The authors examine longitudinal data from a drinking-and-driving study in Australia and evaluate the long-term impacts of reintegrative shaming and procedural justice on recidivism rates; they discuss their research methodology, outcomes, and policy implications.
Advocates of restorative justice (RJ) hypothesize that the diversion of criminal cases to RJ conferences should be more effective in lowering the rate of reoffending than traditional prosecution in court processing because the conferences more effectively engage the psychological mechanisms of reintegrative shaming and procedural justice. This study uses longitudinal data from the drinking-and-driving study in the Australian Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) to evaluate the long-term impact of reintegrative shaming and procedural justice on support for the law and on later recidivism as assessed through the use of police records and by self-report. Analysis first suggests that there is no direct effect of experimental condition on later recidivism. However, it further suggests that both traditional court-based prosecution and RJ conferences increase support for the law and lower the rate of future reoffending when they engage the social psychological mechanisms of reintegrative shaming and procedural justice and thereby increase the legitimacy of the law. Hence, the results argue for the potential value of procedures such as the RJ conference but indicate that those procedures will only achieve their objectives if they are effectively designed and implemented. Publisher Abstract Provided
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Scaling up Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) Framework in Rural Settings Through the Idaho Rural Implementation Model
- Focused Deterrence, Strategic Management, and Effective Gun Violence Prevention
- FY 2024 Solicitation Overview: Project Safe Neighborhoods Formula Grant Program