This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by VAN VOORHIS, P. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Restitution Outcome and Probationers' Assessments of Restitution

The Effects of Moral Development

University of Cincinnati

This article reports the impact of Kohlberg's moral development stages on probationers' receptivity to the intents of financial restitution. Effects of these perceptions and their interactions with moral development on restitution outcome are also presented. Indepth interviews furnished data needed to diagnose moral development and construct ratings of offenders' perceptions. Compliance data were extracted from probation records and interviews with probation officers. Results suggest that low maturity offenders were more likely to identify with deterrent and instrumental intents; high maturity offenders oriented to reparative and rehabilitative intents. Among the offenders as a whole, adherence to notions of reparation and concern for the victim facilitated compliance, whereas perceptions of restitution as lenient and a good deal had adverse impacts. Orientations distinguishing low maturity successes from failures were dysfunctional ones (e.g., restitution is a good deal, lenient, or an inconvenience). An orientation to reparation distinguished high maturity successes from failures.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 12, No. 3, 259-287 (1985)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854885012003001


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. B. Ruback and M. H. Bergstrom Economic Sanctions in Criminal Justice: Purposes, Effects, and Implications Criminal Justice and Behavior, April 1, 2006; 33(2): 242 - 273. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Burnett and S. Maruna The kindness of prisoners: Strengths-based resettlement in theory and in action JCriminology and Criminal Justice, February 1, 2006; 6(1): 83 - 106. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Bazemore and C. Erbe Operationalizing the Community Variable in Offender Reintegration:: Theory and Practice for Developing Intervention Social Capital Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, July 1, 2003; 1(3): 246 - 275. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Presser and P. Van Voorhis Values and Evaluation: Assessing Processes and Outcomes of Restorative Justice Programs Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2002; 48(1): 162 - 188. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Pitts Korrectional Karaoke: New Labour and the Zombification of Youth Justice Youth Justice, August 1, 2001; 1(2): 3 - 16. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Levrant, F. T. Cullen, B. Fulton, and J. F. Wozniak Reconsidering Restorative Justice: The Corruption of Benevolence Revisited? Crime Delinquency, January 1, 1999; 45(1): 3 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. O. HALEY Apology and Pardon: Learning From Japan American Behavioral Scientist, March 1, 1998; 41(6): 842 - 867. [Abstract]

				P. VAN VOORHIS, S. LEE BROWNING, M. SIMON, and J. GORDON The Meaning of Punishment: Inmates' Orientation to the Prison Experience The Prison Journal, June 1, 1997; 77(2): 135 - 167. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. VAN VOORHIS A Cross Classification of Five Offender Typologies: Issues of Construct and Predictive Validity Criminal Justice and Behavior, March 1, 1988; 15(1): 109 - 124. [Abstract]