Restitution to victims is rarely paid in full. One reason for low rates of payments is that offenders lack financial resources. Beyond ability to pay, however, we argue that fair treatment has implications for offender behavior. This study, a survey of probationers who owed restitution, investigated the links between (a) ability to pay, (b) beliefs about restitution and the criminal justice system, and (c) restitution payment, both the amount paid and number of payments. Results indicate that perceived fair treatment by probation staff—those most directly involved with the collection of restitution payments—was significantly associated with greater payment, net of past payment behavior, intention to pay, and ability to pay. Because restitution has potentially rehabilitative aspects if offenders pay more of the court-ordered amount and if they make regular monthly payments, how fairly probation staff treat probationers has implications for both victims and for the criminal justice system.
AposporiE.AlpertG. (1993). Research note: The role of differential experience with the criminal justice system in changes in perceptions of severity of legal sanctions over time. Crime & Delinquency, 39, 184-194.
2.
BeckettK.HarrisA. (2011). On cash and conviction: Monetary sanctions as misguided policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 10, 509-537.
3.
BeijersbergenK. A.DirkzwagerA. J. E.NieuwbeertaP. (2016). Reoffending after release: Does procedural justice during imprisonment matter?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 63-82.
4.
BraithwaiteJ. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BuchananG. M.SeligmanM. (2013). Explanatory style. New York, NY: Routledge.
6.
ButtsJ. A.SnyderH. N. (1992). Restitution and juvenile recidivism (NCJ 137774). Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.
7.
CaseyS.DayA.HowellsK.WardT. (2007). Assessing suitability for offender rehabilitation: Development and validation of the Treatment Readiness Questionnaire. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1427-1440.
8.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
DayA.HowellsK.CaseyS.WardT.ChambersJ. C.BirgdenA. (2009). Assessing treatment readiness in violent offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 618-635.
11.
DickmanM. (2009). Should crime pay: A critical assessment of the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996. California Law Review, 97, 1687-1718.
12.
DillmanD. A. (2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
13.
FarringtonD. P.WelshB. C. (2005). Randomized experiments in criminology: What have we learned in the last two decades?Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 9-38.
14.
GrahamJ. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576.
15.
GrauE.PotterF.WilliamsS.Diaz-TenaN. (2006). Nonresponse adjustment using logistic regression: To weight or not to weight? In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association (pp. 3073-3080).
16.
HarrisA.EvansH.BeckettK. (2010). Drawing blood from stones: Legal debt and social inequality in the contemporary United States. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1753-1799.
17.
HarrisA.EvansH.BeckettK. (2011). Courtesy stigma and monetary sanctions: Toward a socio-cultural theory of punishment. American Sociological Review, 76, 234-264.
18.
HaynesS. H.CaresA. C.RubackR. B. (2014). Juvenile economic sanctions: An analysis of their imposition, payment, and effect on recidivism. Criminology and Public Policy, 13, 31-60.
19.
HaynesS. H.CaresA. C.RubackR. B. (2015). Reducing the harm of criminal victimization: The role of restitution. Violence and Victims, 30, 450-469.
20.
HeinzJ.GalawayB.HudsonJ. (1976). Restitution or parole: A follow-up study of adult offenders. The Social Science Review, 50, 148-156.
21.
HillsmanS. T.MahoneyG.ColeG.AuchterB. (1987). Fines as criminal sanctions. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
22.
HillsmanS. T. (1989). Fines and day fines. Crime and Justice, 12, 49-98.
23.
HudsonJ.GalawayB.ChesneyS. (1976). When criminals repay their victims: A survey of restitution programs. Judicature, 60, 313-321.
24.
JacksonJ.BradfordB.HoughM.MyhillA.QuintonP.TylerT. R. (2012). Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology, 52, 1051-1071.
25.
KaiserK. A.HoltfreterK. (2016). An integrated theory of specialized court programs: Using procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence to promote offender compliance and rehabilitation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 45-62.
26.
LeeK. J.CarlinJ. B. (2010). Multiple imputation for missing data: Fully conditional specification versus multivariate normal imputation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 171, 624-632.
27.
LindE. A.TylerT. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media.
28.
LittleR. J.RubinD. B. (1989). The analysis of social science data with missing values. Sociological Methods and Research, 18, 292-326.
29.
McClellandK. A.AlpertG. P. (1985). Factor analysis applied to magnitude estimates of punishment seriousness: Patterns of individual differences. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1, 307-318.
30.
MurphyK.TylerT. (2008). Procedural justice and compliance behaviour: The mediating role of emotions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 652-668.
31.
National Center for Victims of Crime. (2011). Making restitution real: Five case studies on improving restitution collection. National Center for Victims of Crime: Washington, DC.
OuelletteJ. A.WoodW. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 54-74.
34.
OutlawM. C.RubackR. B. (1999). Predictors and outcomes of victim restitution orders. Justice Quarterly, 16, 847-869.
35.
PaternosterR.BrameR.BachmanR.ShermanL. W. (1997). Do fair procedures matter? The effect of procedural justice on spouse assault. Law & Society Review, 31, 163-204.
36.
PetersonC.SchwartzS. M.SeligmanM. E. (1981). Self-blame and depressive symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 253-259.
37.
ReisigM. D.BainS. N. (2016). University legitimacy and student compliance with academic dishonesty codes: A partial test of the process-based model of self-regulation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 63-82.
38.
RubackR. B.GladfelterA. S.LantzB. (2014). Paying restitution: Experimental analysis of the effects of information and rationale. Criminology & Public Policy, 13, 405-436.
39.
RubackR. B.HoskinsS. N.CaresA. C.FeldmeyerB. (2006). Perception and payment of economic sanctions: A survey of offenders. Federal Probation, 73, 26-31.
40.
RubackR. B.RuthG. R.ShafferJ. N. (2005). Assessing the impact of statutory change: A statewide multilevel analysis of restitution orders in Pennsylvania. Crime & Delinquency, 51, 318-342.
41.
RubackR. B.ShafferJ. N.LogueM. A. (2004). The imposition and effects of restitution in four Pennsylvania counties: Effects of size of county and specialized collection units. Crime & Delinquency, 50, 168-188.
42.
ShermanL. (1993). Policing domestic violence: Experiments and dilemmas. New York, NY: Free Press.
43.
SlocumL. A.WileyS. A.EsbensenF. (2016). The importance of being satisfied: A longitudinal exploration of police contact, procedural injustice, and subsequent delinquency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 7-26.
44.
SparksR.BottomsA. E.HayW. (1996). Prisons and the problem of order. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
45.
TylerT. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46.
TylerT. R. (2007). Procedural justice and the courts. Court Review, 44, 26-31.
47.
Van BuurenS.BoshuizenH. C.KnookD. L. (1999). Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 18, 681-694.
48.
WenzelM. (2002). Principles of procedural fairness in reminder letters: A field-experiment (Centre for Tax System Integrity Working Paper No. 42). Canberra: The Australian National University.
49.
WetzelJ.LowenkampC. T. (2011). Who cares what offenders think? New insight from offender surveys. Federal Probation, 75, 13-15.
50.
WhiteI. R.RoystonP.WoodA. M. (2011). Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice. Statistics in Medicine, 30, 377-399.
51.
WuW.JiaF.EndersC. (2015). A comparison of imputation strategies for ordinal missing data on Likert scale variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 484-503.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
