The Need for Theory in Assessing Peer Courts

Abstract

Over the past decade, peer courts have become an increasingly popular way to divert firsttime and status offenders from the juvenile court, with more than 875 programs nationwide in 2002. With their rise in popularity, some studies have examined peer courts'effectiveness for reducing attendee recidivism, although none have employed social theory for these purposes. The goal of this article is to demonstrate why social theory is necessary for evaluating peer courts. The authors use three classical criminological theories-labeling, deterrence, and differential association-to provide a better understanding of peer court functions and efficacy.

Transforming Teens: Measuring the Effects of Restorative Justice Principles in a Teen Court Setting

“…In another study, Lott et al (2000) found that although teen court participants in Nebraska rated their teen court experience as valuable, "the participants evidenced very little change of attitude or beliefs." Other researchers have also noted empirical and theoretical limitations in the current research on teen courts Dick et al, 2004;Stickle et al, 2008).…”

Juvenile/Youth Justice Management in Nigeria: Making a Case for Diversion Programmes

“…The continued relevance of diversion as an alternative to formal adjudication variously hinges on: its cost effectiveness (Aos, 2002;Dick et al, 2004;Levin, 2010); association with reduced risk of recidivism (Benda and Tollet, 1999;Goldson, 2000;Holman and Ziedenberg, 2006;Shelden, 1999;Sulivan et al, 2007;Whitehead and Lab, 2001); increased chances of children and young people receiving appropriate interventions beyond juvenile/youth justice systems (Beck et al, 2006); and reduced chances of negative interference with the continued social development and socialization of children and young people including their schooling and family life (Balfanz et al, 2003;Levin, 2010).…”

Lived Experiences of Youth of Color in Secured Facilities

“…Such labeling by justice system staff often resulted in risk for bias, prejudice, unfair decision making, and lengthy involvement in the justice system (Bilchik, 1998;Devine, Coolbaugh, & Jenkins, 1998). Indeed, utilizing labeling theory as a theoretical framework can be useful in exploring the lived experiences of youth of color in secured facilities and in their communities (Dick, Pence, Jones, & Geertsen, 2004).…”