The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What Do Meaningful Consequences and Fair and Proportionate Accountability Mean to Youth Offered Extrajudicial Sanctions in Ontario?
Abstract
Extrajudicial sanctions (EJS) under the YCJA are meant to make youth accountable in a fair and proportionate way and to be a meaningful consequence, yet little is known about whether these goals are being accomplished from the perspective of youth. This exploratory study was aimed at examining the perceptions of young persons who have accepted an EJS in a single courthouse in Ontario. Interviews were conducted with youth (N = 20) who provided critical insight into their views about valuable programs, such as counselling, and less valuable aspects, such as writing an essay about the impact of having a criminal record. Some youth revealed that the process of coming to court to be offered an EJS and accept it was more meaningful and made them more accountable than the requirements of the program itself. This research underscores the importance of considering the perspective of young people if the youth justice system is to accomplish its key goals. Such an approach may not only lead to responses that have a greater impact on their behaviour, but it may also, in turn, shift them to be more active and engaged participants in taking responsibility for their actions and the process of justice.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The consensus is that assessment tools do not accurately reflect their risk/need levels and treatment needs (Hyde et al., 2016; Lockwood et al., 2018; Wiley et al., 2020).”
From Colonization, Normalization and Risk-Assessment: The Case of Youth Criminal Justice Act and Correctional Overrepresentation of Indigenous Youth in Canada (2025) · cites this paper as Hyde et al., 2016
In the citing paper
“Secondly, their frustrating entanglement in lengthy extrajudicial-sanction programs that only help to thicken their evaluation dossiers and increase their chances of receiving future secure custodial sentences (Hyde et al., 2016).”
From Colonization, Normalization and Risk-Assessment: The Case of Youth Criminal Justice Act and Correctional Overrepresentation of Indigenous Youth in Canada (2025) · cites this paper as Hyde et al., 2016
In the citing paper
“As a result, they are more likely to show greater risk/needs factors upon assessment (Hyde et al., 2016; Lockwood et al., 2018; Wiley et al., 2020).”
From Colonization, Normalization and Risk-Assessment: The Case of Youth Criminal Justice Act and Correctional Overrepresentation of Indigenous Youth in Canada (2025) · cites this paper as Hyde et al., 2016
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- 10.3138/cjccj.51.2.131 · DOI
- 10.3138/cjccj.46.3.231 · DOI
- Broeking Julia, 2010, Youth Justice, 10, 40, 10.1177/1473225409356759 · DOI
- Burr, Vivien 1995 An Introduction to Social Constructions. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203299968. · DOI
- Campbell, Kathryn 2005 Understanding Youth Justice in Canada. Toronto: Pearson.
- Carrington Peter J., 2008, Criminal Justice Policy Review, 19, 349, 10.1177/0887403407307240 · DOI
- Cesaroni Carla, 2010, Youth Justice, 10, 107, 10.1177/1473225410369290 · DOI
- Clarke Laura H., 2008, Qualitative Health Research, 18, 1084, 10.1177/1049732308320113 · DOI
- Creswell John W., 2012, Thousand Oaks
- Danby Susan, 2004, Australian Educational Researcher, 31, 35, 10.1007/BF03249527 · DOI
- Department of Justice Canada, 2013, Ottawa:
- Doob Anthony N., 2004, Responding to Youth Crime in Canada
- Doob Anthony N., 2006, Punishment and Society, 8, 223, 10.1177/1462474506062106 · DOI
- Feeley Malcolm, 1979, The Process Is the Punishment
- Goodwin-DeFaria Christine, 2012, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 20, 343, 10.1163/157181812X652607 · DOI
- 10.3138/cjccj.52.5.527 · DOI
- Guest Greg, 2006, Field Methods, 18, 59, 10.1177/1525822X05279903 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3138/cjccj.46.3.367 · DOI
- Hartnagel Timothy F., 2004, Criminal Justice, 4, 355, 10.1177/1466802504048654 · DOI
- Kwok Siu-ming, 2008, Journal of Gang Research, 15, 1
- Lane Jodi, 2002, Crime and Delinquency, 48, 431, 10.1177/0011128702048003004 · DOI
- Lochner Lance, 2007, American Economic Review, 97, 444, 10.1257/aer.97.1.444 · DOI
- Maclure Richard, 2003, Policy Studies, 24, 135, 10.1080/0144287032000171019 · DOI
- Matheson Jennifer L., 2008, Substance Use and Misuse, 43, 1027, 10.1080/10826080801914287 · DOI
- Minaker Joanne C., 2009, Youth, Crime, and Society: Issues of Power and Justice
- Peterson-Badali Michele, 2001, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45, 593, 10.1177/0306624X01455005 · DOI
- Prout Alan, 1997, In Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood
- Roberts Julian V., 2003, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 19, 413, 10.1177/1043986203259124 · DOI
- 10.3138/cjccj.2011.E.43 · DOI
- Strauss Anselm, 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Barmaki, R. (2025) · International Criminology · doi:10.1007/s43576-025-00170-8 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Hyde, C., Marinos, V., & Innocente, N.
- Affiliations
- Centennial College (CA)
- Brock University (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice
- Published
- 2016-04
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 194-220
- ISSN
- 1707-7753 (ISSN-L)
- 1911-0219
- OpenAlex
- W2345260285
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 3.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal and Social Justice Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Keywords
- juvenile justice, Youth Criminal Justice Act, youth perspectives, accountability, proportionality, youth participation, criminal records, Ontario
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Do Meaningful Consequences and Fair and Proportionate Accountability Mean to Youth Offered Extrajudicial Sanctions in Ontario? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3138/cjccj.2014.e33
- The paper
- Hyde, C., Marinos, V., & Innocente, N. (2016). What Do Meaningful Consequences and Fair and Proportionate Accountability Mean to Youth Offered Extrajudicial Sanctions in Ontario? Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2014.e33
