Cited by 2Criminal Justice and PenologyLegal and Social Justice StudiesCrime Patterns and Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

What Do Meaningful Consequences and Fair and Proportionate Accountability Mean to Youth Offered Extrajudicial Sanctions in Ontario?

Hyde, Carolyn, Marinos, Voula, Innocente, Nathan·2016·Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice

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

Crossref · 10.3138/cjccj.2014.e33

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. 10.3138/cjccj.51.2.131 · DOI
  2. 10.3138/cjccj.46.3.231 · DOI
  3. Broeking Julia, 2010, Youth Justice, 10, 40, 10.1177/1473225409356759 · DOI
  4. Burr, Vivien 1995 An Introduction to Social Constructions. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203299968. · DOI
  5. Campbell, Kathryn 2005 Understanding Youth Justice in Canada. Toronto: Pearson.
  6. Carrington Peter J., 2008, Criminal Justice Policy Review, 19, 349, 10.1177/0887403407307240 · DOI
  7. Cesaroni Carla, 2010, Youth Justice, 10, 107, 10.1177/1473225410369290 · DOI
  8. Clarke Laura H., 2008, Qualitative Health Research, 18, 1084, 10.1177/1049732308320113 · DOI
  9. Creswell John W., 2012, Thousand Oaks
  10. Danby Susan, 2004, Australian Educational Researcher, 31, 35, 10.1007/BF03249527 · DOI
  11. Department of Justice Canada, 2013, Ottawa:
  12. Doob Anthony N., 2004, Responding to Youth Crime in Canada
  13. Doob Anthony N., 2006, Punishment and Society, 8, 223, 10.1177/1462474506062106 · DOI
  14. Feeley Malcolm, 1979, The Process Is the Punishment
  15. Goodwin-DeFaria Christine, 2012, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 20, 343, 10.1163/157181812X652607 · DOI
  16. 10.3138/cjccj.52.5.527 · DOI
  17. Guest Greg, 2006, Field Methods, 18, 59, 10.1177/1525822X05279903 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.3138/cjccj.46.3.367 · DOI
  19. Hartnagel Timothy F., 2004, Criminal Justice, 4, 355, 10.1177/1466802504048654 · DOI
  20. Kwok Siu-ming, 2008, Journal of Gang Research, 15, 1
  21. Lane Jodi, 2002, Crime and Delinquency, 48, 431, 10.1177/0011128702048003004 · DOI
  22. Lochner Lance, 2007, American Economic Review, 97, 444, 10.1257/aer.97.1.444 · DOI
  23. Maclure Richard, 2003, Policy Studies, 24, 135, 10.1080/0144287032000171019 · DOI
  24. Matheson Jennifer L., 2008, Substance Use and Misuse, 43, 1027, 10.1080/10826080801914287 · DOI
  25. Minaker Joanne C., 2009, Youth, Crime, and Society: Issues of Power and Justice
  26. Peterson-Badali Michele, 2001, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45, 593, 10.1177/0306624X01455005 · DOI
  27. Prout Alan, 1997, In Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood
  28. Roberts Julian V., 2003, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 19, 413, 10.1177/1043986203259124 · DOI
  29. 10.3138/cjccj.2011.E.43 · DOI
  30. Strauss Anselm, 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques

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