Restoring Choice: The Relationship Between Offense Seriousness,Intervening Time,and Victims’ Responses to the Offer of Restorative Interventions

This study investigates victims’ responses to the offer of involvement in a restorative intervention. It tests the hypotheses that victims’ choices are related to the seriousness of the offense (H1), and that this relationship is moderated by how long after the offense the restorative intervention is offered (H2). A cross-sectional, between-subjects design was used, drawing on data from 256 offenses collected for operational purposes by a restorative justice service. Victims of medium-seriousness offenses were most likely to choose indirect and direct reparation. Intervening time moderated the relationship between seriousness and victim choice: victims of low-seriousness offenses became more likely to choose community reparation with time, victims of medium-seriousness offenses became less likely to choose direct or indirect reparation, and there was no change with time for victims of the most serious offenses. These results suggest nonlinear relationships between seriousness, intervening time, and victim choice. Although more complex and in different directions than anticipated, they lend some support to both hypotheses. The study highlights qualitative differences between types of restorative interventions, points to a significant disparity between victims’ choices and processes the literature suggests are of most benefit, and raises questions regarding when and how restorative interventions should be offered.