Abstract
Advocates of restorative justice (RJ) argue that the process offers a more effective means of responding to crime than the formal criminal justice system, and many studies have evaluated RJ positively across a variety of outcome measures, particularly in comparison to court based procedures. However, the RJ literature contains few studies that directly test the factors affecting RJ participants’ behaviours and experiences, so little is known about the specific factors that influence how, and for whom, RJ works. In this paper, we argue that the expanded use of experimental laboratory methodologies will broaden and strengthen our understanding of the basic mechanisms by which RJ operates. We describe some ways in which experimental laboratory research may enhance understandings of apology in restorative settings as well as public support for RJ, and we emphasise the need and the potential to overcome barriers of artificiality in laboratory settings. This analysis of laboratory methodologies and the field of RJ research indicates that creative and well-designed experimental laboratory studies can advance knowledge in this area, allowing researchers to investigate how particular components of RJ contribute to the success or failure of RJ processes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, J. S., & Jacobsen, P. R. (1964). Effects of wage inequities on work equality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69(1), 19–25.
Bazemore, G., & Umbreit, M. (1995). Rethinking the sanctioning function in juvenile court: Retributive or restorative responses to youth crime. Crime and Delinquency, 41(3), 296–316.
Bergseth, K. J., & Bouffard, J. A. (2007). The long term impact of restorative justice programming for juvenile offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(4), 433–451.
Berkowitz, L., & Donnerstein, E. (1982). External validity is more than skin deep: Some answers to criticisms of laboratory experiments. American Psychologist, 37(3), 245–257.
Bolitho, J. J. (2011). Restorative justice: The ideals and realities of conferencing for young people. Critical Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10612-011-9150-z.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame, and reintegration. Cambridge: UK, Cambridge University Press.
Braithwaite, J. (2000). Shame and criminal justice. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 42(2), 281–298.
Braithwaite, J. (2002). Setting standards for restorative justice. British Journal of Criminology, 42(3), 563–577.
Brown, J. (2003). The role of apology in negotiations. The Marquette Law Review, 87, 665–675.
Carlsmith, K. M. (2006). The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 437–451. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.06.007.
Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 284–299. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.2.284.
Choi, J., & Steverson, M. (2009). What! What kind of apology is this?: The nature of apology in victim offender mediation. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(7), 813–820.
Coombs, T., & Holladay, S. (2008). Comparing apology to equivalent crisis response strategies: Clarifying apology’s role and value in crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 34(3), 252–257.
Cosby, P. C. (1977). Methods in behavioral research (3rd edition). Palo Alto: Mayfield.
Daly, K., & Stubbs, J. (2006). Feminist engagement with restorative justice. Theoretical Criminology, 10(1), 9–28.
Darley, J. M., Carlsmith, K. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2000). Incapacitation and just deserts as motives for punishment. Law and Human Behavior, 24(6), 659–683.
Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 324–336.
Davila, J. (2004). Forgiveness as a function of offense severity, apology extensiveness, and perceived sincerity: A theoretical model. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tulane University, New Orleasn, LA, USA.
Dhami, M. K. (2011). Offer and acceptance of apology in victim-offender mediation. Critical Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10612-011-9149-5.
Egan, L. C., Santos, L. R., & Bloom, P. (2007). The origins of cognitive dissonance: Evidence from children and monkeys. Psychological Science, 18(11), 978–983.
Elliot, A., & Devine, P. G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 582–594.
Feather, N. T. (1996). Reactions to penalties for an offense in relation to authoritarianism, values, perceived responsibility, perceived seriousness, and deservingness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 571–587.
Feather, N. T. (2006). Deservingness and emotions: Applying the structural model of deservingness to the analysis of affective reactions to outcomes. European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 38–73. doi:10.1080/10463280600662321.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.
Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115–130.
Gold, G. J., & Weiner, B. (2000). Remorse, confession, group identities, and expectancies about repeating a transgression. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 22(4), 291–300.
Gromet, D. M. (2011). Restoring the victim: Emotional reactions, justice beliefs, and support for reparation and punishment. Critical Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10612-011-9146-8.
Harmon-Jones, E., Brehm, J. W., Greenberg, J., Simon, L., & Nelson, D. E. (1995). Evidence that the production of aversion consequences is not necessary to create cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 5–17.
Heuer, L., Blumenthal, E., Douglas, A., & Weinblatt, T. (1999). A deservingness approach to respect as a relationally based fairness judgement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1279–1292. doi:10.1177/0146167299258009.
Heuer, L., & Sivasubramaniam, D. (2011). Procedural justice: Theory and method. In B. Rosenfeld & S. Penrod (Eds.), Research methods in forensic psychology. New York: Wiley.
Horai, J., & Bartek, M. (1978). Recommended punishment as a function of injurious intent, actual harm done, and intended consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(4), 575–578.
Horan, H. D., & Kaplan, M. F. (1983). Criminal intent and consequence severity: Effects of moral reasoning on punishment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(4), 638–645.
Kahneman, D., Schkade, D., & Sunstein, C. R. (1998). Shared outrage and erratic awards: The psychology of punitive damages. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 16, 49–86.
Kassin, S. M., & Kiechel, K. L. (1996). The social psychology of false confessions: Compliance, internalization, and confabulation. Psychological Science, 7(3), 125–129.
Kovera, M. B., Levy, R. J., Borgida, E., & Penrod, S. E. (1994). Expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases: Effects of expert evidence type and cross-examination. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 653–674.
Latimer, J., Dowden, C., & Muise, D. (2001). The effectiveness of restorative practices: A meta-analysis. Department of Justice, Canada: Research and Statistics Division Methodological Series.
Lerner, J. S., Goldberg, G. H., & Tetlock, P. E. (1998). Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 563–574.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, C. P. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 952–959.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, USA: Plenum Press.
Lind, E. A., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 767–780.
Lindsay, R., & Wells, G. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(3), 556–564.
MacCoun, R. J. (2005). Voice, control, and belonging: The double-edged sword of procedural fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 171–201. doi:10.1146/annurev.Lawsocsci.1.041604.115958.
McPherson Frantz, C., & Bennigson, C. (2005). Better late than early: The influence of timing on apology effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 201–207.
Ministry of Child and Youth Services (2010). What happens outside the formal court process? Retrieved from http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/topics/youthandthelaw/index.aspx.
Muncie, J. (2005). The globalisation of crime control - the case of youth and juvenile justice: Neo-liberalism, policy convergence and international conventions. Theoretical Criminology, 9, 35–64.
Nadler, J., & Rose, M. R. (2003). Victim impact testimony and the psychology of punishment. Cornell Law Review, 88, 419–456.
Nisbett, R., & Wilson, T. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256.
O’Hara, E., & Yam, D. (2002). On apology and consilience. Washington Law Review, 77, 1121–1172.
Okimoto, T. G., Wenzel, M., & Feather, N. T. (2009). Beyond retribution: Conceptualizing restorative justice and exploring its determinants. Social Justice Research, 22, 156–180. doi:10.1007/s11211-009-0092-5.
Pavlou, M., & Knowles, A. (2001). Domestic violence: Attributions, recommended punishments and reporting behaviour related to provocation by the victim. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 8(1), 76–85.
Petrucci, C. J. (2002). Apology in the criminal justice setting: Evidence for including apology as an additional component in the legal system. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20(4), 337–362.
Polk, K. (1994). Family conferencing: Theoretical and evaluative concerns. In C. Alder & J. Wundersitz (Eds.), Family conferencing and juvenile justice: The way forward or misplaced optimism? (pp. 123–140). Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Regehr, C., & Gutheil, T. (2002). Apology, justice, and trauma recovery. Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 30(3), 425–430.
Roberts, J. V., & Stalans, L. J. (2004). Restorative sentencing: Exploring the views of the public. Social Justice Research, 17(3), 315–334.
Rodriguez, N. (2007). Restorative justice at work: Examining the impact of restorative justice resolutions on juvenile recidivism. Crime and Delinquency, 53(3), 355–379.
Rossner, M. (2011). Emotions and interaction ritual: A micro analysis of restorative justice. British Journal of Criminology, 51(1), 95–119.
Russano, M. B., Meissner, C. A., Narchel, F. M., & Kassin, S. M. (2005). Investigating true and false confessions within a novel experimental paradigm. Psychological Science, 16(6), 481–486.
Salkind, N. (2006). Exploring research (6th ed.). USA: Pearson, Prentice Hall.
Sherman, L., Strang, H., Angel, C., Woods, D., Barnes, G., Bennett, S., et al. (2005). Effects of face-to-face restorative justice on victims of crime in four randomized, controlled trials. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(3), 367–395.
Sivasubramaniam, D., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2008). Decisions to participate in restorative justice conferences: Effects of convener identity and power-distance. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 15(2), 301–316.
Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2000). Race in the courtroom: Perceptions of guilt and dispositional attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(11), 1367–1379.
Stone, J., & Cooper, J. (2001). A self-standards model of cognitive dissonance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(3), 228–243.
Strang, H. (2002). Repair or revenge: Victims and restorative justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Strang, H., & Sherman, L. W. (2003). Repairing the harm: Victims and restorative justice. Utah Law Review, 15((n/a)), 15–43.
Strang, H., & Sherman, L. W. (2006). Restorative justice to reduce victimization. Preventing Crime. New York: USA, Springer.
Strang, H., Sherman, L., Angel, C., Woods, D., Bennett, S., Newbury-Birch, D., et al. (2006). Victim evaluations of face-to-face restorative justice conferences: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis. Journal of Social Sciences, 62(2), 281–306.
Taft, L. (2000). Apology subverted: The commodification of apology. The Yale Law Journal, 109(5), 1135–1161.
Talwar, V. (2008). Social and cognitive correlates of children’s lying behavior. Child Development, 79(4), 866–912.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A psychological analysis. New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Trimboli, L. (2000). An evaluation of the NSW youth justice conferencing scheme. Sydney, NSW: Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.
Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830–838.
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social Justice: Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 117–125.
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Restorative justice and procedural justice: Dealing with rule breaking. Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 307–326.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). New York: Academic Press.
Tyler, T. R., Sherman, H., Strang, L., Barnes, G. C., & Woods, D. (2007). Reintegrative shaming, procedural justice, and recidivism: the engagement of offenders’ psychological mechanisms in the Canberrarise drinking-and-driving experiment. Law and Society Review, 41(3), 553–586.
Umbreit, M. (1998). Restorative justice through victim-offender mediation: A multisite assessment. Western Criminology Review, 1(1), 1–15.
Umbreit, M., Coates, R., & Kalanj, B. (1994). Victim meets offenders: The impact of restorative justice and mediation. New York, USA: Criminal Justice Press.
Umbreit, M., Coates, R. & Vos, B. (2001). Juvenile victim offender mediation in six Oregon counties. Retrieved from http://www.rjp.umn.edu.
Vidmar, N., & Miller, D.T. (1980). Socialpsychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment. Law & Society Review, 14(3), 565–602. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3053193.
Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Waister, W. G. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(2), 151–176.
Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., & Cameron, K. (2011). Do retributive and restorative justice processes address different symbolic concerns? Critical Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10612-011-9147-7.
Witvliet, C., Worthington, E., Root, L., Sato, A., Ludwig, L., & Exline, E. (2008). Retributive justice, restorative justice, and forgiveness: An experimental psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(1), 10–25.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
In November, 2011, Diane Sivasubramaniam will join the Department of Psychological Sciences and Statistics at Swinburne University in Melbourne, Australia.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saulnier, A., Lutchman, K. & Sivasubramaniam, D. Laboratory Experiments: A Meaningful Contribution to Restorative Justice Research?. Crit Crim 20, 99–115 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-011-9152-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-011-9152-x