Does Procedural Justice Moderate the Effect of Collective Efficacy on Police Legitimacy?

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Yongjae Nam, Chris Melde
{"title":"Does Procedural Justice Moderate the Effect of Collective Efficacy on Police Legitimacy?","authors":"Yongjae Nam,&nbsp;Chris Melde","doi":"10.1007/s12103-024-09753-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research suggests perceptions of neighborhood social dynamics and judgments that the police follow fair procedures are strongly correlated with residents’ views of police legitimacy. The nature of these relationships is less clear, including the extent to which the association between informal neighborhood dynamics and police legitimacy is influenced by perceptions of police practice. We examined whether perceptions of procedural justice moderate the effect of collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations. Utilizing data from three city-level victimization surveys (<i>N</i> = 2,837), we found that the influence of collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations was moderated by judgments that the police follow fair procedures. When perceptions of procedural justice are at their mean or higher, collective efficacy beliefs are unassociated with police legitimacy. Conversely, collective efficacy beliefs have a stronger impact on legitimacy evaluations when procedural justice is low. Results suggest perceptions that police treat people fairly minimize the impact of low collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51509,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Criminal Justice","volume":"49 4","pages":"590 - 613"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12103-024-09753-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research suggests perceptions of neighborhood social dynamics and judgments that the police follow fair procedures are strongly correlated with residents’ views of police legitimacy. The nature of these relationships is less clear, including the extent to which the association between informal neighborhood dynamics and police legitimacy is influenced by perceptions of police practice. We examined whether perceptions of procedural justice moderate the effect of collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations. Utilizing data from three city-level victimization surveys (N = 2,837), we found that the influence of collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations was moderated by judgments that the police follow fair procedures. When perceptions of procedural justice are at their mean or higher, collective efficacy beliefs are unassociated with police legitimacy. Conversely, collective efficacy beliefs have a stronger impact on legitimacy evaluations when procedural justice is low. Results suggest perceptions that police treat people fairly minimize the impact of low collective efficacy beliefs on police legitimacy evaluations.

程序正义是否会调节集体效率对警察合法性的影响?
研究表明,对邻里社会动态的感知以及对警察遵循公平程序的判断与居民对警察合法性的看法密切相关。这些关系的性质尚不明确,包括非正式邻里动态与警察合法性之间的关联在多大程度上受到对警察实践的看法的影响。我们研究了对程序正义的看法是否会缓和集体效能信念对警察合法性评价的影响。利用三项城市级受害情况调查的数据(N = 2,837),我们发现集体效能信念对警察合法性评价的影响受到警察遵循公平程序判断的调节。当对程序公正的认知处于平均水平或更高水平时,集体效能信念与警察的合法性无关。相反,当程序公正性较低时,集体效能信念对合法性评价的影响更大。研究结果表明,警察公平待人的观念能最大限度地减少低集体效能信念对警察合法性评价的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Criminal Justice
American Journal of Criminal Justice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
5.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Criminal Justice, the official journal of the Southern Criminal Justice Association, is a peer reviewed publication; manuscripts go through a blind review process. The focus of the Journal is on a wide array of criminal justice topics and issues. Some of these concerns include items pertaining to the criminal justice process, the formal and informal interplay between system components, problems and solutions experienced by various segments, innovative practices, policy development and implementation, evaluative research, the players engaged in these enterprises, and a wide assortment of other related interests. The American Journal of Criminal Justice publishes original articles that utilize a broad range of methodologies and perspectives when examining crime, law, and criminal justice processing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信