Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) rely on community volunteers to operate; approximately one-quarter of these volunteers have lived experience of sexual violence. Research on the motivations of these victim/survivor volunteers has not utilised general community samples of victim/survivors but has focused on those victim/survivors who already volunteer with CoSA. This research addresses this gap. It involved a survey of 193 victim/survivors and investigated victim/survivors’ purported reasons for wanting or not wanting to volunteer in a CoSA. The findings may assist CoSA programs to enact evidence-based strategies for recruiting and supporting victim/survivor volunteers.
AlmondPBatesAWilsonC (2015) Circles of support and accountability: criminal justice volunteers as the ‘deliberative public’. British Journal of Community Justice13(1): 25–40.
2.
ArmstrongSChistyakovaYMackenzieS, et al. (2008) Circles of Support and Accountability: Consideration of the feasibility of pilots in Scotland. Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research. https://www.sccjr.ac.uk/publications/circles-of-support-accountability-consideration-of-the-feasibility-of-pilots-in-scotland/
3.
ArmstrongSWillsD (2014) A Review of the Fife Circles of Support and Accountability Project Commissioned by Sacro – Final Report. Glasgow: Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research.
4.
BandyR (2015) The impact of sex offender policies on victims. In: WrightR (ed) Sex Offender Laws, Second Edition: Failed Policies, New Directions. New York: Springer, 358–380.
5.
BatesAWilliamsDWilsonC, et al. (2014) Circles south east: the first 10 years 2002–2012. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology58(7): 861–885.
6.
BohmertMNDuweGHippleNK (2018) Evaluating restorative justice Circles of Support and Accountability: can social support overcome structural barriers?International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology62(3): 739–758.
7.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
8.
BraunVClarkeV (2019) Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health11(4): 589–597.
9.
Burke JohnsonROnwuegbuzieATurnerL (2007) Toward a definition of mixed methods research. . Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(2): 112–133.
10.
BurtonACullenFBurtonV, et al. (2020) Belief in redeemability and punitive public opinion: “once a criminal, always a criminal” revisited. . Criminal Justice and Behavior47(6): 712–732.
ClarkHQuadaraA (2010) Insights into Sexual Assault Perpetration: Giving Voice to Victim/Survivors’ Knowledge. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
CraunSSimmonsC (2012) Taking a seat at the table: sexual assault survivors’ views of sex offender registries. Victims & Offenders7(3): 312–326.
15.
CreswellJ (2015) Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In: Hesse-BiberSBurke JohnsonR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 57–71.
16.
Dancig-RosenbergHDaganN (2019) Retributarianism: a new individualization of punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy13: 129–137.
17.
DeathJRichardsKChatawayM, et al. (in press) Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice: Victim/Survivors’ Perspectives on Post-custodial Measures for People with Convictions for Sexual Offending. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
18.
Deogaonkar AnantR (2021) Retributivism: punishment and justification. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences16(1): 17–33.
19.
DoddS (2018) The punitive woman? Gender differences in public attitudes toward parole among an Australian sample. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology62(10): 3006–3022.
20.
DorocM (2013) Reintegration: The Contribution of Offence, Offender and Respondent Factors. Geelong: Deakin University.
21.
DoyleL (2015) Mixed methods. In: HenlyS (ed) Routledge International Handbook of Advanced Quantitative Methods in Nursing Research. London: Routledge, 411–422.
22.
DuffA (2003) Punishment, Communcation, and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
DuweG (2018) Can circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) significantly reduce sexual recidivism? Results from a randomized controlled trial in Minnesota. Journal of Experimental Criminology14(4): 463–484.
24.
ElliottIZajacGMeyerC (2013). Evaluability Assessment of the Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) Model. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243832.pdf.
25.
FarringtonP (2015). Circles of support and accountability: the role of social support in preventing sexual offender recidivism. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
26.
FederoffPMoranB (1997) Myths and misconceptions about sex offenders. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality6(4): 263–277.
27.
FloerschJLonghoferJKrankeD, et al. (2010) Integrating thematic, grounded theory and narrative analysis: a case study of adolescent psychotropic treatment. Qualitative Social Work9(3): 407–425.
28.
FoxK (2014) Restoring the social: offender reintegration in a risky world. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology38(3): 235–256.
29.
GarethTHayfieldNClarkeV, et al. (2017). Thematic analysis. In WilligCStainston RogersW (eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2
30.
GilliamMNovakMBohmertMN, et al. (2021) Desires and desirability of volunteers in CoSA programs. Sexual Abuse33(4): 406–433.
31.
GrantG (2014) Away days for sex offenders. Scottish Daily Mail1.
32.
HannemS (2011) Experiences in reconciling risk management and restorative justice: how Circles of Support and Accountability work restoratively in the risk society. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology57(3): 269–288.
33.
HannemSPetrunikM (2007) Circles of Support and Accountability: a community justice initiative for the reintegration of high risk sex offenders. Contemporary Justice Review10(2): 153–171.
34.
HermanSWassermanC (2001) A role for victims in offender rentry. Crime & Delinquency47(3): 428–445.
35.
HöingMBogaertsSVogelvangB (2016a) Helping sex offenders to desist offending: the gains and drains for CoSA volunteers – a review of the literature. Sexual Abuse28(5): 364–402.
36.
HöingMBogaertsSVogelvangB (2017) Volunteers in Circles of Support and Accountability: job demands, job resources, and outcomes. Sexual Abuse29(6): 541–562.
37.
HöingMPetrinaRDukeL, et al. (2016b) Community support for sex offender rehabilitation in. Europe European Journal of Criminology13(4): 491–516.
38.
HoughA (2015). Examining resilience, motivation and impact in volunteers working with sexual offenders. PhD thesis, University of York, York.
39.
JülichSLandonF (2017) Achieving justice outcomes: participants of project Restore’s restorative processes. In: ZinsstagEKeenanM (eds) Restorative Responses to Sexual Violence: Legal, Social and Therapeutic Dimensions. London: Routledge, 192–211.
40.
KerrNTullyRVöllmB (2018) Volunteering with sex offenders: the attitudes of volunteers towards sex offenders, their treatment, and rehabilitation. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment30(6): 659–675.
41.
KilpatrickDOttoR (1987) Constitutionally guaranteed participation in criminal proceedings for victims: potential effects on psychological functioning. Wayne Law Journal34(1): 7–28.
42.
Koon-MagninS (2015) Perceptions of and support for sex offender policies: testing Levenson, Brannon, Fortney, and Baker’s findings. Journal of Criminal Justice43(1): 80–88.
43.
KossM (2014) The RESTORE program of restorative justice for sex crimes: vision, process, and outcomes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence29(9): 1623–1660.
44.
LevensonJFortneyTBakerJ (2010) Views of sexual abuse professionals about sex offender notification policies. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology54(2): 150–168.
45.
LoweG (2017) Circles of support and accountability: an investigation of volunteer motivation and experiences, and the effect of the “sex offender” label on community attitudes towards individuals who have sexually offendedPhD thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland.
46.
ManciniCShieldsRMearsD, et al. (2010) Sex offender residence restriction laws: parental perceptions and public policy. Journal of Criminal Justice38(5): 1022–1030.
47.
MarshFWagerN (2015) Restorative justice in cases of sexual violence: exploring the views of the public and survivors. Probation Journal62(4): 336–356.
48.
MarunaSKingA (2009) Once a criminal, always a criminal? ‘Redeemability’ and the psychology of punitive public attitudes. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research15(1-2): 7–24.
McAvoyJ (2012). Birds of a feather? Irish public attitudes towards sex crime and sex offender reintegration. Is there a publically perceived scale of sexual deviance?Master's thesis, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin.
McGlynnCWestmarlandN (2019) Kaleidoscopic justice: sexual violence and victim-survivors’ perceptions of justice. Social & Legal Studies28(2): 179–201.
54.
McGlynnCWestmarlandNGoddennN (2012) ‘I just wanted him to hear me’: sexual violence and the possibilities of restorative justice. Journal of Law and Society39: 213–240.
55.
MillerK-L (2014) Relational caring: the use of the victim impact statement by sexually assaulted women. Violence and Victims29(5): 797–813.
56.
MuscatB (2009) An Evaluation of Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA): Final Report. Fresno: California State University.
57.
NowellLNorrisJWhiteD, et al. (2017) Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Inenrational Journal of Qualitative Methods16: 1–13.
58.
OrthU (2003) Punishment goals of crime victims. Law and Human Behavior27(2): 173–186.
59.
O’SullivanKHoldernessDHongX, et al. (2017) Public attitudes in Australia to the reintegration of ex-offenders: testing a belief in redeemability (BiR) scale. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research23: 409–424.
60.
OuelletteHApplegateBVukM (2017) The public's stance on prisoner reentry: policy support and personal acceptance. American Journal of Criminal Justice42: 768–789.
61.
PownallS (2016) Outrage Over Plans to Support Sexual Aabusers: Campaigners Rage at Rehabilitation Plan to Bring Sex Offenders on Fun Days Out. UK: Sunday Mirror.
RackleyEMcGlynnCJohnsonK, et al. (2021) Seeking justice and redress for victim-survivors of image-based sexual abuse. Feminist Legal Studies29(3): 293–322.
RichardsK (2022a) Desistance from Sexual Offending: The Role of Circles of Support and Accountability. London: Routledge.
66.
RichardsK (2022b) Survivors’ beliefs about the causes of sexual offending: an Australian study. Violence Against Women28(2): 551–572.
67.
RichardsKBironD (2024). Framing perpetrators of sexual violence who participate in Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA): an analysis of global print media reporting. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology68(15): 1485–1504. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x221113536
68.
RichardsKDeathJChatawayM, et al. (in press) Victim/Survivors’ Perspectives on the Reintegration of People with Convictions for Sexual Offending. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
RichardsKDeathJRonkenC (2021) What do victim/survivors of sexual violence think about Circles of Support and Accountability?Victims & Offenders16(6): 893–911.
71.
RichardsKDeathJRonkenC (2023) The views of victim/survivors of sexual violence about perpetrator post-release measures. Criminal Justice Studies36(4): 418–437.
72.
RichardsKMcCartanK (2018) Public opinion about Circles of Support and Accountability: a qualitative analysis. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal39(3): 400–416.
73.
RichardsKWeirB (in press) The experiences of victim/survivors of sexual violence who volunteer in Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA): an exploratory, qualitative study. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.
74.
RooneyL (2020) Gendered perceptions of child sexual abusers: the paradox of the “vulnerable other”. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice36(4): 559–581.
75.
SpooSKaylorLSchaafS, et al. (2018) Victims' attitudes toward sex offenders and sex offender legislation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(11): 3385–3407.
76.
Tamarit SumallaJHernández-HidalgoP (2018) Victims of child sexual abuse: understanding their need for justice. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice54: 11–20.
77.
TanXXChuCMTanG (2016) Factors contributing towards stigmatisation of offenders in Singapore. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law23(6): 956–969.
78.
ThakkerJ (2012) Public attitudes to sex offenders in New Zealand. Journal of Sexual Aggression18(2): 149–163.
TontodonatoPErezE (1994) Crime, punishment, and victim distress. International Review of Victimology3(1-2): 33–55.
81.
VaismoradiMTurunenHBondasT (2013) Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Sciences15(3): 398–405.
82.
von HirschA (2017) Deserved Criminal Sentences: An Overview. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
WeareSHulleyJ (2023) Interviewing male survivors of sexual violence and abuse: ethical and methodological considerations. Journal of Interpersonal Violence38(1-2): 2234–2254.
85.
WilsonCHudsonK (2024) Circles of support and accountability: restorative outcomes for the survivor volunteer. In: WinderBHockenKLievesleyR, etal (eds) Sexual Crime: Victims and Survivors. Cham: Springer International, 169–192.
86.
WilsonRCortoniFMcWhinnieA (2009) Circles of Support and Accountability: a Canadian replication of outcome findings. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment21(4): 412–430.
87.
WilsonRMcWhinnieAPichecaJ, et al. (2007a) Circles of Support and Accountability: engaging community volunteers in the management of high-risk sex offenders. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice46(1): 1–15.
88.
WilsonRPichecaJPrinzoM (2005). Circles of Support and Accountability: An Evaluation of the Pilot Project in South-Central Ontario. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada. https://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/092/r168_e.pdf
89.
WilsonRPichecaJPrinzoM (2007b) Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally-facilitated volunteerism in the community-based management of high-risk sexual offenders: part one – effects on participants and stakeholders. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice46(3): 289–302.
90.
WylieA (2003). Why standpoint matters. In FigueroaRHardingS (eds) Science and Other Cultures: Issues in Philosophy of Science and Technology (pp. 26–48). New York: Routledge.
