Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHayes, Hennesseyen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcGee, Taraen_US
dc.contributor.authorCerruto, Michaelen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T12:42:22Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T12:42:22Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.modified2012-05-15T22:51:36Z
dc.identifier.issn10345329en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/44248
dc.description.abstractOver the past two decades, research has produced inconsistent results regarding the crime prevention potential of restorative justice conferencing for young offenders. Some comparative research has suggested that restorative justice conferencing reduces reoffending compared with other youth justice processes (Strang et al 1999). Other quantitative research has examined the circumstances under which conferencing reduces crime and has found that offender characteristics, conference features and post-conference life experiences are important in explaining reoffending after a conference (Hayes and Daly 2003). Drawing upon observation and interview data obtained from a sample of 25 young offenders who attended conferences in south-east Queensland, the study reported in this article explored how experiences in conferences relate to post-intervention offending behaviour. The results of the study suggest that young people in the sample who continued (n=9) or stopped offending (n=16) one year after their conference, had positive experiences in telling their story, meeting their victims and hearing their victim's stories in conferences. However, there were some key differences. Some young people who continued offending were disappointed when victims did not attend or perceived victims as being hostile towards them. In contrast, some young people who stopped offending viewed their conference experience as an event that helped them avoid future offending because the conference highlighted the consequences of their offending for victims. These results suggest that while, on balance, conference processes are judged positively, there are important interactional features that can bear negatively on post-intervention offending. Introductionen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent339833 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Sydneyen_US
dc.publisher.placeAustraliaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://sydney.edu.au/law/criminology/journal/23_02.shtmlen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom127en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto143en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue2en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalCurrent Issues in Criminal Justiceen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume23en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLaw and Legal Studies not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode189999en_US
dc.titleExplaining Continuity and Change in Offending Behaviour after a Restorative Justice Conferenceen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.facultyArts, Education & Law Group, School of Criminology and Criminal Justiceen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2011, Published by The Institute of Criminology, University of Sydney. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.en_US
gro.date.issued2011
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record