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

Abstract

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and policy effects of the program, as described in 75 publications and papers arising from it, including previously unpublished results of our ongoing analyses.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.

Examining the Effectiveness of Restorative Justice in Reducing Victims’ Post-Traumatic Stress

“…Participants assigned to RJ reported feeling safer and had less fear of revenge after participating in VOCs (Beven et al 2005;Davis 2009). Further, improvements in hyperarousal displayed longevity, as anxiety of revictimisation was lower in victims who had received RJ compared with those whose cases had been adjudicated by the courts up to 10 years after receiving the intervention (Sherman et al, 2015b). Consistent with these findings, symptoms of irritability and aggression were significantly different between justice interventions.…”

“…In adult victims, it was consistently evidenced that anger was lower in the RJ group compared with the group receiving the customary justice intervention (Beven et al 2005;Davis 2009;Gal and Moyal 2011). Further, reductions in anger were found to hold up to 10 years following the intervention (Sherman et al 2015b). RJ also supported improvements in mood and cognition in an adolescent sample.…”

“…Participants were victims of real crimes recruited through judicial institutions such as court referrals following victimisation (Angel et al 2014;Beven et al 2005;Calhoun and Pelech 2013;Davis 2009;Gal and Moyal 2011;Sherman et al 2005;Sherman et al, 2015b). Five studies included adult participants (Angel et al 2014;Beven et al 2005;Davis 2009;Sherman et al 2005;Sherman et al 2015b) and two studies examined Gal and Moyal 2011). Baseline characteristics of the samples recruited, which included crime severity, age, and gender, did not differ significantly between the intervention and comparison groups.…”

Evidence comes by replication, but needs differentiation: the reproducibility issue in science and its relevance for criminology

“…As in multicentered treatment research in medicine, these primary studies should be designed as a series of replications to test the reproducibility of findings (e.g., in a meta-analysis). The evaluation of a restorative justice program by Sherman et al (2015) is a good example of this strategy.…”

Promoting Healthy Outcomes Among Youth with Multiple Risks: Innovative Approaches

“…A systematic review concluded that restorative justice is a promising approach for both adults and youth (76). However, restorative justice may reduce rates of recidivism only for more serious juvenile crimes and not for misdemeanors or offenses such as drunk driving (128). It should be noted that most evaluations did not include true randomization, and the program’s voluntary nature may introduce selection bias that presents an obstacle to obtaining reliable estimates of program effects because offenders may refuse to participate in the programs (76).…”