Background
In criminal justice systems today, sentencing can have different goals: retribution, prevention, and restoration. Of these, retribution and prevention are well-known. Think about typically court hearings, in which an offender receives a punishment such as a community or prison sentence. However, in recent years restorative justice and rehabilitation have received more attention in research and policy discussions, which has led for example to the incorporation of restorative practices in the Dutch criminal justice system. That is, that mediation between victims and suspects can be part of the criminal justice procedure (see link). The aim of restorative justice is not to punish the offender, but to restore the damage that has been done, by engaging victim, offender and the community in restorative actions taken in the aftermath of a crime (Hansen & Umbreit, 2018).
When it comes to reacting to crime, it is important to take into account the opinion of the public as well, because the legitimacy of criminal sanctions depends also on whether citizens understand and support the purposes of punishment. However, there is still little knowledge about how well the public knows about the above mentioned sentencing goals, and how their opinions are affected when the goals are presented in different ways (Malsch et al., 2024).
It is especially relevant to study public knowledge and attitudes now, because restorative justice is becoming increasingly important in practice. If the public does not support such goals, or if their views are based on incorrect assumptions, then the implementation of restorative practices can be difficult. On the other hand, if we can see under which conditions citizens are more open to restoration and restorative practices, policymakers and practitioners can use this knowledge to make criminal justice responses more effective and legitimate.
For this study a questionnaire has already been developed, and we are considering doing a field experiment among Dutch civilians to see when and how they might support restoration more as an important sentencing goal in Dutch criminal cases. The aim of this master project is to pilot test this experiment. Although the structure of the study has been set up, you are invited to contribute to it and add own variables of interest or additional analyses.
Research questions
1. What is the level of public knowledge and perception of the main sentencing goals (retribution, prevention, and restoration) in the criminal justice system?
2. How does exposure to different frames (neutral, knowledge, punitive, restorative) influence citizens’ attitudes towards the perceived importance and effectiveness of the three sentencing goals?
Type of research
Experimental research.
Key words
Sanctioning; public perception; justice goals; restorative justice
Information
Please contact Steven Watson (s.j.watson@utwente.nl) when you are interested in this assignment.
Start
Available anytime
Literature
Hansen, T., & Umbreit, M. (2018). State of knowledge: Four decades of victim-offender mediation research and practice: the evidence. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 36(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21234
Malsch, M., Wit, J. De, & Bruin, B. De. (2024). Kennis en ervaring met het recht maakt burger realistischer.
Moss, S. A., Lee, E., Berman, A., & Rung, D. (2019). When do people value rehabilitation and restorative justice over the punishment of offenders?. Victims & Offenders, 14(1), 32-51.
Roberts, J. V., & Stalans, L. J. (2004). Restorative sentencing: Exploring the views of the public. Social Justice Research, 17(3), 315-334