Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Principles in Juvenile Justice: A Meta-Analysis (ICPSR 37000)

Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

The objective of this study was to systematically review and statistically synthesize all available research that, at a minimum, compared participants in a restorative justice program to participants processed in a more traditional way using meta-analytic methods. Ideally, these studies would include research designs with random assignment to condition groups, as this provides the most credible evidence of program effectiveness.

Study Design View help for Study Design

A systematic search identified 99 publications, both published and unpublished, reporting on the results of 84 evaluations nested within 60 unique research projects or studies. From these studies, results related to delinquency, non-delinquency, and victim outcomes for the youth and victims participating in these programs were extracted.

Sample View help for Sample

To be eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis, a study must have met all of the eligibility criteria detailed below. No restriction was placed on the nature of the publication (i.e., both published and unpublished studies were included), nor any restriction on the country in which the study was conducted. Only studies in English were considered; studies only available in other languages were excluded given the linguistic limitations of the research team.

Intervention

To be eligible, studies must have tested the effectiveness of a juvenile justice program that included a restorative justice component. This included restorative justice programs that are solely based on restorative justice principles as well as programs that implement one or more restorative justice feature. Such features included restitution, face-to-face meetings between the offender and victim or victim surrogate, or some other method of trying to repair the harm done by the crime, such as an apology letter.

Participants

Studies were eligible if the study sample only consisted of juveniles involved in the juvenile justice system or juveniles engaged in other problem behaviors with a clearly defined victim (such as another student). Youth were defined as persons age 18 or under. These youth could be formally adjudicated or diverted from formal processing as part of the restorative justice program, or have no contact with the justice system, such as youth from a school-based program.

Research design

The population of evaluations eligible for this review were experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of a juvenile justice program with a restorative justice component compared to either a comparison group that was treated in a traditional fashion or was treated by an alternative program. To be eligible as an experimental or quasi-experimental design, a study must have met at least one of the following criteria:

1. Subjects were randomly assigned to treatment and comparison conditions or assigned by a procedure plausibly equivalent to randomization.
2. Quasi-experiments for which the subjects in the treatment and comparison conditions are generally similar. Eligible designs included those with a matched comparison group, a comparison group that was equated using statistical methods, cohort designs, or uncontrolled quasi-experiments comparing the treatment condition with a treatment as usual type group.
3. Ineligible quasi-experimental designs were those without a credible comparison group or designs where the comparison group was the youth who refused participation in the restorative justice program.

Outcomes

Several outcomes were of interest to this review. A study was eligible if it reported data relevant to any of these outcomes:

1. Criminal behavior: Any measure of criminal behavior following the treatment program (often called recidivism). Possible measures included official measures such as arrest or adjudication, or self-reported or other-reported measures of delinquency. Measures could be reported dichotomously or on a multi-item scale.
2. Participant satisfaction: Any measure of the victims' and offenders' satisfaction with the restorative justice process and/or outcomes.
3. Perception of fairness: Any measure of the perception of the victim or offender regarding whether the process resulted in a fair or just outcome.
4. Restitution compliance: Any measure of compliance with restitution by the youth to the victim/program.
5. Reparation of harm: Any measure of the reparation of harm beyond restitution, such as an apology letter.
6. Juvenile justice system costs: Any measures of the relative cost of the restorative justice program versus the routine processing that the youths would have received.

Time Method View help for Time Method

Universe View help for Universe

Published and unpublished research studies.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2018-12-19