Are Restorative Justice Conferences More Fair Than Criminal Courts? Comparing Levels of Observed Procedural Justice in the Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE)

Barnes, Geoffrey C.; Hyatt, Jordan M.; Angel, Caroline M.; Strang, Heather; Sherman, Lawrence W.

doi:10.1177/0887403413512671

Cited by 31 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Barnes (1999*) first found this, in a theoretically coherent analysis of both process and outcome variables, in the RISE drink-driving experiment (see also Barnes et al 2015*). Tyler et al (2007*), using a more multivariate strategy with similar data, found the same result.…”

Section: Offender Perceptions Of Procedural Justicementioning

confidence: 57%

Twelve experiments in restorative justice: the Jerry Lee program of randomized trials of restorative justice conferences

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives We conducted and measured outcomes from the Jerry Lee Program of 12 randomized trials over two decades in Australia and the United Kingdom (UK), testing an identical method of restorative justice taught by the same trainers to hundreds of police officers and others who delivered it to 2231 offenders and 1179 victims in 1995- J Exp Criminol (2015) 11:501-540 DOI 10.1007 2004. The article provides a review of the scientific progress and policy effects of the program, as described in 75 publications and papers arising from it, including previously unpublished results of our ongoing analyses. Methods After random assignment in four Australian tests diverting criminal or juvenile cases from prosecution to restorative justice conferences (RJCs), and eight UK tests of supplementing criminal or juvenile proceedings with RJCs, we followed intention-to-treat group differences between offenders for up to 18 years, and for victims up to 10 years.Results We distil and modify prior research reports into 18 updated evidence-based conclusions about the effects of RJCs on both victims and offenders. Initial reductions in repeat offending among offenders assigned to RJCs (compared to controls) were found in 10 of our 12 tests. Nine of the ten successes were for crimes with personal victims who participated in the RJCs, with clear benefits in both short-and long-term measures, including less prevalence of post-traumatic stress symptoms. Moderator effects across and within experiments showed that RJCs work best for the most frequent and serious offenders for repeat offending outcomes, with other clear moderator effects for poly-drug use and offense seriousness.Conclusions RJ conferences organized and led (most often) by specially-trained police produced substantial short-term, and some long-term, benefits for both crime victims and their offenders, across a range of offense types and stages of the criminal justice processes on two continents, but with important moderator effects. These conclusions are made possible by testing a new kind of justice on a programmatic basis that would allow prospective meta-analysis, rather than doing one experiment at a time. This finding provides evidence that funding agencies could get far more evidence for the same cost from programs of identical, but multiple, RCTs of the identical innovative methods, rather than funding one RCT at a time.

show abstract

Section: Offender Perceptions Of Procedural Justicementioning

confidence: 57%

Twelve experiments in restorative justice: the Jerry Lee program of randomized trials of restorative justice conferences

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further studies confirmed this link between procedural justice and legitimacy, and the effects of legitimacy on compliance with rules (Tyler, Boeckmann, Smith, & Huo, 1997) and cooperation more generally (Tyler & Blader, 2000). Tyler and Huo (2002) The effects of procedural justice on institutional legitimacy have been demonstrated across a range of contexts, for example in the area of policing (Mazerolle et al, 2013;Bradford, Murphy & Jackson, 2013), mediation (Nolan-Hayley, 2014), correctional institutions (Baker et al, 2014); criminal justice (Barnes et al, 2013), workplaces (Andrews et al, 2013Greenberg & Colquitt, 2013, and political institutions (Hibbing & Theiss-Morse, 2001). Studies have also demonstrated that procedural justice influences political trust in the absence of inter-personal interaction between authorities and citizens.…”

Section: B the Procedural Justice Model Of Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebuilding institutional legitimacy in post-conflict societies: a case study of Nepal

Fisk¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legitimacy refers to the perceived rightfulness of authorities, and is central to citizens' perceptions of institutions such as the government. Legitimate authority is linked to acceptance of institutions and long-term stability of societies. As such, rebuilding the legitimacy of institutions such as the government and judiciary ('institutional legitimacy') is essential for stability in post-conflict societies. In this thesis, I explore the factors that lead citizens to view their government as legitimate following the reconstruction of central government institutions after a conflict. I draw on sociological, political science, social psychological and statebuilding theories to develop and present a theoretical model of post-conflict legitimacy.The model has three key components. The first encompasses relational and instrumental antecedents of legitimacy. Relational antecedents encompass fair and neutral decision-making, as well as respectful and dignified treatment, and are referred to collectively as procedural justice. Instrumental antecedents are those which involve outcomes to citizens, and include distributive justice (fairness in outcome distribution), outcome favourability (personal gain in outcomes), and government performance (the ability of the government to function effectively and provide services to citizens). These main variables are investigated along with contingencies relating to social groups that may influence the relationship between procedural justice and legitimacy, such as national identification and group power. Testing of the first model component revealed that procedural justice was by far the strongest predictor of post-conflict institutional legitimacy, and was significantly stronger than instrumental variables such as distributive justice, government performance, and outcome favourability. Further, the relationship between procedural justice and legitimacy was moderated by national identification and group power, suggesting that procedural justice operates through social identity to exert its positive effect. Moreover, the effect of procedural justice on government legitimacy was not simply due to trust and performance perceptions of local institutions, and was not diminished by the government's ability to provide essential services (as predicted by the statebuilding literature). 4Testing of the second model component revealed that two elements of local ownership-voice and local influence-weakly predicted legitimacy, with these relationships varying according to participants' position in the Nepalese caste hierarchy.Testing of the third model component revealed a significant social interaction effect, such that citizens' legitimacy beliefs are influenced by the legitimacy views of those around them. This effect persisted even when demographic, regional, and individual-level variables were controlled.This thesis concludes that procedural justice is more predictive of post-conflict institutional legitimacy than instrumental outcomes. Further, the relationship appears to operat...

show abstract

“…Fourth, researchers should investigate how in justice within the restorative justice conference may actually promote prosocial behavior (Barry & Tyler, ; Sleebos et al, ). Restorative practices may involve an element of stigmatization even if offenders perceive them to be more reintegrative than other forms of punishment (Barnes et al, ; Scheuerman & Keith, ). For example, offenders who took part in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) were observed to be subject to more stigmatizing names and labels, harassment, and shouting than offenders who were randomly assigned to court (Barnes et al, , p. 119).…”

Section: Implications For Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Restorative practices may involve an element of stigmatization even if offenders perceive them to be more reintegrative than other forms of punishment (Barnes et al, ; Scheuerman & Keith, ). For example, offenders who took part in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) were observed to be subject to more stigmatizing names and labels, harassment, and shouting than offenders who were randomly assigned to court (Barnes et al, , p. 119). Whether or not injustice promotes group‐oriented behavior depends in part on group identification (Barry & Tyler, ).…”

Section: Implications For Restorative Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although procedural justice and reintegrative shaming theories have been used to understand the effectiveness of restorative justice (Barnes, Hyatt, Angel, Strang, & Sherman, ; Maxwell & Morris, ; Tyler et al, ), various questions remain regarding how justice, shame, and related emotions affect the restorative justice process (for a detailed review, see Ahmed, Harris, Braithwaite, & Braithwaite, ). For instance, while different types of justice may operate in restorative justice, criminological and restorative justice literatures tend to neglect this distinction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding shame:Examining how justice and emotions operate in the context of restorative justice

Scheuerman

2018

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An essential element of the restorative justice process is engagement in emotional healing, which is made possible via the ways in which offenders manage shame. Effective shame management depends in part on the operation of justice principles. While research has examined justice and the importance of emotions in facilitating the restorative justice process, further investigation is necessary to understand how various types of justice affect emotions and facilitate the restoration of offenders. This article provides an overview of major findings regarding the relationship between justice, attributions, and emotions and how these findings relate to restorative justice. Implications for research in restorative justice are also discussed.

show abstract

Are Restorative Justice Conferences More Fair Than Criminal Courts? Comparing Levels of Observed Procedural Justice in the Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE)

Cited by 31 publications

References 29 publications

Twelve experiments in restorative justice: the Jerry Lee program of randomized trials of restorative justice conferences

Twelve experiments in restorative justice: the Jerry Lee program of randomized trials of restorative justice conferences

Rebuilding institutional legitimacy in post-conflict societies: a case study of Nepal

Understanding shame:Examining how justice and emotions operate in the context of restorative justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About