Victims and restorative justice

Bolívar, Daniela; Pelikan, Christa; Lemonne, Anne

doi:10.4324/9780203070826-9

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In her study in Austria ( N = 162), Pelikan () demonstrated that over 80% of victims who participated in victim‐offender mediation were satisfied. This research reflected similar findings in Finland, where over 80% of victims were satisfied with their agreements and in Belgium, where 76.3% were satisfied (Bolivar, Pelikan, & Lemonne, ). This research also confirmed that 70–80% of victims in the Netherlands and Finland received an apology, of which 88% and 66%, respectively, took as sincere.…”

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futuresupporting

confidence: 85%

“…This research also confirmed that 70–80% of victims in the Netherlands and Finland received an apology, of which 88% and 66%, respectively, took as sincere. Bolivar et al () also considered the psychosocial benefit of “feeling better,” with 62% of victims in Finland, 61% of victims in Austria, and 51% of victims in the Netherlands reporting that they felt better after mediation, and only 6–10% felt worse. Overall, 68% of the victims in Austria, 63.4% of the victims in Finland, 50% of the victims in Belgium, and 35.2% of the victims in the Netherlands reported that the mediation “repaired the harm” for them (Bolivar et al, ).…”

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bolivar et al () also considered the psychosocial benefit of “feeling better,” with 62% of victims in Finland, 61% of victims in Austria, and 51% of victims in the Netherlands reporting that they felt better after mediation, and only 6–10% felt worse. Overall, 68% of the victims in Austria, 63.4% of the victims in Finland, 50% of the victims in Belgium, and 35.2% of the victims in the Netherlands reported that the mediation “repaired the harm” for them (Bolivar et al, ). Another study in Belgium ( N = 54) found that generally victims who participated in victim‐offender mediation felt physically and emotionally safer as a result of taking part in mediation (De Mesmaeker, ).…”

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

State of knowledge: Four decades of victim‐offender mediation research and practice: The evidence

Hansen

Umbreit

2018

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an overview of 40 years of victimoffender mediation evaluation research. This research demonstrates that victims and offenders are more satisfied with the process and outcomes than with the courts, they are more likely to draft and complete restitution agreements, they derive psychosocial benefits, the process is less expensive, crime victims are more likely to receive apologies from offenders, and offenders are less likely to recidivate. These benefits are not necessarily uniformly distributed. This "first wave" research provides a platform for the second wave, currently underway. To contextualize these findings, current and future victim-offender mediation practices are outlined.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futuresupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussion: Findings Disparities Concerns and The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State of knowledge: Four decades of victim‐offender mediation research and practice: The evidence

Hansen

Umbreit

2018

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 Despite this expectation, existing literature revealed mixed findings on the perceived sincerity of apology in RJ. Although some studies suggested that victims regarded their offender's apology as sincere (Bolívar et al, 2015;Vanfraechem, 2015), other research reported otherwise (Honkatukia, 2015a;Hoyle et al, 2002;Wagland et al, 2013;Walters, 2014). Moreover, there seems to be a gap in the perceived sincerity between offenders and victims because, while offenders claimed that they offered a sincere apology, victims disagreed with it (Choi & Severson, 2009;Daly, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Possibility of Sincere Apology in Restorative Justice: When and How?

Suzuki

2022

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While apology has only a secondary role in restorative justice (RJ), an apology is prevalent in the RJ process. This is promising, but problematic is that there seems to be a gap in the perceived sincerity of apology between victims and offenders. Since less is known about why this gap exists, this paper extends our knowledge about under what conditions a sincere apology is possible in RJ. More specifically, this paper seeks to identify the key components of a sincere apology that are pertinent to RJ as well as the promoting and inhibiting factors for a sincere apology in RJ. This paper provides future research implications about the relationship between RJ and sincere apology.

show abstract

“…Shapland et al, 2011). Similarly, when different institutional settings in which mediation is offered are compared (for example, between mediation offered by probation services; victim support services; or services without any apparent association with offenders or victims, such as voluntary sector providers), victims in general seem to favour the system with which they are familiar or the one they have experienced (Bolivar, Pelikan & Lemonne, 2015). Maybe, providing mediators/facilitators keep to the overall values of restorative justice, the details and name of the provision do not matter.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In search of a research nirvana: what process for whom?

Shapland

2017

Restorative Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writing an editorial is a time to dream, to think of possibilities in the far future when one's key research questions might be answered. For me, the impetus in researching restorative justice is not just to understand what it is, or how it works, but also to work with practitioners to improve practice. That means, in the context of restorative justice and its values of inclusivity and voluntariness, listening to those who participate and reflecting back what they are saying and their reactions. Perhaps one of the most important tasks for research in this field is that researchers may be able to hear and translate the voices of all of those who participate back to those who design restorative justice programmes, fund them and deliver them. My plea in this editorial is that we may work out ways to see what kinds of restorative justice processes are found helpful by different participants (adult and young participants, victims and offenders), for varying offences. This is not a task of evaluation, of finding out 'what works', or what effects and outcomes restorative justice programmes or experiences have. Evaluation can only work with what has happened, and good evaluation is evaluation true to the aims and values of the programmes which have been delivered. So evaluation is necessarily bounded by the current shape of programmes and how they have been delivered. It is constrained by current provision, and can only speculate about other possibilities which have not been tried as yet. Listening to the voices of participants is a slightly different and more difficult task, where one needs to listen to what was not there, but might have been there and would have been helpful-to find the gaps and see possibilities for future development. However, I think it is a key task for researchers, particularly given the values of restorative justice, that that justice should not reflect the state's demands, or criminal justice's power balances, but instead what would be helpful to potential participants, within the bounds of human rights considerations.Working out what might be helpful in restorative justice is a particularly problematic task because the aims of policymakers and funders (who

show abstract

Victims and restorative justice

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

State of knowledge: Four decades of victim‐offender mediation research and practice: The evidence

State of knowledge: Four decades of victim‐offender mediation research and practice: The evidence

Possibility of Sincere Apology in Restorative Justice: When and How?

In search of a research nirvana: what process for whom?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About