative approach43, 44 to identify 
emergent themes regarding the barriers and facilitators of implementing VR-JIT. 
14.0 Data Monitoring Plan to Ensure the Safety of Participants: 
Data will be strictly monitored by the PI who regularly reviews testing and data management 
procedures to ensure protection of human subjects. We follow IRB and University of Michigan 
guidelines to minimize risk and report problems. We are required by our funding agency to 
report results annually. All data reported is de-identified prior to entry and analysis. We will 
initiate protocol revisions with the IRB when necessary. We have established a Data Safety 
and Monitoring Board to meet annually during the active recruitment phase of the study. The 
DSMB will review the research protocol and plans for data safety and monitoring, adverse 
events, risk management policies, and preliminary data analsysis. Members of the board 
include University of Michgan’s Daphne Watkins, David Cordova, Yale University’s Morris 
Bell, and Department of Correction’s Kyle Kaminski. 
 
All electronic data is stored on a secure server managed by University of Michigan School of 
Social Work, and access to the server requires a password and netID, and is fire walled, 
requiring VPN connection if off campus (per IT security protocols). An additional password is 
needed to access identifiable data stored on this secure server. Further, all data collected in 
the field is stored on encrypted drives and also identified only by ID number. All paper data is 
stored in locked filing cabinets in our lab at UM. Data analysis is completed by approved 
project personnel.  
 
15.0 Qualifications to Conduct Research and Resources Available: 
Overview and anticipated contribution to success of the proposed work 
 
The University of Michigan (UM) is one of the most resource intensive universities in the 
world, with state-of-the-art computing, statistical, library, and research consultation resources 
readily available to faculty researchers. The facilities and resources necessary for the 
proposed work are all currently available to Dr. Smith and his team. Below, the key units and 
facilities are described in detail to provide information about the specific contribution of each.    
 
University of Michigan 

Page 20 of 29 
 
 
Office: 
The facilities and resources necessary for the proposed work are all currently available to Dr. 
Smith and his team. Dr. Smith and the study staff have offices at the School of Social Work. 
The study staff and Dr. Smith have meeting and office space within the Curtis Research 
Center where Dr. Smith is the contributing faculty.  
 
Computer: 
The P.I. and the research staff have computer resources for data analysis and word 
processing for manuscript preparation.  
 
Scientific Environment: 
 
School of Social Work: The UM is a leader in social work education and research and is 
ranked first in the U.S. News and World Report rankings of social work programs.  The 
interdisciplinary Joint Doctoral Program in Social Work and Social Science stands alone in 
the nation. This distinctive program trains academics, researchers, and practitioners to meet 
the challenges of society by utilizing theories and research from anthropology, economics, 
political science, psychology and sociology. There are approximately 600 MSW and 
approximately 75 Ph.D. students enrolled each term in the School of Social Work programs.  
For this project, Dr. Smith will regularly involve graduate students as work-study research 
assistants and they will facilitate data cleaning and double data entry in addition to other 
project supports. 
 
The Vivian A. and James L. Curtis Research and Training Center: Through the generous 
contribution of the Curtis family, The Vivian A. and James L. Curtis Research and Training 
Center is funded to foster interdisciplinary externally funded research and UM-community 
evaluation research partnerships to advance knowledge in the areas of mental health, 
substance abuse, and health. The Curtis Center’s research agenda focuses in studying 
health and mental health disparities and on the conduct of translational research to 
ameliorate these disparities. Center support includes study design consultation, advanced 
statistical consultation, grant and manuscript writing assistance, research space, and several 
other services.  Expert consultation is provided by a multidisciplinary group of experienced, 
federally funded researchers. For this project, the Curtis Center will serve as the hub for the 
project staff and Dr. Smith. We will utilize its research consultation and research support 
resources to increase chances of success in completing the proposed project. 
 
 
CTSA – (Clinical Translational Science Awards) and Michigan Institute for Clinical and 
Health Research (MICHR):  The University of Michigan is the recipient of an NIH CTSA 
award, which has its home in MICHR (http://www.michr.umich.edu). MICHR provides a 
comprehensive institutional source of support and infrastructure for clinical and translational 
researchers at the University of Michigan. It is designed to serve any investigator, in any 
school of the University, performing clinical or translational research. It serves to connect and 

Page 21 of 29 
 
integrate education, career development, infrastructure, and to catalyze research that spans 
the laboratory, the clinic, and the community. MICHR is organized in fourteen unique 
resource programs, focusing on the following domains: novel methods, technical core, 
Clinical Research Unit (MCRU), education/career development, biomedical informatics, 
regulatory support, pilot grants, biostatistics, research ethics, pediatric research, community 
engagement, clinical translation sciences, and health disparities research.  Research Support 
Services include research development, data management and project management and 
monitoring (PMM) of federally funded, multi-center trials. MICHR offers all investigators 
expert consultation, budgeting and administrative support for project development, funding for 
pilot studies, the Engage participant recruitment portal, and support for clinical research 
management system, among other research development services. For this project, MICHR 
will provide assistance in data management, based on the REDCap platforms.  REDCap is 
an electronic data capture (EDC) system that is secure, HIPAA compliant, and web-based. 
This easy-to-use, no-cost tool for the University of Michigan Clinical Researchers is intended 
to replace Microsoft Excel and Access. Using REDCap's stream-lined process for rapidly 
developing databases, an investigator may create, design, and manage clinical research data 
online. Further, REDCap provides automated export  procedures  for  seamless data 
downloads to common statistical packages (SPSS, SAS, Stata, R), as well as a built-in 
scheduling calendar, ad hoc reporting tools, and advanced electronic data capture form 
features, such as branching logic, file uploading, and calculated fields. 
 
Center for Statistical Consultation and Research (CSCAR):  CSCAR is a service and 
research unit under the administrative oversight of the VPR that provides integrated, 
comprehensive statistical consulting services covering all aspects of research design and 
analysis from initial study design through presentation of research findings.  CSCAR provides 
free statistical support to UM faculty and research staff and is located approximately three 
blocks from the School of Social Work.  Among the CSCAR services provided are those related 
to proposal presentation and study design (e.g., power and sample size calculations), dataset 
consulting (e.g., database design, transferring datasets across platforms and different software 
packages), choice of statistical methods, use of statistical software (e.g., SAS, SPSS, SYSTAT, 
S-Plus, BMDP, JMP, LISREL, and AMOS on Windows, UNIX, and Macintosh platforms), 
interpretation of and presentation of results, collaborative research, workshops, remote 
consultation using “whiteboard” software, and geographic information systems consultation. 
With regard to computing resources, CSCAR provides PCs and Mac computers with the latest 
versions of a large number of software programs such as STATA, MPLUS, AMOS, MATLAB, 
R, SAS, SPSS, ArcGIS, and ArcView GIS, among others. The CSCAR Library PC also has a 
variety of statistical software packages available for use including a sample size and power 
analysis package. For this project, CSCAR will provide any statistical consultation needed to 
increase the chances of success of this project. 
 
 
 
 
References 

Page 22 of 29 
 
1. 
Carson, E.A., and D. Golinelli, Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases, 
1991–2012. 2013, Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice 
Statistics. 
2. 
Alper, M., and M.R. Durose, 2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A Nine-Year Follow-
up Period (2005-2014).  2018,  Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of 
Justice Statistics. 
3. 
Nally, J.M., et al., The Post-Release Employment and Recidivism among Different 
Types of Offenders with a Different Level of Education: A Five-Year Follow-up Study in 
Indiana. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 2014. 9(1): 16–34. 
4. 
Indianapolis-Marion County Commission, Indianapolis-Marion County City-County 
Council Re-Entry Police Study Commission Report, Indianapolis-Marion County City-
County Council, Editor. 2013, Indianapolis-Marion County Council. 
5. 
Visher, C.A., et al., Evaluating the long-term effects of prisoner reentry services on 
recidivism: What types of services matter? Justice Quarterly, 2017. 34(1): 136–65. 
6. 
Piquero, A.R., et al., A systematic review of age, sex, ethnicity, and race as predictors 
of violent recidivism. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative 
Criminology, 2013. 59(1): 5–26. 
7. 
Clark, V., Predicting two types of recidivism among newly released prisoners: First 
addresses as “launch pads” for recidivism or reentry success. Crime and Delinquency, 
2016. 62(10): 1364–1400. 
8. 
Tripoldi, S.J., J.S. Kim, and K. Bender, Is employment associated with reduced 
recidivism? The complex relationship between employment and crime. International 
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2010. 54(5): 706–20. 
9. 
Laub, J., and R. Sampson, Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives: Delinquent Boys to Age 
70. 2003, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. 
10. 
Petersilia, J., When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. 2005, New 
York: Oxford University Press. 
11. 
Visher, C.A., and S. Courtney, Cleveland Prisoners' Experiences Returning Home. 
2006, Washington, DC: Urban Institute. 
12. 
Petersilia, J., and R. Rosenfeld, Parole, Desistance from Crime and Community 
Integration. 2008, Washington, DC: National Research Council. 
13. 
Bushway, S., M. Stoll, and D.F. Weiman, Barriers to Reentry? The Labor Market for 
Released Prisoners in Post-Industrial America. 2007, New York: Russell Sage. 
14. 
Petersilia, J., Prisoner reentry: Public safety and reintegration challenges. Prison 
Journal, 2001. 81(3): 360–75. 
15. 
Harlow, C., Education and Correctional Populations. 2003, Washington, DC: Bureau of 
Justice Statistics. 
16. 
U.S. Department of Justice National Reentry Week: After Action Report. Washington, 
DC: U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice Archives. 
17. 
Newton, D., et al., The impact of vocational education and training programs on 
recidivism: A systematic review of current experimental evidence. International Journal 
of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2018. 62(1): 187–207. 
18. 
Ajzen, I., The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision 
Processes, 1991. 50: 179–211. 
19. 
Corbiere, M., et al., Job acquisition for people with severe mental illness enrolled in 
supported employment programs: A theoretically grounded empirical study. Journal of 
Occupational Rehabilitation, 2011. 21(3): 342–54. 
20. 
Huffcutt, A.I., An empirical review of the employment interview construct literature. 
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2011. 19(1): 62–81. 

Page 23 of 29 
 
21. 
Hurtz, G.M., and J.J. Donovan, Personality and job performance: The big five revisited. 
Journal of Applied Psychology, 2000. 85(6): 869–79. 
22. 
Hunter, J.E., and R.F. Hunter, Validity and utility of alternate predictors of job 
performance. Psychological Bulletin, 1984. 96: 72–98. 
23. 
Bond, G.R., R.E. Drake, and D.R. Becker, An update on randomized controlled trials of 
evidence-based supported employment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 2008. 31(4): 
280–90. 
24. 
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Supported Employment: 
Training Frontline Staff, ed. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2009, 
Rockville, MD: Center for Mental Helth Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
Services Administration. 
25. 
Roelfsema, P.R., A. van Ooyen, and T. Watanabe, Perceptual learning rules based on 
reinforcers and attention. Trends in Cognitive Science, 2010. 14(2): 64–71. 
26. 
Vinogradov, S., M. Fisher, and E. de Villers-Sidani, Cognitive training for impaired neural 
systems in neuropsychiatric illness. Neuropsychopharmacology, 2012. 37(1): 43–76. 
27. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training for veterans with post-traumatic 
stress disorder. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 2015. 42: 271–79. 
28. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training and six-month employment 
outcomes for individuals with schizophrenia seeking employment. Schizophrenia 
Research, 2015. 166(1–3): 86–91. 
29. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training for individuals with psychiatric 
disabilities. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 2014. 202(9): 659–67. 
30. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training in adults with autism spectrum 
disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2014. 44(10): 2450–63. 
31. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training and six-month employment 
outcomes for individuals with substance use disorders seeking employment. Journal of 
Vocational Rehabilitation, 2016. 44: 323–32. 
32. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Job offers to individuals with severe mental illness after participation 
in virtual reality job interview training. Psychiatric Services, 2015. 66(11): 1173–79. 
33. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Brief report: Vocational outcomes for young adults with autism 
spectrum disorders at six months after virtual reality job interview training. Journal of 
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2015. 45(10): 3364–69. 
34. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Virtual reality job interview training increases employment rates for 
transition age youth with educational disabilities. In preparation. 
35. 
Smith, M.J., et al., Preliminary effectiveness of virtual reality job interview training in 
individual placement and support services. In preparation. 
36. 
Proctor, E.K., et al., Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging 
science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration and 
Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 2009. 36(1): 24–34. 
37. 
Wells, K.B., Treatment research at the crossroads: The scientific interface of clinical 
trials and effectiveness research. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1999. 156(1): 5–10. 
38. 
March, J.S., et al., The case for practical clinical trials in psychiatry. American Journal 
of Psychiatry, 2005. 162(5): 836–46. 
39. 
Curran, G.M., et al., Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: Combining elements 
of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. 
Medical Care, 2012. 50(3): 217–26. 
40. 
Salyers, M.P., et al., A ten-year follow-up of a supported employment program. 
Psychiatric Services, 2004. 55(3): 302–8. 

Page 24 of 29 
 
41. 
Gervey, R., and H. Kowal, The job developer's presence in the job interview: Is it helpful 
or harmful to persons with psychiatric disabilities seeking employment? Psychiatric 
Rehabilitation Journal, 2005. 29(2): 128–31. 
42. 
Lord, S.E., et al., The potential of technology for enhancing individual placement and 
support supported employment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 2014. 37(2): 99–106. 
43. 
Damschroder, L.J., and H.J. Hagedorn, A guiding framework and approach for 
implementation research in substance use disorders treatment. Psychology of Addictive 
Behaviors, 2011. 25(2): 194–205. 
44. 
Damschroder, L.J., et al., Fostering implementation of health services research findings 
into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. 
Implementation Science, 2009. 4: 50. 
45. 
Olsen, D.E., W.A. Sellers, and R.G. Phillips, The simulation of a human subject for law 
enforcement training. In Office of National Drug Control Policy. 1999. Washington, DC. 
46. 
Fleming, M., et al., Virtual reality skills training for health care professionals in alcohol 
screening and brief intervention. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 
2009. 22(4): 387–98. 
47. 
Fleming, M.F., et al., Brief physician advice for heavy drinking college students: A 
randomized controlled trial in college health clinics. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and 
Drugs, 2010. 71(1): 23–31. 
48. 
Cooper, J.O., Applied behavior analysis in education. Theory into Practice, 1982. 21(2): 
114–18. 
49. 
Cooper, J.O., T.E. Heron, and W.L. Heward, Applied Behavioral Analysis. 2007, 
London: Pearson. 
50. 
Bell, M.D., and A. Weinstein, Simulated job interview skill training for people with 
psychiatric disability: Feasibility and tolerability of virtual reality training. Schizophrenia 
Bulletin, 2011. 37(Suppl 2): S91–97. 
51. 
Dilk, M.N., and G.R. Bond, Meta-analytic evaluation of skills training research for 
individuals with severe mental illness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 
1996. 64(6): 1337–46. 
52. 
Park, K.M., et al., A virtual reality application in role-plays of social skills training for 
schizophrenia: A randomized, controlled trial. Psychiatry Research, 2011. 189(2): 166–
72. 
53. 
Rus-Calafell, M., J. Gutierrez-Maldonado, and J. Ribas-Sabate, A virtual reality-
integrated program for improving social skills in patients with schizophrenia: A pilot 
study. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 2014. 45(1): 81–89. 
54. 
Veling, W., S. Moritz, and M. van der Gaag, Brave new worlds: Review and update on 
virtual reality assessment and treatment in psychosis. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2014. 
40(6): 1194–97. 
55. 
Wolpe, J., The Practice of Behavior Yherapy. 1969, Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press. 
56. 
Horan, W.P., et al., Social cognitive skills training in schizophrenia: an initial efficacy 
study of stabilized outpatients. Schizophrenia Research, 2009. 107(1): 47–54. 
57. 
Horan, W.P., et al., Efficacy and specificity of social cognitive skills training for 
outpatients with psychotic disorders. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 2011. 45(8): 
1113–22. 
58. 
Penn, D., et al., A pilot study of social cognition and interaction training (SCIT) for 
schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 2005. 80(2–3): 357–59. 
59. 
Roberts, D.L., et al., Transportability and feasibility of social cognition and interaction 
training (SCIT) in community settings. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 2010. 
38(1): 35–47. 

Page 25 of 29 
 
60. 
Brennan, T., W. Dietrich, and B. Ehret, Evaluating the predictive validity of the COMPAS 
risk and needs assessment system. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2009. 36(1): 21–40. 
61. 
Bellack, A.S., M. Hersen, and D. Lamparski, Role-play tests for assessing social skills: 
Are they valid? Are they useful? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979. 
47(2): 335–42. 
62. 
Bellack, A.S., et al., Role play for assessing the social competence of psychiatric 
patients. Psychological Assessment, 1990. 2: 248–55. 
63. 
Mueser, K.T., et al., Prevalence and stability of social skill deficits in schizophrenia. 
Schizophrenia Research, 1991. 5(2): 167–76. 
64. 
Bellack, A.S., et al., An analysis of social competence in schizophrenia. British Journal 
of Psychiatry, 1990. 156: 809–18. 
65. 
McCroskey, J.C., Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech Monographs, 
1970. 37: 269–77. 
66. 
U.S. Department of Labor, Dictionary of Occupational Titles. 1991, Washington, DC: 
U.S. Employment Service. 
67. 
Cook, J.A., et al., Results of a multisite randomized trial of supported employment 
interventions for individuals with severe mental illness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 
2005. 62(5): 505–12. 
68. 
Becker, D.R., et al., Job terminations among persons with severe mental illness 
participating in supported employment. Community Mental Health Journal, 1998. 34(1): 
71–82. 
69. 
Lachin, J.M., Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Controlled Clinical 
Trials, 2000. 21(3): 167–89. 
70. 
Eekhout, I., et al., Missing data in a multi-item instrument were best handled by multiple 
imputation at the item score level. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2014. 67(3): 335–
42. 
71. 
Rubin, D.B., Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. 1987, Hoboken, NJ: John 
Wiley & Sons. 
72. 
Sterne, J.A., et al., Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical 
research: Potential and pitfalls. BMJ, 2009. 338: b2393. 
73. 
Mazumdar, S., et al., Intent-to-treat analysis for longitudinal clinical trials: Coping with 
the challenge of missing values. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 1999. 33(2): 87–95. 
74. 
Chernick, M.R., and C.Y. Liu, The saw-toothed behavior of power vs. sample size and 
software solutions: Single binomial proportion using exact methods. American 
Statistician, 2002. 56: 149–55. 
75. 
Shieh, G., A comparison of two approaches for power and sample size calculations in 
logistic regression models. Communication in Statistics—Simulation and Computation, 
2000. 29: 763–91. 
76. 
Diggle, P.J., et al., Analysis of Longitudinal Data. 2002, New York: Oxford University 
Press. 
77. 
Siegel, J.E., et al., Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses: Panel 
on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Journal of the American Medical 
Association, 1996. 276(16): 1339–41. 
78. 
Chaudhary, M.A., and S.C. Stearns, Estimating confidence intervals for cost-
effectiveness ratios: An example from a randomized trial. Statistics in Medicine, 1996. 
15(13): 1447–58. 
79. 
Willan, A.R., and B.J. O'Brien, Confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: An 
application of Fieller's theorem. Health Economics, 1996. 5(4): 297–305. 
80. 
Fenwick, E., B.J. O'Brien, and A. Briggs, Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves: Facts, 
fallacies, and frequently asked questions. Health Economics, 2004. 13(5): 405–15. 

Page 26 of 29 
 
81. 
Kraemer, H.C., and R.D. Gibbons, Why does the randomized clinical trial methodology 
so often mislead clinical decision making? Focus on moderators and mediators of 
treatment. Psychiatric Annals, 2009. 39(7): 736–45. 
82. 
MacKinnon, D.P., A.J. Fairchild, and M.S. Fritz, Mediation analysis. Annual Review of 
Psychology, 2007. 58: 593–614. 
83. 
Preacher, K.J., and A.F. Hayes, SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect 
effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and 
Computers, 2004. 36(4): 717–31. 
84. 
Krueger, R.A., Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4th ed. 2009, 
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 
85. 
Guest, G., K.M. MacQueen, and E.E. Namey, Applied Thematic Analysis. 2012, 
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 
86. 
Lincoln, Y., and E. Guba, Processing naturally obtained data. In Naturalistic Inquiry, 
332–56. 1985, London: Sage Publications. 
87. 
Bernard, H.R., and G.W. Ryan, Text analysis: Qualitative and quantitative methods. In 
Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology, ed. H.R. Bernard. 1998, Walnut Creek, 
CA: Altamira Press. 
88. 
Kurasaki, K., Intercoder reliability for validating conclusions drawn from open-ended 
interview data. Field Methods, 2000. 12: 179–94. 
89. 
Green, J., and N. Thorogood, Qualitative Methods for Health Research. 3rd ed. 2014, 
Los Angeles: Sage Publications. 
90. 
Crabtree, B.F., and W.L. Miller, A template approach to text analysis: Developing and 
using codebooks, 93–109. In Doing Qualitative Research, ed. B.F. Crabtree and M.L. 
Miller. 1992, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 
91. 
Sullivan, S.D., et al., Budget impact analysis—Principles of good practice: Report of the 
ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Value Health, 2014. 
17(1): 5–14. 
92. 
Ritzwoller, D.P., et al., Costing behavioral interventions: A practical guide to enhance 
translation. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 2009. 37(2): 218–27. 
93. 
Rosen, C. S., Drescher, K. D., Moos, R. H., Finney, J. W., Murphy, R. T., & Gusman, F. 
(2000). Sixand Ten-Item Indexes of Psychological Distress Based on the Symptom 
Checist-90. Assessment, 7(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/107319110000700201 
94. 
Narrow W, Clarke D, Kuramoto J. DSM-5 Field Trials in the United States and Canada, 
Part III: Development and Reliability Testing of a Cross-Cutting Symptom Assessment 
for DSM-5. Am J Psychiatry. 2013; 170: 71–82 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Page 27 of 29 
 
AMENDMENTS: 
 
Ame00098947 
 
This protocol is the exact protocol that was approved and used for HUM00155161. There are  
only a few differences between the current protocol and HUM00155161. First, the current 
protocol will enroll participants into the randomized controlled trial (RCT) who are 30 years or 
older (HUM00155161 participants in the randomized controlled trial are 18-29 years old). 
Second, the current protocol will enroll 60 participants into the RCT (compared to 150 
participants in HUM00155161). Third, the current protocol is funded for 12-months by MICHR 
(via funding from NIH). Lastly, the current protocol is only for the randomized controlled trial 
(rather than HUM00155161 which includes enrolling staff into an implementation evaluation). 
 
The inclusion criteria for villagers are: 
• 30 years or older 
• Identified as at moderate to high risk for reoffending with violent crimes (determined at 
the time of enrollment in the Vocational Village via the COMPAS Risk Assessment 
Classification Instrument [60]) 
• Within three months of their earliest release date 
• Actively enrolled in a Vocational Village 
We revised our inclusion criteria to drop the 4th grade reading level requirement for 
participants.  This requirement is already met by the participants’ enrollment in the Vocational 
Village as the program requires that all villagers have a high school diploma or GED before 
entering the program. 
 
The Acceptability and Usability and Villager Status surveys have been revised and updated. 
No sensitive questions have been added to these surveys. 
 
Ame00100075 
 
For post-test study procedures, an option to conduct the visit remotely over the phone (using 
BlueJeans) will be added to the additional protocol. University of Michigan research staff will 
set up an encrypted BlueJeans conference line and provide the number to the Vocational 
Village. An MDOC Vocational Village employee, who is aware of the that the villager is 
participating in research, will escort villager participants to an area within the facility that has a 
phone. The number will be dialed in and research staff will conduct the post-test visit as 
previously approved. The mock job interview will be the only part that will be actively recorded. 
The villagers have already been consented and have agreed to participate in the study. 
 
 
Ame00100925 
 
In response to COVID-19, we decided to revise our recruitment and study visit protocols.  
 
Post-visits have already been approved to be done removely. However, as some villagers may 
be released early without notice to research staff, we are revising the protocol to conduct the 
post-test visit over a one-on-one BlueJeans call directly with the vocational villager after they 
are released. We already have contact information from MDOC and hope to reach out to them 

Page 28 of 29 
 
if this occurs. As previously mentioned, the mock job interview will be recorded, but the survey 
collection will not be recorded. For these visits, the research staff will email copies of the 
surveys to participants ahead of time and then ask the villagers to read and respond to the 
survey items over the phone. In case email is not a reliable option, research staff will read each 
item and record their responses on a paper copy and then enter them directly into REDCap 
after the visit is complete, or, if able, research staff will enter their responses directly into 
REDCap. We propose to provide a one-time payment of $20 for these participants to 
compensate them for their time completing the post-test visits outside of the vocational village 
after their release from MDOC custody. 
 
We will also add the option for payments other than gift cards (for example, a check) to be sent 
to participants.  
  
 Ame00101332 
 
In response to COVID-19, we decided to revise our recruitment and study visit protocols. We 
are doing so in order to continue enrolling participants as well as conduct study visits over the 
phone or remotely if study staff are unable to visit the vocational village sites. 
 
First, recruitment will be the same except that the informational session with the study staff will 
be either audio recorded and then played for the selected villagers, or it will be conducted live 
via BlueJeans phone call for the group of villagers. The BlueJeans call will likely be audio-only 
as the facilities do not typically have web cam access or internet access to receive web-based 
phone calls. If web cams are available to use, we will do so, but it is expected that phone audio 
will be the primary method. The consent form will be reviewed over the BlueJeans phone call 
with the villager if they choose the participate in the study. Village staff will print two copies of 
the consent form and provide them to the villager. Research staff will review the consent with 
the villager over BlueJeans phone call. The villager will then give oral consent to participate. 
The villager will keep one copy in his file. 
 
After the oral consent, the villager will attend Study Visits 1 and 2 one-on-one with study staff 
over a BlueJeans conference call in a semi-private room with a Vocational Village staff member 
to set up the phone call. Next, Village staff will provide the villagers with a copy of each survey. 
The villager will read the items and research staff will record them on an internal paper copy 
that they will later enter into the study’s REDCap data base. There will be no survey data left 
in the Village as the participant will not be marking their answers down. Next, the mock job 
interview will be recorded via BlueJeans phone call, as originally agreed to on the consent form 
and from a previous amendment (of note, the collection of survey data will not be recorded on 
audio).  
 
Randomization and intervention delivery will occur as previously approved. 
 
Ame00102494 
 
We have revised our inclusion criteria to expand recruitment to 36 years or older in order to 
meet our recruitment goals. We would also like to note that the corresponding study to this 
(HUM00155161) will be revising their recruitment age to 18-35 years old so the two study 
populations do not overlap. 
 

Page 29 of 29 
 
We are also adding an additional contact plan for participants awaiting the 6-month and 12-
month follow ups in order to keep open communication and remind them of their upcoming 
calls. We will be sending a postcard in an envelope in the mail approximately 4 times bewteen 
their follow up time points. For intervention participants, it will contain their intervention 
username and password as a reminder that they can log into the intervention if they so choose. 
While they were also given this information during their release, we think it would be best to 
send reminders whenever possible. Control participants will not receive their log in information 
until their 12 month follow up has been completed, however, they will still receive a postcard in 
an envelope. The postcard will be enclosed within an envelope so that username information 
is not displayed. However, if another person were to obtain the username/password, they will 
not have any access to any participant data or information as nothing is linked via the 
Simmersion website. All they will be able to do is access and use the virtual interview training.