Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Satisfied? Exploring Victims’ Justice Judgments

  • Chapter
Crime, Victims and Policy

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Victims and Victimology ((PSVV))

Abstract

It is remarkable that, with nearly 50 years of research on the experiences of victims of crime with criminal justice systems across common law countries, including Australia, there is enduring attachment to the use of ‘satisfaction’ as a measure — because the term can hide as much as it reveals. While useful for policy purposes, it tells us little of the detail that persons are being asked to assess, is vague on context, ignores motivations and expectations and fixes identity and place. Moreover, it deftly sidesteps the more fundamental critique that persons, as victims, make of the system — that is, the absence of justice itself. This chapter takes satisfaction seriously and looks to unpack the judgements about justice that lie behind it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, J.S. 1965. Inequity in Social Exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 2, pp. 267–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aspinal, F., Addington-Hall, J., Hughes, R. and Higginson, I. 2003. Using Satisfaction to Measure the Quality of Palliative Care: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Advanced Nursing 42(4), pp. 324–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. 1964. Justice in Social Exchange. Sociological Inquiry 34(2), pp. 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B. 2011. Voice, Neutrality and Respect: Use of Victim Support Services, Procedural Fairness and Confidence in the Criminal Justice System. Criminology and Criminal Justice 11(4), pp. 345–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Jackson, J. and Stanko, E. 2009. Contact and Confidence: Revisiting the Impact of Public Encounters with Police. Policing and Society 19(1), pp. 20–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, V. 2001. The Community Hopes, Fears and Actions Survey: Goals and Measures. Working Paper No. 2. Centre for Tax System Integrity. Canberra: The Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bright, S. and Bakalis, C. 2003. Anti-Social Behaviour: Local Authority Responsibility and the Voice of the Victim. The Cambridge Law Journal 62(2), pp. 305–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J. and Wiesenfeld, B. 1996. An Integrative Framework for Explaining Reactions to Decisions: Interactive Effects of Outcomes and Procedures. Psychological Bulletin 120(2), pp. 189–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzawa, E. and Buzawa, C. 2003. Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Response. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassell, P. 2009. In Defense of Victim Impact Statements. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6, pp. 611–648.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J., Greenberg, J. and Zapata-Phelan, C. 2005. What is Organizational Justice? A Historical Overview. In: Colquitt, J. and Greenberg, J. eds. Handbook of Organizational Justice Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp. 3–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, B., David, F. and Grant, A. 1999. Victims’ Needs, Victims’ Rights: Policies and Programs for Victims of Crime in Australia. Research and Public Policy Series No. 19. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai, M., Frank, J. and Sun, I. 2011. Procedural Justice during Police-Citizen Encounters: The Effects of Process-based Policing on Citizen Compliance and Demeanor. Journal of Criminal Justice 39(2), pp. 159–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, P., Francis, P. and Greer, C. eds. 2007. Victims, Crime and Society. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. and Mulford, C. 2008. Victim Rights and New Remedies Finally Getting Victims Their Due. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 24(2), pp. 198–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. 1985. Distributive Justice: A Social-Psychological Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff, R.A. 2010. Towards a Theory of Criminal Law. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, pp. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. 1975. A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science 5(4), pp. 435–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, I. 2004. An Ambiguous Participant: The Crime Victim and Criminal Justice Decision-Making. British Journal of Criminology 44(6), pp. 967–982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, I., Thomas, S. and Ogloff, J. 2012. Procedural Justice in Contacts with the Police: The Perspective of Victims of Crime. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 13(5), pp. 437–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erez, E., Kilchling, M. and Wemmers, J. eds. 2011. Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Victim Participation: International Perspectives. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. 2000. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. 1977. Distributive and Procedural Justice: Combined Impact of voice and improvement on Experienced Inequity Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35(2), pp. 108–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. 1986. Rethinking Equity Theory: A Referent Cognitions Model. In: Bierhoff, H., Cohen, R. and Greenberg, J. eds. Justice in Social Relations. New York: Plenum, pp. 145–162.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. and Cropanzano, R. 2001. Fairness Theory: Justice as Accountability. In: Greenberg, J. and Cropanzano, R. eds. Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giese, J. and Cote, J. 2000. Defining Consumer Satisfaction. Academy of Marketing Science Review 2000(1), pp. 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, L. and White, L. 2009. A Critical Review of Patient Satisfaction. Leadership in Health Services 22(1), pp. 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. 2009. Victims of Crime: Policy and Practice in Criminal Justice. Cullompton: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, E., Walster, W. and Berscheid, E. 1978. Equity: Theory and research. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauenstein, N., McGonigle, T. and Flinder, S. 2001. A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Procedural Justice and Distributive Justice: Implications for Justice Research. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 13(1), pp. 39–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinds, L. and Murphy, K. 2007. Public Satisfaction with Police: Using Procedural Justice to improve Police Legitimacy. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 40(1), pp. 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holder, R. 2008. The Quality of Justice: Operation of the Victims of Crime Act 1994 in the Australian Capital Territory 1996–2007. Canberra: Victims of Crime Coordinator.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holder, R. 2013. Just Interests: Victims, Citizens and the Potential for Justice. PhD thesis, The Australian National University. http://hdl.handle.net/1885/11464

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. 1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indermaur, D. and Roberts, L. 2009. Confidence in the Criminal Justice System. Trends and Issues 387, Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J. and Sunshine, J. 2007. Public Confidence in Policing: A Neo-Durkheimian Perspective. British Journal of Criminology 47(2), pp. 214–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelleher, C. and Wolak, J. 2007. Explaining Public Confidence in the Branches of State Government. Political Research Quarterly 60(4), pp. 707–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laxminarayan, M., Bosmans, M., Porter, R. and Sosa, L. 2013. Victim Satisfaction with Criminal Justice: A Systematic Review. Victims and Offenders 8, pp. 119–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E.A. 2001. Fairness Heuristic Theory: Justice Judgments as Pivotal Cognitions in Organizational Relations. In: Greenberg, J. and Cropanzano, R. eds. Advances in organizational justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 56–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E.A. and Tyler, T. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • MacCoun, R. 2005. Voice, Control, and Belonging: The Double-edged Sword of Procedural Fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1, pp. 171–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, M. and Bennett, T. 1982. Burglary in a Dwelling: The Offence, the Offender, and the Victim. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, M. and Ponting, J. eds. 1988. Victims of Crime: A New Deal? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Tur, V., Perió, J., Ramos, J. and Moliner, C. 2006. Justice Perceptions as Predictors of Customer Satisfaction: The Impact of Distributive, Procedural, and Interactional Justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36(1), pp. 100–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matravers, M. 2010. The Victim, the State, and Civil Society. In: Bottoms, A. and Roberts, J. eds. Hearing the Victim: Adversarial Justice, Crime Victims and the State. Cullompton: Willan, pp. 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, G. and Levesque, T. 2000. Customer Satisfaction with Services: Putting Perceived Value into the Equation. The Journal of Services Marketing 14(5), pp. 392–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGlynn, C. and Munro, V. 2010. Rethinking Rape Law: International and Comparative Perspectives. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J. and Zedner, L. 1992. Child Victims: Crime, Impact, and Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. 2009. Public Satisfaction with Police: The Importance of Procedural Justice and Police Performance in Police-citizen Encounters. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 42(2), pp. 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. and Cherney, A. 2012. Understanding Cooperation with Police in a Diverse Society. British Journal of Criminology 52(1), pp. 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K., Murphy, B. and Mearns, M. November 2010a. The 2009 Public Safety and Security in Australia Survey: Survey Methodology and Preliminary Findings. Working Paper No. 17. Geelong: Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K., Murphy, B. and Mearns, M. November 2010b. The 2007 Public Safety and Security in Australia Survey: Survey Methodology and Preliminary Findings. Working Paper No. 16. Geelong: Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, P. ed. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pallant, J. 2011. SPSS Survival Manual. 4th ed. Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattie, C., Seyd, P. and Whiteley, P. 2004. Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M., Bratton, J. and Gertz, M. 2007. The Construct Validity and Refinement of Process-based Policing Measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior 34(8), pp. 1005–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roach, K. 1999. Due Process and Victims’ Rights: The New Law and Politics of Criminal Justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. 2007. Public Confidence in Criminal Justice in Canada: A Comparative and Contextual Analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 49, pp. 153–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. and Erez, E. 2004. Communication in Sentencing: Exploring the Expressive Function of Victim Impact Statements. International Review of Victimology 10(3), pp. 223–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, L. and Indermaur, D. 2009. What Australians Think about Crime and Justice: Results from the 2007 Survey of Social Attitudes. Research and Public Policy Series 101. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rock, P. 1998. After Homicide: Practical and Political Responses to Bereavement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ruspini, E. 1999. Longitudinal Research and the Analysis of Social Change. Quality and Quantity 33(3), pp. 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. 2009. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapland, J., Willmore, J. and Duff, P. 1985. Victims in the Criminal Justice System. Aldershot: Gower Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. 2009. Exploring the ‘Lost and Found’ of Justice Theory and Research. Social Justice Research 22, pp. 98–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L., Aramovich, N., Lytle, B. and Sargis, E. 2011. Knitting Together an Elephant: An Integrative Approach to Understanding the Psychology of Justice Reasoning. In: D. Bobocel, A. Kay, M. Zanna and J. Olson eds. The Psychology of Justice and Legitimacy: The Ontario Symposium (11th volume), pp. 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. 2005. Citizen Satisfaction with Police Encounters. Police Quarterly 8(3), pp. 298–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stover, E. 2011. The Witnesses: War Crimes and the Promise of justice in The Hague. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang, H. 2002. Repair or Revenge: Victims and Restorative Justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temkin, J. and Krahé, B. 2008. Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: A Question of Attitude. Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. and Walker, L. 1975. Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. 1989. The Psychology of Procedural Justice: A Test of the Group-value Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57(5), pp. 830–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. 1990/2006. Why People Obey the Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. and Blader, S. 2003. The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review 7(4), pp. 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. and Huo, Y. 2002. Trust in the Law: Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. and Lind, A. 1992. A Relational Model of Authority in Groups. In: Zanna, M. ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 115–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R. and Wilke, H. 1996. The Consistency Rule and the Voice Effect: The Influence of Expectations on Procedural Fairness Judgements and Performance. European Journal of Social Psychology 26(3), pp. 411–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R. and Wilke, H. 1997. Procedural and Distributive Justice: What is Fair Depends More on What Comes First than on What Comes Next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72(1), pp. 95–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle, S. 2009. Confidence in the Criminal Justice System: Does Experience Matter? British Journal of Criminology 49(3), pp. 384–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle, S., van Roosebroek, S. and Bouckaert, G. 2008. Trust in the Public Sector: Is There any Evidence for a Long-term Decline? International Review of Administrative Sciences 74(1), pp. 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walklate, S. 1989. Victimology: the Victim and the Criminal Justice Process. London: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walklate, S. 2007. Imagining the Victim of Crime. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitekamp, E. and Kerner, H. eds. 2002. Restorative Justice, Theoretical Foundations. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, W. 2007. Type of Contact and Evaluations of Police Officers: The Effects of Procedural Justice across Three types of Police–citizen Contacts. Journal of Criminal Justice 35(6), pp. 612–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wemmers, J. 2013. Victims’ Experiences in the Criminal Justice System and their Recovery from Crime. International Review of Victimology 19(3), pp. 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wemmers J. and Cyr, K. 2004. Victims’ Perspective on Restorative Justice: How much Involvement are Victims Looking for? International Review of Victimology 9(11), pp. 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wemmers J. and Cyr, K. 2006. What Fairness Means to Crime Victims: A Social Psychological Perspective on Victim-offender Mediation. Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice 2(2), pp. 102–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B., Coyle, J. and Healy, D. 1998. The Meaning of Patient Satisfaction: An Explanation of High Reported Levels. Social Science and Medicine 47(9), pp. 1351–1359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, H. 1990. Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Criminal Justice. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Robyn Holder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sussex, UK

    Dean Wilson

  2. University of Melbourne, Australia

    Stuart Ross

Copyright information

© 2015 Robyn Holder

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Holder, R. (2015). Satisfied? Exploring Victims’ Justice Judgments. In: Wilson, D., Ross, S. (eds) Crime, Victims and Policy. Palgrave Studies in Victims and Victimology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137383938_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation