RT Article
T1 Discerning justice: clarifying the role of procedural and interactional justice in restorative conferencing
JF Contemporary justice review
VO 24
IS 1
SP 4
OP 23
A1 Hegtvedt, Karen A.
A2 Scheuerman, Heather
A2 Gilbert, Talia N.
A2 Keith, Shelley
LA English
YR 2021
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1752169379
AB 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.
K1 Shaming
K1 interactional justice
K1 Procedural Justice
K1 Restorative Justice
K1 Offense Type
DO 10.1080/10282580.2020.1755843