Critiquing the Critics: A Brief Response to Critics of Restorative Justice

By A. Morris. 2002

243 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bfffbba148ce1a0c0dfbdc535ac25a69bf340d78

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

1. N. Rodriguez
2. E. McGarrell
3. N. Hipple
4. H. Hayes

Citations in the corpus

• Assessing Reoffending in Restorative Justice Conferences (2005, background): “…that restorative justice initiatives should not be graded on their ability to effect reductions in recidivism because there are other, more salient benefits for offenders and victims (e.g., restoring victims’ sense of loss and giving offenders a chance to make amends; Miers, 2001; Morris, 2002).”
• Restorative Justice at Work: Examining the Impact of Restorative Justice Resolutions on Juvenile Recidivism (2007, background): “…randomized design), possible selection effects and nonresponse bias call into question the ability to adequately assess program impact if selected offenders decline to participate after the randomization process (Hayes, 2005; Hayes & Daly, 2003; Kurki, 2000; McCold & Wachtel, 1998; Morris, 2002).”
• Family Group Conferencing and Re‐Offending Among First‐Time Juvenile Offenders: The Indianapolis Experiment (2007, background): “In J. Hudson, B. Galaway, A. Morris, & G. Maxwell (Eds.)”