Thesis (M. Soc. Sc.) -- Lincoln University, 2009. / Also available via the World Wide Web.

Handwriting is a complex occupation; it is an intricately coordinated symphony of skills and interactions. The success of a child’s handwriting is dependent on many factors and conditions. The concept of occupational justice implies, as a determinant of health and well-being, all children have the right to access sound handwriting instruction and if required, supportive services for therapeutic intervention. However, a number of school-aged children do not have access to sound handwriting instruction or therapeutic intervention. This is an occupational injustice. An integrative review of the occupational therapy literature was completed for the purposes of enhancing the understanding of handwriting in the school system. The Revised Framework of Occupational Justice was used to guide the analysis of the literature sources and identify the conditions contributing to an occupational injustice. The results of this review provided a comprehensive overview of handwriting and identified conditions leading to an occupational injustice in handwriting.

Restorative justice was first used in Saskatchewan in 1985 and experienced a meteoric rise over the next two decades. In Saskatchewan, the use of restorative justice is not authorized for certain ‘serious’ offences, including sexual assault and family violence. While the overriding sense is that restorative justice programs have been successful, the momentum surrounding restorative justice has begun to taper off. Exploration into the use of restorative justice with more serious offences is being contemplated to combat the movement’s stagnation. Despite the rapid expansion of restorative justice agencies and organizations in Saskatchewan, little research has been conducted on these programs. In other jurisdictions, the research conducted has largely focused on program outcomes rather than the processes involved. There is also a gap in the research respecting how justice professionals view restorative justice and, in particular, how certain issues, such as safety and power imbalances, are currently addressed and will be addressed if more serious offences are referred to programs. To fill this gap, I conducted a qualitative study to determine how well those involved with Saskatchewan restorative justice programs, such as Crown prosecutors, police and program staff, believe programs are handling the offences currently referred. I also sought their views on the prospect of authorizing the use of restorative justice for more serious offences and what, if anything, must be changed in current programs to meet additional needs. The study revealed a mix of views across the professions, but generally justice professionals in Saskatchewan are resistant to the idea of referring more serious offences to restorative justice programs. Participation in a restorative justice process most deeply influenced views on whether restorative justice is appropriate for more serious offences. The concerns expressed about programs are poor practice or administrative in nature, and are fixable by employing best practices. A provincial strategic plan is needed for restorative justice to move forward. The plan should focus on determining clear goals and measures of success; committing to a set of best practices; more evaluation of programs and the effect of restorative justice on recidivism rates; expanded training for all justice professionals; and a greater investment in ensuring the ‘right’ person is in the room during restorative justice processes. The plan will gain the confidence of justice professionals, policy makers and the public in the ability of restorative justice to handle more serious offences.

Affective reactions to unfair treatment date back to the earliest work on organizational justice. Seminal research on inequity identifies anger and guilt as primary responses to judgments of low justice. More recently, interpersonal justice has been linked to emotions such as anger and hostility. In fact, interpersonal justice is arguably the most emotionally charged of all the justice types. Yet, despite the strong theoretical support and empirical evidence linking interpersonal justice to negative emotions, we are unsure whether dignity and respect from a supervisor may also influence positive emotions. Justice scholars have also begun to investigate the moderating influence of status on to the effects of interpersonal justice. It has been suggested, and empirically demonstrated, that people of lower objective status (hierarchical position, race) react more strongly to fairness relative to those higher in status. However, we do not yet know how the effects of interpersonal justice may be moderated by employees’ perceptions of personal status, workgroup status, or supervisor status. Furthermore, scholars have yet to examine the moderating influence of status on emotional reactions to interpersonal justice. In this dissertation, I answer recent calls for further investigation into the relationships between interpersonal justice and emotions and between interpersonal justice and status. Specifically, I draw from affective events theory and self-enhancement theory to develop a model of interpersonal justice, status, and emotions. In this model, I hypothesize a mediating effect of emotions on the relationships between interpersonal justice and a number of distal attitudes and behaviors. I further predict a moderating influence of justice orientation and three types of status—personal (self) status, workgroup status, and supervisor status—on the interpersonal justice to emotions relationships. A sample of 427 university-based military cadets provided partial support for my model. As expected, interpersonal justice predicted a number of important distal outcomes indirectly through both positive and negative emotions. Personal status, supervisor status, and justice orientation moderated several of the relationships between interpersonal justice and emotions. Implications for practice and theory are discussed.

This thesis explores the recent introduction of restorative justice into the youth justice system in England. It examines the historical and political context from which current youth justice policies have emerged and aims to evaluate how this new system is functioning 'on the ground' several years after being implemented. Specifically, the primary aim of the research is to investigate final warnings and referral orders. The findings are based on an in-depth study of one Youth Offending Team (YOT). The research adopted a predominantly qualitative, case study based method utilizing techniques of observation, informal conversations, formal interviews with the young offenders and their supporters as well as with authority figures who are amongst those responsible for policy and practice in the youth justice system. The substantive chapters of this thesis focus on the delivery of final warnings, referral order panel meetings, victim participation, and the structural, cultural and political influences on YOT practice. This research concludes that at present, restorative practices in England are seriously compromised. However, simply because these programmes experience difficulties, they should not necessarily be considered a failure. The present failures in practice are not related to the philosophical foundation of these programmes or even to the way in which they have been set up. Rather, the current shortcomings in practice are due mostly to a failure of implementation on the part of the YOT. The final warning and referral order programmes, if improved, have the potential to become an effective first encounter with the criminal justice system and to impact positively on many first time offenders.

Conferencing is a Restorative Justice practice operating in juvenile justice systems in Australia. Some conferences are convened by police, despite research demonstrating that ethnic minority youth often view police as biased or untrustworthy. Justice research in evaluative legal procedures indicates that perceived third party bias and outcomes delivered by a third party affect fairness judgments. Many disputants regard conferences as more fair than court. However, psychological mechanisms underlying fairness judgments in conferences, where offenders participate in outcome decisions, have not been directly investigated. This research program examined the effects of outcome and perceived convenor bias on procedural and distributive justice ratings in conferencing. Past research indicates that people high and low on Hofstede??s power-distance dimension differ in their emphases on outcome and third party bias when forming fairness judgments. This thesis investigated whether power-distance moderated the interactive effect of trust and outcome on fairness judgments in conferences. Study 1 established power-distance variation in a university sample, and similarity with a community sample on perceived police bias. Study 2 confirmed that high power-distance people who consider police biased against them may nonetheless choose to participate in police-convened conferences. Studies 3 and 4 extended previous research examining interactive effects of trust and outcome on justice judgments in evaluative procedures, investigating whether power-distance moderated this effect. No significant effects of power-distance and trust emerged, but the findings demonstrated the importance of outcome fairness (correspondence between outcomes and beliefs) in determining procedural justice. Studies 5, 6 and 7 extended this investigation to conferencing procedures. Studies 6 and 7 employed a computer-simulation, allowing participants to interact with a conference transcript and select outcomes, thereby investigating the effects of trust and power-distance on outcome choice, as well as the effects of trust, power-distance, and outcome on justice evaluations. Studies 5 and 6 were unsuccessful in manipulating bias by varying convenor identity (police versus civilian). Study 7 successfully manipulated bias according to convenor behaviour and revealed that third party bias in conferencing affected outcome choices but not fairness judgments. Results are discussed in terms of implications for culturally-relevant police practices, procedural justice theory and conferencing policy.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toronto, 2004. / Adviser: David Levine.

Thesis (B.A.)--Haverford College, Dept. of Philosophy, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2006. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 180-185).

Thesis--Marburg. / Vita. Bibliography: p. [235]-[242]