Sherman&Strang: Restorative Justice (Alternatives)

Question 1

PPs?

Answer 1

An Internet search of articles including the words:
•'restorative'
•'justice'
With:
•'re-offending' or
•'recidivism' or
•'mediation' 

From these 36 articles found, they compared offenders on an RJ programme+those not

Question 2

Procedure?

Answer 2

•2 researchers analysed the content of all the research found+compared the 2 groups

Question 3

Results?

Answer 3

• reductions in re-offending were found for violence+property crime but not in all cases
• more effective for cases with a personal victim than those without one
• seems more effective when violence part of the crime
• can improve victims mental health by reducing Post Traumatic Shock symptoms+helping them come to terms with what happened

Question 4

Conclusions?

Answer 4

Strong evidence that RJ is effective in some cases+there is support for its increased use, perhaps beginning with young offenders

Question 5

Strengths?

Answer 5

• useful= suggests RJ can improve recidivism rates
• ethical
• potential high pop validity of taking research from 36 sources
• hugger reliability as consistent across 36 sources
• secondary data= cheaper+easier

Question 6

Weaknesses?

Answer 6

• review article= low ecological validity
• secondary data= less reliable+valid as unsure of accuracy+control of primary sources
• researcher bias in what is included
• publication bias

Question 7

Method?

Answer 7

Review article

Question 8

Aim?

Answer 8

To look at good practice in restorative justice and to reach a conclusion on its effectiveness with reference to re-offending.

Question 9

Restorative justice?

Answer 9

Focusses on reconciliation with victims and the community
•victim satisfaction
•engagement with perpetrator so they can realise their actions
•provide confidence for the community