Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Abstract

In the field of Conflict Transformation, Restorative Justice (RJ) is often perceived as a transformative process focused on healing relationships after a specific harm. The parties considered in a RJ setting are those harmed, those responsible and the community impacted. This is particularly true in the field of criminal and transitional justice, and in an extended and spiritual view, there is reconciliation with the parties and God. Despite cultural differences, RJ theory and concepts have been accepted favorably in the many countries. From a viewpoint focused on methodology and process, however, cultural differences have a significant effect for implementation. For example, important concepts such as control, choice, harm, responsibility, apology, shame, reconciliation and forgiveness vary greatly in the manner in which they are perceived from culture to culture and may create obstacles for successful implementation of a successful process when one culture’s process and definitions are forced upon another. Therefore, promotional factors (i.e., culture and religion) and the implication of semiotics (cultural definition or meaning) are an absolute consideration in developing a RJ process within a particular culture. This paper discusses the cultural differences between the United States and Japan with regard to semiotic obstacles in the implementation of a RJ model in the Japanese criminal justice system. While the exploration of cultural differences, particularly between the United States and Japan is not new and has been the focus of many disciplines, little has been considered regarding the assimilation and implementation of a Western RJ model into the Eastern culture of Japan. In sum, is an attempt to clarify and integrate the effects of cultural differences for some factors (i.e., Control/Choice, Harm, Apology, Responsibility, Shame, Forgiveness, and Reconciliation) as they apply to a RJ based reconciliation process focused in Semiotics, Social psychology and the Sociology of law as they apply to the United States and Japan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. It should be understood by the reader, however, the concepts set forth in this paper are by no means exhaustive, nor meant to be complete. Unfortunately, due to constraints in this forum, other key concepts such as Sympathy/Empathy and Honor, have not been addressed in this paper, but necessarily should be considered in future analysis.

  2. At best this is a working definition. For a full overview of what Restorative Justice is and is not, see [75].

  3. The terms “victim” and “offender” are losing favor in the RJ community and more contemporary definitions of RJ have scrapped the words victim and offender, and replaced them with terminology such as, “injured party” and “responsible party,” in an attempt to avoid stigmatization and a process which appears imbalanced from the outset.

  4. McFadden’s focus is on the “consumer,” which for the purposes of this paper is used interchangeably with the concept of, “stakeholder”.

  5. Civil actions brought against a governmental agency are technically against the people of the state because the governmental agency exists at will and through the taxation of the people. For the purpose of this paper, unless specifically noted, governmental agency will be construed as quasi-private person.

  6. For an example of the cultural clash between the U.S. and Japan based upon the differences in the form and timing of apologies see Matsumoto [42] and Lingley [37].

References

  1. Auhagen, Ann.E., and Hans.W. Bierhoff. 2000. Responsibility: The many faces of a social phenomenon, 16. London, GBR: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Averill, J.R. 1973. Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. Psychological Bulletin 80: 286–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bayley, D.H. 1991. Forces of order: Policing modern Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bazemore, G., and L. Walgrave. 1999. Restorative juvenile justice: in search of fundamentals and an outline for systemic reform. In Restorative juvenile justice: Repairing the harm of youth crime, ed. G. Bazemore, and L. Walgrave, 49. Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bazemore, G. 1998. Communities, victims and offender reintegration. American Behavioral Scientist 41(6): 768–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Benedict, Ruth (1947, reprinted 1989) The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

  7. Braithwaite, J. 2000. Shame and criminal justice. Canadian Journal of Criminology 42(3): 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Braithwaite, J. 1989. Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Braithwaite, J. 2002. Restorative justice and responsive regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Braithwaite, J., and S. Mugford. 1994. Conditions of successful reintegration ceremonies. British Journal of Criminology 34(2): 139–171.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brehm, J.W. 1966. A theory of psychological reactance. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Clark, N.J. 2008. The three Rs: Retributive justice, restorative justice, and reconciliation. Contemporary Justice Review 11(4): 331–350. 341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cranach, M.V., and A. Ammann. 1999. Die Annahme der Willensfreiheit und ihre Konsequenzen für die Sozialwissenschaften [The assumption of the free will and its consequences for the social sciences]. Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften 10: 257–267.

    Google Scholar 

  14. de Charms, R. 1968. Personal causation: The internal affective determinants of behavior. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dillon, R.S. 2001. Self-Forgiveness and Self-Respect. Ethics 112: 53–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Emerson, R.M. 1962. Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review 27: 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Enright, R.D. 1996. Counseling within the forgiveness triad: On forgiving, receiving forgiveness, and self–forgiveness. Counseling & Values 40: 107–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Exline, J.J., B.L. Root, S. Yadavalli, A.M. Martin, and M.L. Fisher. 2011. Reparative behaviors and self-forgiveness: Effects of a laboratory-based exercise. Self and Identity 10: 101–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fenwick, C.R. 1985. Culture, philosophy and crime: The Japanese experience. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice 9: 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fisher, M.L., and J.J. Exline. 2006. Self-forgiveness versus excusing: The roles of remorse, effort, and acceptance of responsibility. Journal of Self & Identity 5: 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fisher, M.L., and J.J. Exline. 2010. Moving toward self-forgiveness: Removing barriers related to shame, guilt, and regret. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 4(8): 548–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fitzsimons, G.J. 2000. Consumer response to stockouts. Journal of Consumer Research 27: 249–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hall, J.H., and F.D. Fincham. 2005. Self-forgiveness: The stepchild of forgiveness research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 24: 621–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hall, J.H., and F.D. Fincham. 2008. The temporal course of self-forgiveness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 27: 174–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Halpern, J., and H.M. Weinstein. 2004. Rehumanizing the other: Empathy and reconciliation. Human Rights Quarterly 26(561–583): 567.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hamlin, J.B. 2011. Restorative justice: An answer to the call of the Gospel of St. Mark for Service and Reconciliation. International Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences 1(19): 277–285. 280.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hamlin, J.B., and J. Darling. 2012. Peace circle use in large scale community conflict: A case study. Conflict Resolution Quarterly 29(4): 403–419. 415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Iyengar, S. 2010. The art of choosing. New York: Twelve.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Irori, H. 1998. Shame and Honor-Japanese psychological structure. Kodansya: Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Jiang, S., E.G. Lambert, T. Saito, and J. Hara. 2012. University students’ views of formal and informal control in Japan: An exploratory study. Asian Journal of Criminology 7(2): p137–p152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Konoishi, T. 2006. Trauma of criminal victims. Risosya: Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lazare, Aaron. 2004. On apology. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Langer, E.J., and J. Rodin. 1976. The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34: 191–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Langer, E.J. 1975. The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32: 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lederach, J.P. 1998. Beyond violence: Building sustainable peace. In The handbook of interethnic coexistence, ed. E. Weiner, 236–245. New York: Continuum. 241.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lewis, H.B. 1971. Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York, NY: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lingley, D. 2006. Apologies across cultures: An analysis of intercultural communication problems raised in the Ehime Maru incident, Asian EFL Journal 8(1), Article4.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Llewellyn, J., and R. Howse. 1999. Restorative justice: A conceptual framework. Ottawa: Law Commission of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Luttmer, E. 2001. Group loyalty and the taste for redistribution. The Journal of Political Economy 109: 500–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Magee, J.C., and A.D. Galinsky. 2008. Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals 2: 351–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Masuda, T., P.C. Ellsworth, B. Mesquita, J. Leu, S. Tanida, and E.V. de Veerdonk. 2008. Placing the face in context: Cultural differences in the perception of facial emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94: 365–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Matsumoto, T. 2011. The semantic dimensions of an international story: The Ehime Maru incident. ETC: A Review of General Semantics 68(2): 205–213.

    Google Scholar 

  43. McCold, P. 2004. What is the role of community in restorative justice theory and practice? In Critical Issues in Restorative Justice eds. H. Zehr and B. Toews, 158. Monsey: Criminal Justice Press. Here McCold prioritizes the goal of ‘repairing the harm’ in relation to restorative justice from the micro-community perspective.

  44. McCold, P. and T. Watchtel, 2003. In Pursuit of Paradigm: A Theory of Restorative Justice. Paper presented at the 13th World congress of criminology, August 10–15, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

  45. McConnell, J., and D. Dixon. 2012. Perceived Forgiveness from God and Self-Forgiveness. Journal of Psychology and Christianity 31(1): 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  46. McFadden, D. 2010. Sociality, rationality, and the ecology of choice. In Choice Modelling: The State-of-the-Art and the State-of-Practice: Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference, eds. Stephane Hess, and Andrew Daly, Bradford, West Yorkshire, 25. GBR: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.

  47. Montada, L. (1983). Verantwortlichkeit und das Menschenbild in der Psychologie [Responsibility and the metaphor of man in psychology]. In Psychologie in der Veränderung [Psychology in Change], ed. G. Jüttemann, 162–188. London: Routledge.

  48. Nagano, Akiko. 2003. Why Japanese always think “I’m sorry”?. Tokyo: Soushisya Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Nathanson, D.L. 1992. Shame and pride. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ohbuchi, K. 2011. Research of apology. Sendai: Tohoku University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Parker Jr, I.C. 2001. The Japanese police system today: A comparative study. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Reichel, P.L. 2002. Comparative criminal justice systems: A topical approach. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Reischauer, E.O. 1980. The Japanese. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Scheff, T. 2000. Shame and the social bond. Sociological Theory 18(1): 84–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Roth, S., and L. Kubal. 1975. Effects of noncontingent reinforcement on tasks of differing importance: Facilitation and learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32: 680–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Rotter, J.B. 1966. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs 80: 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Rucker, D.D., and A.D. Galinsky. 2008. Desire to acquire: Powerlessness and compensatory consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 35: 257–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Rucker, D.D., and A.D. Galinsky. 2009. Conspicuous consumption versus utilitarian ideals: How different levels of power shape consumption. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45: 549–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Sakuta, K. 1967. Reconsideration of shame culture. Chikumashobo: Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Terrill, R.J. 2003. World criminal justice systems: A survey. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Schoenleber, M., and H. Berenbaum. 2012. Shame regulation in personality pathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 121(2): 433–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Staub, E. 2006. Reconciliation after genocide, mass killing, or intractable conflict: Understanding the roots of violence, psychological recovery and steps toward a general theory. Political Psychology 27(867–894): 868.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Tagiuri, R., and N. Kogan. 1957. The visibility of interpersonal preferences. Human Relations 10: 385–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Tangney, J.P. 1995. Recent advances in the empirical study of shame and guilt. American Behavioral Scientist 38: 1132–1145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Tangney, J.P., R.S. Miller, L. Flicker, and D.H. Barlow. 1996. Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70: 1256–1269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. The Center for Families, Children and Courts, Administrative Offices of the California Superior Court. 2003. Balanced and restorative justice, an information manual for California, 12.

  67. Triandis, H. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Van Stokkam, B. 2002. Moral emotions in restorative justice conferences. Theoretical Criminology 6(3): 339–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Westermann, T.D., and J.W. Burfeind. 1991. Crime and justice in two societies: Japan and the United States. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Wohl, M.J.A., L. DeShea, and R.L. Wahkinney. 2008. Looking within: Measuring state self-forgiveness and its relationship to psychological wellbeing. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 40: 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Yamada, T. (2008). Japanese “Shame Culture”, Memoirs of Mejiro University College 44, A1–A13, 2008-01.

  72. Yoder, C. 2005. The little book of trauma healing. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Zehr, H. 1990. Changing lenses: A new focus for crime and justice. Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Zehr, H. 2002. The little book of restorative justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Zehr, Howard., and Barb. Toews (eds.). 2004. Critical issues in restorative justice. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jack B. Hamlin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hamlin, J.B., Hokamura, A. The Cultural Context of Restorative Justice: Journeys Through Our Cultural Forests to a Well-Spring of Healing. Int J Semiot Law 27, 291–310 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9295-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9295-4

Keywords

Navigation