A Restorative Justice Intervention in United States Prisons: Implications of Intervention Timing, Age, and Gender on Recidivism

• Published date: 01 September 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X221086555
• Author: Kailey A. Richner,Sandra Pavelka,Dennis E. McChargue
• Date: 01 September 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X221086555

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2023, Vol. 67(12) 1193 –1210

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X221086555

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

A Restorative Justice

Intervention in United States

Prisons: Implications of

Intervention Timing, Age, and

Gender on Recidivism

Kailey A. Richner1, Sandra Pavelka2,

and Dennis E. McChargue1

Abstract

Restorative justice seeks to balance the needs of the victim, offender, and community

by repairing the harm caused by crime and wrongdoing and improving the prosocial

competencies and accountability of the offender in response to an offense. Restorative

justice interventions (RJIs) offer an alternative method to reduce harm and short- and

long-term recidivism. However, empirical validation of mechanisms and moderating

factors warrant additional inquiry within jail and prison settings. Thus, the authors

sought to examine RJI delivery timing on recidivism outcomes with age and gender

as moderators. A final sample of 1,316 individuals (49.8% female) incarcerated in

several United States prisons received an RJI between 2001 and 2017. RJI timing

did not relate to binary recidivism. However, women recidivated less than men

and older individual recidivated less than younger individuals. For the subsample of

reoffenders (n = 283), RJIs delivered closer to release increased the amount of time

before recidivism. Delivering RJIs closer to release from prison may allow for other

community programs to intervene and reduce recidivism even further.

Keywords

restorative justice intervention, timing, gender, age, prison, jail

1University of Nebraska–Lincoln, USA

2Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, USA

Corresponding Author:

Dennis E. McChargue, Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska Lincoln, 238 Burnett Hall,

Lincoln, NE 68588-0308, USA.

Email: dmcchargue2@unl.edu

1086555IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X221086555International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyRichner et al.

research-article2022

1194 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 67(12)

Restorative justice seeks to balance the needs of the victim, offender, and community

by repairing the harm caused by crime and wrongdoing and improving the prosocial

competencies and accountability of the offender in response to an offense (Bazemore,

1997; Zehr, 1990, 2015). This process holds promise in reducing harm and short- and

long- term recidivism rates (Dhami et al., 2009; Maryfield et al., 2020; Pavelka, 2016;

Pavelka & Thomas, 2019; Wallace & Wylie, 2013). The fundamental aspects of restor-

ative justice focus on in-person dialogue in which the offender and victim or other

members of the community work with justice professionals to resolve matters arising

from a crime. While most settings allow the implementation of direct victim offender

dialogue and victim impact panels, Restorative Justice Interventions (RJIs) commonly

differ in prison and jail settings and employ other accepted restorative justice activities

(Daly, 2016; Dhami et al., 2009).

RJIs are seen as effective interactive and communicative driven programs targeted

at increasing a participant’s knowledge and awareness of the short- and long-term

harm that crime inflicts on victims and their communities, as well as providing an

opportunity for the expression of thoughts and emotions resulting from victimization

while building upon participants’ self-efficacy skills and competencies (Dhami et al.,

2009; Pavelka & Seymour, 2019; Wallace & Wylie, 2013). The curriculum is delivered

in a solution-focused, structured, and contingency-based model using positive model-

ing, reinforcement, discussions, exercises, and constructive feedback. The program is

skill-based learning which helps in enhancing participant’s strengths and important

skills by building rapport, increasing knowledge, displaying accountability and

responsibility, and practicing skills through discussions and practical exercises which

may include, increasing an offender’s understanding of victim empathy and the harm

they inflicted on the victim, the survivor and the community, mock apology letters to

the victim by the offender, restitution and reparation, community service projects, and

discussions in group settings (Dhami et al., 2009; Pavelka & Seymour, 2019; Wallace

& Wylie, 2013). Each curriculum section builds upon the previous section to culmi-

nate in achievement of expectations and desired outcomes for the course.

The study described within follows a similar curriculum within a brief 8-hour

course and has shown significant reductions in recidivism 6 years post-treatment

among individuals on probation (Kennedy et al., 2019). The current study examines

the long-term effectiveness of the same brief RJI among those who paroled from

prison. Relative to prison populations, RJIs show moderate reductions in recidivism

compared to treatment as usual groups (Bergseth & Bouffard, 2012; Duwe, 2012;

Forgays & DeMilio, 2005; Koss, 2014; Latimer et al., 2005; McChargue, et al., 2020).

These effects are consistent with meta-analytic data and results from individual studies

showing the various tools employed within RJIs result in lower levels of recidivism

and/or higher levels of victim satisfaction among adolescents involved in probation or

diversion, individuals experiencing domestic violence, individuals in a child welfare

setting, and in school and community organizations (Latimer et al., 2005; Maryfield

et al., 2020; Wilson et al., 2017). However, RJIs have room for improvement with

delivery considerations and identification of mechanisms increasing or decreasing

efficacy within prisons and other restorative justice settings (Albrecht, 2011; Dhami

et al., 2009; Latimer et al., 2005).