Traditional sentencing aims are discussed and defined, and the concept of reparation by offenders is explored. The primary justifying aim of CS as a criminal sanction is concluded to be the moral precepts, particularly the notion of justice, conveyed to the offenders and to the public, rather than the material benefit afforded victims. Several areas of recent social-psychological theory are outlined to support the contention that doing justice through reparation contributes to the maintenance of social control. The relationships between the postulated reparative aim and other sentencing aims are analyzed, and the significance of CS for sentencing theory and some of its implications for sentencing practice are indicated. To test the effects of CS on offenders' attitudes, the attitudes of samples of offenders in Britain given CS (n=48), a fine (n=42), and probation (n=42) were compared. The CS subjects were found to be significantly more positive than the others on several measures of attitude toward the sentence and tended to appreciate the moral principles represented in the sentence. They were also more positive than the other subjects in attitudes toward court procedure and court staff. The CS group differed significantly from the other groups on only a few measures of broad social and moral attitudes. Tabular data and 166 references are provided, and study instruments are appended. (Author abstract modified)