Bibliographic record
Abstract
‘Restorative justice’ is a process meant to involve those who have a stake in a specific offense and to collectively identify and address harms, needs and obligations in order to heal at the individual, family and community levels. As Braithwaite (2020) points out, restorative justice sees crime as an imbalance of social relationships and harms done to the victim, family and community. A restorative approach fundamentally differs from a traditional criminal justice approach because achieving justice is about making amends, restoring the relationships and addressing the offender’s accountability and the victim’s reparations of harms. Such an approach also includes problem-solving policing or ‘restorative policing’, including crisis intervention teams, on-scene victim assistance units for domestic violence calls, or police-facilitated family group conferencing for juveniles. The concept of ‘therapeutic jurisprudence’ originates from the function of mental health law, focusing on the therapeutic impact of legal rules and procedures, as well as the psychological competency and wellbeing of offenders involved in the court process. Therapeutic jurisprudence focuses on the reintegration of the offender into society by addressing rehabilitation through cognitive-behavioural intervention. Origins and evolution of restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence Restorative justice reflects ancient and Indigenous practices employed in cultures around the globe. For example, ‘talking circles’ – originating from Indigenous tradition – are a core component of the restorative process, using a structural framework to build relationships and to address conflict within a community. In the modern context, restorative justice emerged in the 1970s as mediation or reconciliation between victims and offenders. The positive response by the victims led to the first victim– offender reconciliation programme in Ontario, Canada. The concept subsequently acquired various names, such as victim– offender mediation, as it spread through North America and Europe in the 1980s and 1990s. ‘Family group conferencing’ started in New Zealand in 1989, to respond to Māori people’s concerns with the number of their children being removed from their homes by the courts. In Australia, a community-based group – the Aboriginal Youth Night Patrol – supports the welfare of young people by providing safety for those at risk of danger or anti-social behaviour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.184 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".