Dataset Information

Young Children's Understanding of Restorative Justice.

ABSTRACT: The present study investigated how young children understand the sophisticated concept of restorative justice in unintentional moral transgressions. A sex-balanced sample of 5-year-old (M = 5.67, SD = 0.34, 49.3% girls) and 8-year-old (M = 7.86, SD = 0.29, 46.0% girls) Chinese children (N = 193) participated in the study. In designing the materials, we distilled the multidimensional meanings of restorative justice into two stories, one addressing the theme of property violation and the other physical harm; both stories were set in an animal community. We then engaged the children in joint reading and an interview, during which they showed preference for the given treatments for the transgressor (two restorative treatments vs. two retributive treatments) and ranked two further sets of restorative vs. retributive treatments at the community level. The results indicated that most children favored restorative treatments over retributive treatments for a transgressor, and the 8-year-olds viewed psychological restoration more favorably and behavioral punishment less favorably than the 5-year-olds. The children also tended to endorse restorative treatments at the community level, revealing an understanding of the needs, and obligations of all parties concerned. Notably, more 8- than 5-year-olds showed a consistency in restorative orientation at this level. Interpreting our data through the lens of the Representational Redescription model, we attained a more refined account of young children's levels of understanding regarding restorative justice. These results provide insights for the early cultivation of restorative justice among young children, which is a cornerstone for its successful practice in any society.

SUBMITTER: Zhou Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8506036 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeRestorative Justice (RJ) as a practice and mindset is growing within academic medicine and health care. The authors aim to categorize the extent to which RJ training and practices have been researched, explored, and applied within health care, medicine, and academic contexts.MethodsIn July 2021, the authors conducted a scoping literature review, searching four databases for peer-reviewed articles and book chapters discussing RJ. Authors also used bibliography searches and personal knowledge to add relevant work. Reviewers independently screened article titles and abstracts, assessing the full texts of potentially eligible articles with inclusion and exclusion criteria. From each included article, authors extracted the publication year, first author's country of origin, specific screening criteria met, and the depth with which it discussed RJ.ResultsFrom 599 articles screened, 39 articles, and books were included (published 2001-2021). Twenty-five (64%) articles discussed RJ theory with few describing application practices with substantial depth. Ten (26%) articles only referenced the term "restorative justice" and seven (18%) discussed legal applications in health care. Fifty-four percent were from outside the United States. Articles tended to describe RJ uses to address harm and often missed the opportunity to explore RJ's capacity to proactively build community and culture that helps prevent harm.ConclusionsRJ in health care is a rapidly expanding field that offers a framework capable of building stronger communities, authentically preventing and responding to harm, inviting radical inclusion of diverse participants to build shared understanding and culture, and ameliorate some of the most toxic and unproductive hierarchical practices in academics and medicine. Most literature calls to RJ for help to respond to harm, although there are very few well-designed and evaluated implementations. Investment in RJ practices holds significant promise to steer our historically hierarchical, "othering" and imperfect systems to align with values of justice (vs. punishment), equity, diversity, and inclusion.

Project description:PurposeTo use a qualitative research approach to determine children's understandings of epilepsy and their epilepsy treatment.MethodsChildren aged 7-16 years with physician-confirmed active epilepsy (i.e., having had an epileptic seizure in the past year and or currently taking antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), and not known to have an intellectual disability, were invited to participate. Children had semi-structured interviews separately on two occasions. Between the first and second interviews, an observation of a routine epilepsy clinic appointment of individual children was conducted, and was then discussed during the second interview. Participatory research tools were used in both child interviews to facilitate discussions. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed, pseudonymized and entered into NVivo (version 12, QSR International). Data were analyzed using a thematic approach.ResultsTwenty-three children of mean age 10.1 years (range 8-14), mean duration of epilepsy of 4.6 years (range 2-10) were enrolled. Twelve were 12 female; 7 had focal, 14 had generalized, and 2 had combined epilepsy; 20 were on monotherapy; and 16 had tried previous AEDs. All had an initial (first) interview; 20 were observed during a clinic appointment and had a second interview. Five broad themes emerged: understanding of epilepsy; understanding of seizures; understanding of medication; understanding of children's role in clinical appointments; influences on children's understanding. Children spoke about what epilepsy meant by describing the physical sensations of having a seizure or through the act of taking medication. Children described the role they had, or felt they should have, but reported challenges in being meaningfully involved in clinical appointments. While healthcare professionals were initial information nodes, epilepsy information from parents appeared to be more significant for children.ConclusionsThe perspectives of children with epilepsy are valuable for clinicians to understand; assumptions should not be made that children's views can be accessed via parents. Clinicians need to be constantly aware of children's views and ways of understanding and communicating about their epilepsy. To support this, the research - drawing on children's words, meanings, and stories - was used to inform an easily accessible, gender-neutral, animation about epilepsy that provides information about the condition, seizures, and medication (https://youtu.be/MO7xXL2ZXP8).

Dataset Information

Young Children's Understanding of Restorative Justice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets