Kim M. E. Lens

Heterogeneity in victim participation: A new perspective on delivering a Victim Impact Statement

A central question in the debate about victim participation in criminal justice procedures is which instrument available to victims ‘works’. The purpose of the present study was to examine which factors contribute to the likelihood of victims delivering a Victim Impact Statement (VIS). We extend previous research in two important regards. First, we examined victims’ perspectives on the purposes and function of the VIS. Consistent with previous research (for example, Roberts and Erez, 2004), we reveal a distinction between impact-related and expression-related use of VISs. However, this study adds a third component to the existing literature: the anticipation of negative consequences. Second, we examined which factors influence the likelihood of delivering a VIS and found three variables to be positively associated: posttraumatic stress symptoms, the type of crime, and the time of victimization. Against expectations, victims’ perspectives did not make a unique contribution to the model. Based on these findings, we argue that what is called for is a more heterogeneous approach to the study of procedural instruments available to victims.

Delivering a Victim Impact Statement: Emotionally effective or counter-productive?:

Although the delivery of a Victim Impact Statement (VIS) in court is assumed to contribute to the healing and recovery process of victims of violent crimes, its effectiveness to facilitate emotional recovery is widely debated. The current longitudinal study is the first to empirically examine the psychological effects of delivering a VIS in terms of the two most important emotional reactions after crime: anger and anxiety. It extends previous findings by showing that the debate concerning the effectiveness of delivering a VIS is not a ‘black and white’ matter. In this article, we argue that the question should not be whether delivering a VIS ‘works’ or ‘doesn’t work’ for the victim, but for whom, and under which conditions. We show that delivering a VIS does not give rise to direct ‘therapeutic’ effects. However, we found that feelings of anger and anxiety decrease for victims who experience more control over their recovery process and higher levels of procedural justice.

You shouldn't feel that way! Extending the emotional victim effect through the mediating role of expectancy violation

Recent research has shown that the ‘emotional victim effect’ (an emotional victim is more readily believed than a nonemotional victim) is mediated by expectancy violation: people base their judgments about a victims credibility on their expectations of the victims suffering. Victims whose behavior is inconsistent with these expectations suffer a loss of credibility. In this article, we further examine the role of expectancy violation and explore possible negative effects of a victims highly emotional post-crime reaction. Using several mediations, we demonstrate three important contributions to the existing literature. First, we demonstrate that, in the same way as expectancy violation mediates the effect from nonverbal emotional expression on perceived credibility, this mediating effect would also hold for the verbal expression of emotions. Second, we demonstrate that expectancy violation mediates the effect from a victims verbal emotional expression on the observers attitude toward the victim. More specifically, we demonstrate that a highly emotional written Victim Impact Statement (VIS) could lead to secondary victimization, dependent on the observers expectations regarding the effects of the crime. Third, this article is the first to demonstrate that expectancy violation leads to a negative effect on peoples acceptance of the VIS in the criminal justice procedure.

Making Men Out of Boys? Ethnic Differences in Juvenile Violent Offending and the Role of Gender Role Orientations

This study examines the association of gender role orientations to juvenile violent offending in a sample of nearly 500 Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch adolescent boys. While results from this study support the hypothesis that an ethnic minority background is associated with higher prevalence rates in serious violent offending, direct examination of the effects of ethnicity on serious violent offending demonstrated the influential role of gender role orientations in the prevalence rates of serious violent offending. Specifically, lower class boys and Moroccan-Dutch boys reported more conventional gender role attitudes than their counterparts. The results highlight the importance of considering the need to provide positive male role models who provide concrete information about how to behave, as source of support and guidance, but also to provide concrete information to boys regarding what is possible for them as members of specific social groups. The psychosocial need for affirmation, convention, and support may be an important consideration in addressing violent offending.

Observers’ reactions to victim impact statements A preliminary study into the affective and cognitive responses

Previous research has shown that expectancy violations can have both affective and cognitive consequences. In particular, recent victimological research argues that people’s perceptions and judgments of victims are negatively influenced when their expectations of the victim’s emotional behavior are violated. That is, expectancy violation may lead to secondary victimization: victims may be judged to be less credible, suffer higher levels of victim derogation, and receive less sympathy as a result of expectancy violation. In this study, we elaborate upon these affective consequences and examine possible cognitive consequences of expectancy violation in victimological research. We found preliminary evidence for secondary victimization in both affective and cognitive domains: when evaluated by student observers, victims of ‘mildly’ severe crimes who delivered an emotional victim impact statement not only ran the risk of being evaluated as less credible than victims of more severe crimes who delivered the exact same victim impact statement, but their victim impact statement was also remembered less accurately.

One rule for the goose, one for the gander? Wrongfulness and harmfulness in determining reactions to offenders and victims of crime

People’s reactions to offenders and victims of crime follow different rationales. Whereas the punishment of the offender is primarily determined by the severity of the crime (which includes its foreseeable harmful consequences), the actual harm that is experienced by the victim drives the need for his or her support and assistance. With the introduction of the Victim Impact Statement (VIS), in which victims are allowed to express the (harmful) consequences of the crime on their lives, the question is raised whether allowing such victim input during criminal proceedings would influence the offender’s sentence. The main goal of the current research is to disentangle how a crime’s wrongfulness and harmfulness influence people’s reactions to offenders and victims. We show that, whereas people’s perceptions of the offender (and the outcome of the trial) are influenced by the severity of the crime, people’s judgements related to the victim are more likely to be influenced by an interaction between the severity of the crime and the experienced harm of the crime. That is, in this study no support was found for the argument that the delivery of a VIS would lead to a violation of the proportionality principle.