skip navigation


Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 199563 Find in a Library
Title: Role of Shame, Guilt, and Remorse in Restorative Justice Processes for Young People (From Restorative Justice: Theoretical Foundations, P 267-284, 2002, Elmar G.M. Weitekamp, Hans-Jurgen Kerner, eds., -- See NCJ-199553)
Author(s): Gabrielle Maxwell; Allison Morris
Date Published: 2002
Page Count: 18
Sponsoring Agency: Willan Publishing
Portland, OR 97213-3644
Sale Source: Willan Publishing
c/o ISBS, 5804 N.E. Hassalo Street
Portland, OR 97213-3644
United States of America
Type: Literature Review
Format: Book (Softbound)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This chapter discusses shame, guilt, and remorse and the role they play in the criminal justice process.
Abstract: The understanding of shame and its associated emotions point to the potential power and danger of shame and the need to manage it carefully if negative consequences are to be avoided. The implication for criminological theories of the consequences of shaming sanctions suggest that such sanctions are likely to reduce self-esteem, and shame or guilt may or may not result depending on the personality of the person that is being sanctioned. One model of crime control has five key areas: (1) shame and guilt are intimately entwined; (2) disapproval is the mechanism for invoking remorse; (3) the shame that matters most is the shame of people most cared about; (4) the distinction between stigmatic shaming and reintegrative shaming; and (5) communitarian societies are able to deliver both potent shaming and reintegrative shaming. Stigmatic shaming can have a negative effect on self-esteem and involves the separation and segregation of defendants. Reintegrative shaming means that the offense rather than the offender is condemned and the offender is reintegrated with rather than rejected by society. In restorative conferencing that are based on reintegrative shaming, there is danger that the disapproval that is intended to be reintegrative might be taken by the offender to be stigmatic. A poorly managed conference could increase the offender’s shame without resulting in an effective apology. Family group conferences in New Zealand are not scripted and the format is in the hands of the participants that are consulted about the venue and timing of the meeting. One of the primary aims of these conferences is to give offenders a sense of the consequences of their actions and an understanding of how the victims feel. This is done not by a process that emphasizes disapproval or shaming, but by a process that emphasizes the effects of the crime on the victim. Encouraging offenders to feel remorse about the harm they have caused and to apologize for what they have done are critical restorative values. 2 notes, 40 references
Main Term(s): Restitution; Victim-offender reconciliation
Index Term(s): Alternatives to institutionalization; Conflict resolution; Intermediate sanctions; Rehabilitation; Restitution programs; Victim prosecution of offender
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.