Discerning justice: clarifying the role of procedural and interactional justice in restorative conferencing

Research suggests that offenders perceive restorative justice (RJ) conferences as more just and reintegrative than standard court proceedings. Yet, little research focuses on how the nature of the offense may affect these social psychological processes, and studies that investigate how offenders per...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Hegtvedt, Karen A. (Autor)
Otros Autores: Scheuerman, Heather ; Gilbert, Talia N. ; Keith, Shelley
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2021
En: Contemporary justice review
Año: 2021, Volumen: 24, Número: 1, Páginas: 4-23
Acceso en línea: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
Descripción
Sumario:Research suggests that offenders perceive restorative justice (RJ) conferences as more just and reintegrative than standard court proceedings. Yet, little research focuses on how the nature of the offense may affect these social psychological processes, and studies that investigate how offenders perceive justice typically examine justice in general, not specific types (procedural vs. interactional). Using data from the Australian Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE), we find that offense type is differentially associated with types of justice and shaming perceptions, demonstrating the need to distinguish between interactional and procedural justice to understand how various offenders experience the RJ conference.
ISSN:1477-2248
DOI:10.1080/10282580.2020.1755843