Who questions the legitimacy of law? A latent profile analysis using national data in China.

IF 2.4 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Law and Human Behavior Pub Date : 2024-09-30 DOI:10.1037/lhb0000583

Han Wang, Mengliang Dai

{"title":"Who questions the legitimacy of law? A latent profile analysis using national data in China.","authors":"Han Wang, Mengliang Dai","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The present study aims to identify meaningful distinct subgroups of legal legitimacy, thereby addressing the need to move beyond a general legitimacy-based model.Hypotheses: We hypothesized (1) we would find distinct profiles for legal legitimacy, (2) perceived procedural justice would predict the identified profiles, and (3) profiles with low normative alignment or duty to obey scores would be associated with disadvantaged groups.Method: This study utilized a subset of survey items from the Chinese General Social Survey 2015 to measure legal legitimacy. Eight survey items, selected based on theoretical considerations, underwent a confirmatory factor analysis to assess their suitability for loading onto the two dimensions of legal legitimacy. A latent profile analysis was then performed on the scores obtained from the eight items to identify distinct profiles of legal legitimacy. Multinomial logistic regression models were estimated to examine the associations between the identified profiles, procedural justice, and sociodemographic characteristics. The analyses were conducted on a large sample of Chinese citizens (N = 3,475, 47.8% males; Mage = 50.3 years, SD = 16.8).Results: We identified four distinct profiles of legal legitimacy, namely contented conformist, relatively satisfied conformist, ordinary conformist, and cynical conformist. In support of the construct validity of the profiles, we found that these profiles differed on key factors of procedural justice and multiple sociodemographic variables.Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate population heterogeneity in legal legitimacy and underscore the importance of a multidimensional conceptualization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000583","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The present study aims to identify meaningful distinct subgroups of legal legitimacy, thereby addressing the need to move beyond a general legitimacy-based model.

Hypotheses: We hypothesized (1) we would find distinct profiles for legal legitimacy, (2) perceived procedural justice would predict the identified profiles, and (3) profiles with low normative alignment or duty to obey scores would be associated with disadvantaged groups.

Method: This study utilized a subset of survey items from the Chinese General Social Survey 2015 to measure legal legitimacy. Eight survey items, selected based on theoretical considerations, underwent a confirmatory factor analysis to assess their suitability for loading onto the two dimensions of legal legitimacy. A latent profile analysis was then performed on the scores obtained from the eight items to identify distinct profiles of legal legitimacy. Multinomial logistic regression models were estimated to examine the associations between the identified profiles, procedural justice, and sociodemographic characteristics. The analyses were conducted on a large sample of Chinese citizens (N = 3,475, 47.8% males; M_age = 50.3 years, SD = 16.8).

Results: We identified four distinct profiles of legal legitimacy, namely contented conformist, relatively satisfied conformist, ordinary conformist, and cynical conformist. In support of the construct validity of the profiles, we found that these profiles differed on key factors of procedural justice and multiple sociodemographic variables.

Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate population heterogeneity in legal legitimacy and underscore the importance of a multidimensional conceptualization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文本刊更多论文

谁质疑法律的合法性？利用中国全国数据进行的潜在特征分析。

目的：本研究旨在确定有意义的、不同的法律合法性分组，从而满足超越基于合法性的一般模式的需要：本研究旨在确定有意义的、不同的法律合法性亚群，从而满足超越基于合法性的一般模型的需要：我们假设：(1) 我们将发现不同的法律合法性特征；(2) 感知到的程序正义将预测所确定的特征；(3) 低规范一致性或服从义务得分的特征将与弱势群体相关：本研究利用《2015 年中国社会总体调查》中的一个调查项目子集来测量法律合法性。根据理论考虑选取的八个调查项目进行了确认性因素分析，以评估它们是否适合加载到法律合法性的两个维度上。然后，对这八个项目的得分进行潜在特征分析，以确定法律合法性的不同特征。对多项式逻辑回归模型进行了估算，以研究已确定的特征、程序正义和社会人口特征之间的关联。分析对象为大量中国公民样本（样本数 = 3,475，47.8% 为男性；年龄 = 50.3 岁，SD = 16.8）：结果：我们发现了四种不同的法律合法性特征，即满足型守法者、相对满足型守法者、普通守法者和愤世嫉俗型守法者。为了证明这些特征的建构有效性，我们发现这些特征在程序正义的关键因素和多个社会人口变量上存在差异：我们的研究结果表明了法律合法性的人群异质性，并强调了多维概念化的重要性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved）。

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

Law and Human Behavior Multiple-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

8.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.