The Influence of Belief in Offender Redeemability and Decision‐Making Competence on Receptivity to Restorative Justice

IF 0.5 4区 管理学 Q4 MANAGEMENT Negotiation and Conflict Management Research Pub Date : 2019-12-19 DOI:10.1111/ncmr.12176
Gregory D. Paul
{"title":"The Influence of Belief in Offender Redeemability and Decision‐Making Competence on Receptivity to Restorative Justice","authors":"Gregory D. Paul","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Restorative justice (RJ) processes offer a way to address multifaceted harms caused by wrongdoing. Yet, questions remain about people’s attitudes toward restorative processes such as victim–offender conferences (VOCs) and the factors that influence those attitudes. This study examined whether beliefs about youth and adult redeemability and decisionmaking competence influence perceptions of justice outcomes, VOC effectiveness, VOC appropriateness, VOC support, and VOC participation willingness. Analysis of survey data gathered from 207 participants through Amazon MTurk suggests that perceived redeemability and to a lesser extent decision-making competence significantly shape outcomeand process-related beliefs and evaluations. Namely, the more people believe that offenders are redeemable, the more they are likely to support restorative outcomes, perceive VOCs to be effective and appropriate, support the use of VOCs, and be willing to participate in a VOC. The study’s findings are useful for potentially shaping people’s understanding of and support for RJ.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12176","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12176","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Restorative justice (RJ) processes offer a way to address multifaceted harms caused by wrongdoing. Yet, questions remain about people’s attitudes toward restorative processes such as victim–offender conferences (VOCs) and the factors that influence those attitudes. This study examined whether beliefs about youth and adult redeemability and decisionmaking competence influence perceptions of justice outcomes, VOC effectiveness, VOC appropriateness, VOC support, and VOC participation willingness. Analysis of survey data gathered from 207 participants through Amazon MTurk suggests that perceived redeemability and to a lesser extent decision-making competence significantly shape outcomeand process-related beliefs and evaluations. Namely, the more people believe that offenders are redeemable, the more they are likely to support restorative outcomes, perceive VOCs to be effective and appropriate, support the use of VOCs, and be willing to participate in a VOC. The study’s findings are useful for potentially shaping people’s understanding of and support for RJ.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
罪犯可救赎性信念和决策能力对恢复性司法接受度的影响
恢复性司法程序为解决不法行为造成的多方面危害提供了一种途径。然而,人们对诸如受害者-犯罪者会议(VOCs)等恢复性过程的态度以及影响这些态度的因素仍然存在问题。本研究考察了关于青年和成人的可救赎性和决策能力的信念是否影响对正义结果、VOC有效性、VOC适当性、VOC支持和VOC参与意愿的看法。通过亚马逊MTurk收集的207名参与者的调查数据分析表明,感知到的可赎回性和较小程度上的决策能力显著地塑造了与结果和过程相关的信念和评估。也就是说,人们越相信冒犯者是可以挽回的,他们就越有可能支持恢复性的结果,认为VOCs是有效和适当的,支持使用VOCs,并愿意参与VOC。这项研究的发现有助于潜在地塑造人们对RJ的理解和支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Value from Control: Subjective Valuations of Negotiations by Principals and Agents Why are Women Less Likely to Negotiate? The Influence of Expectancy Considerations and Contextual Framing on Gender Differences in the Initiation of Negotiation There is No Away: Where Do People Go When They Avoid an Interpersonal Conflict? Valuing Cooperation and Constructive Controversy: A Tribute to David W. Johnson Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1