Nathan Harris

Emotional dynamics in restorative conferences

Restorative justice interventions, which focus upon repairing the harm caused by an offence, are consistent with the approach advocated by reintegrative shaming theory. However, some have argued that remorse and empathy play a more important role in restoration, and that a focus upon disapproval and the emotion of shame may be misguided. This article analyses theoretical distinctions between shame and guilt before discussing their role in restorative interventions. It is argued that emotions like empathy, remorse and guilt will spill over into feelings of shame, and that it is the resolution of these emotions that is critical for successful justice interventions.

Reassessing the dimensionality of the moral emotions

The dimensionality of the moral emotions was tested to examine whether theoretical distinctions between specific emotions were empirically supported. A total of 720 drink-driving offenders indicated the degree to which they experienced feelings associated with the moral emotions, in an interview conducted after attending court or a restorative justice conference. Expected distinctions between shame and guilt were not found. Instead the principal components analysis identified three factors: shame-guilt, embarrassment-exposure, and unresolved shame. The results also show that shame-guilt was related to higher feelings of empathy and lower feelings of anger/hostility. It is concluded that differences between shame and guilt may be overstated. Furthermore, it is suggested that the relationship between situational experiences of shame and the disposition to feel it may be more complicated than initially thought.

Testing the Reliability of Observational Measures of Reintegrative Shaming at Community Accountability Conferences and at Court

The inter-rater reliability of reintegrative shaming (Braithwaite 1989) concepts was tested at Community Accountability Conferences and at court using two observation methods. This paper presents data collected from 45 cases: 15 violence or property-related conferences; 15 drink-drive conferences; and a mix of 15 drink-drive, property-related, and violence-related court cases. The results, which are a synthesis of those presented in a more extensive report (Harris & Burton 1997), show that components of reintegrative shaming theory can be observed reliably using systematic observation and global rating observation methods.

Governing beyond command and control: A responsive and nodal approach to child protection

This chapter is interested in the challenge of governing beyond crime, surveillance and control. It argues for the need to re-imagine the governance of security in ways designed to both build and enrol the capacities of different actors. The authors draw on regulatory theory and the ideas developed in the areas of ‘responsive regulation’ and ‘nodal governance’ to explore the opportunities for, and the challenges associated with designing governance institutions and processes that serve to de-centre hierarchy, command and interventionism as essential rationalities and practices. Its empirical focus is on the case of child protection, where the authors argue for the importance of nurturing the capacities of families and communities to govern both beyond and in tandem with hierarchical modalities. It is hoped that the theoretical issues raised and the agenda articulated can be engaged with across a variety of empirical domains.