{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0256, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0032, 'mean_word_length': 5.38265306122449, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
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.