 |
Long Term Effects of Restorative Justice Conferencing: Do Emotional Dynamics Influence Offending?
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Rossner ASC Submission 2007
4
and shared morality. There were also controls for age, sex, and race. This allows us to see if the theory of interaction ritual holds up under empirical analysis. Findings
This analysis shows that conferences that are rhythmically balanced have
significantly higher levels of group solidarity. While this analysis produces many different results, I will focus on only a few here (See Rossner 2008 for more detailed descriptions of findings). First, all the experiments were combined in one regression (Table 1). Here, there is very strong evidence that all variables are involved in the production of both solidarity and a shared morality. However, it is interesting to note that the strongest effect was for the treatment variable, indicating that there is something going on in conferences that is missing from courtroom interactions. Interestingly, there is weaker evidence that these items are related to shared morality in court. However, shame is working opposite the expected direction. It seems that displays of shame are contributing to both solidarity and shared morality.
The most successful experiment in terms of reoffending was the juvenile violence
experiment (JVC) (Sherman et al 2000). While the other experiments did not produce a change in offending, the JVC experiment reduced offending by 38% for the conference group, a statistical and substantively significant drop in offending. Because of this, this experiment may be the most interesting to look at in terms of interaction ritual. When the regressions were run on this experiment, we find that shame no longer plays a role in creating solidarity (Table 3). However, it is still clear that rhythm and balance are contributing to solidarity, but not necessarily shared morality. Again, the treatment variable is the strongest predictor of solidarity, and in fact the only predictor of shared morality.
B
SE
B
SE
shame
0.126 **
0.020
0.033
0.021
disruptions
-0.228 **
0.054
-0.092 **
0.055
balance
0.202 **
0.026
0.044
0.027
treatment
0.501 **
0.058
0.696 **
0.059
age
-0.014
0.003
-0.131 **
0.003
sex
0.012
0.065
0.028
0.065
aboriginal
0.028
0.127
0.021
0.129
** p < .05, * p<.01
Ritual outcomes (N=912)
Solidarity
Shared Morality
Table 1. Standardized regression coefficents representing the efffect of ritual ingredients on group solidarity and shared morality- All Experiments
|
| | Authors: Rossner, Meredith. |
|
| |
|
|
Rossner ASC Submission 2007
4
and shared morality. There were also controls for age, sex, and race. This allows us to
see if the theory of interaction ritual holds up under empirical analysis.
Findings
This analysis shows that conferences that are rhythmically balanced have
significantly higher levels of group solidarity. While this analysis produces many
different results, I will focus on only a few here (See Rossner 2008 for more detailed
descriptions of findings). First, all the experiments were combined in one regression
(Table 1). Here, there is very strong evidence that all variables are involved in the
production of both solidarity and a shared morality. However, it is interesting to note that
the strongest effect was for the treatment variable, indicating that there is something
going on in conferences that is missing from courtroom interactions. Interestingly, there
is weaker evidence that these items are related to shared morality in court. However,
shame is working opposite the expected direction. It seems that displays of shame are
contributing to both solidarity and shared morality.
The most successful experiment in terms of reoffending was the juvenile violence
experiment (JVC) (Sherman et al 2000). While the other experiments did not produce a
change in offending, the JVC experiment reduced offending by 38% for the conference
group, a statistical and substantively significant drop in offending. Because of this, this
experiment may be the most interesting to look at in terms of interaction ritual. When the
regressions were run on this experiment, we find that shame no longer plays a role in
creating solidarity (Table 3). However, it is still clear that rhythm and balance are
contributing to solidarity, but not necessarily shared morality. Again, the treatment
variable is the strongest predictor of solidarity, and in fact the only predictor of shared
morality.
B
SE
B
SE
shame
0.126 **
0.020
0.033
0.021
disruptions
-0.228 **
0.054
-0.092 **
0.055
balance
0.202 **
0.026
0.044
0.027
treatment
0.501 **
0.058
0.696 **
0.059
age
-0.014
0.003
-0.131 **
0.003
sex
0.012
0.065
0.028
0.065
aboriginal
0.028
0.127
0.021
0.129
** p < .05, * p<.01
Ritual outcomes (N=912)
Solidarity
Shared Morality
Table 1. Standardized regression coefficents representing the efffect of
ritual ingredients on group solidarity and shared morality- All
Experiments
|
|
 Convention | | Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
