This study of the effect of restorative justice conferencing on offenders found that the offenders benefitted from conferencing. However, the benefits often did not vary much from the benefits experienced by those who went to court. The Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments looked at four types of offenses: drunk driving (for all ages), property (juveniles only), shoplifting (juveniles only) and youth violence (up to 29 years of age). Offenders were randomly assigned to court or to conference. After the offenders went through their assigned process, the researchers asked them about their experience of procedural justice (how fair they felt the process was), retributive justice (whether they thought the punishment was fair), restorative justice (a feeling that they're contributing to the community), reintegrative shaming (shaming that helps them to integrate back into the community) and stigmatic shaming (shaming that makes them feel stigmatized). Two years later, the researchers interviewed them again to find out if there were any comparatively greater long-term effects for conference attendees as opposed to those who went to court.

Drunk driving and shoplifting offenders were more likely to have a positive experience of procedural justice when they went through conference than when they went to court. Those who went through conference also had significantly greater feelings of retributive justice, restorative justice and reintegrative shaming. Very few of each of the drunk driving and shoplifting groups felt stigmatic shaming due to their experience with court or conference; however, significantly more of the drunk driving conference group felt forgiven.

In contrast to drunk driving and shoplifting offenders, those who committed property offenses or were arrested for youth violence had similar experiences of procedural justice, retributive justice and restorative justice regardless of which process they went through. There were also no significant differences in their feelings of reintegrative shaming or stigmatic shaming. About half of each group felt forgiven.

Two years after going to court or conference, there were no significant differences in life events between those who went to court and those who went through conference for any of the four offenses. They had similar experiences of education, employment, health, relationship changes or homelessness. However, in all groups, significantly more of the conference attendees felt they had the opportunity to repay society and make up for what they did.