Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence

Citation

(2013), "Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence", Policing: An International Journal, Vol. 36 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/pijpsm.2013.18136caa.004

Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence

Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence

Article Type: Perspectives on policing From: Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, Volume 36, Issue 3.

Lorraine Mazerolle, Sarah Bennett, Jacqueline Davis, Elise Sargeant and Matthew ManningJournal of Experimental Criminology2013

This study constitutes the first systematic meta-analysis of the evaluation literature relating to procedural justice and police legitimacy. Research on procedural justice has indicated that citizens who feel they have been treated fairly are more likely to accept the decisions of criminal justice actors, to see those actors as legitimate, and to obey the law. In comparison, citizens who do not feel they have been treated fairly are less likely to accept the decisions of authorities, to see authorities as legitimate, and to be obedient. Observational studies and survey research have found that procedural justice and police legitimacy can lead to increased cooperation and positive interactions between law enforcement and citizens. This review included all studies (published and unpublished) that assessed some type of police-led intervention intended to increase police legitimacy or including language associated with at least one of the four principles of procedural justice (participation, neutrality, dignity/respect, and trustworthy motives). Specific inclusion criteria limited studies to those that utilized experimental or quasi-experimental design, were written in English between 1980 and 2007, and reported on individual perceptions and attitudes about legitimacy of police, procedural justice, willingness to cooperate with police, trust/confidence in police, satisfaction, and compliance.

Conducting an extensive search for eligible works resulted in 963 records, of which 28 studies were eligible and suitable for meta-analysis. These studies were varied across a number of factors including intervention strategies and components of procedural justice. Analyses were conducted using CMA, a meta-analysis software package, and were conducted for each of the six outcome measures (legitimacy, procedural justice, cooperation, confidence, satisfaction, and compliance). Due to similarities in measurement as well as a low number of studies, satisfaction, and confidence were combined into a single outcome, and compliance and cooperation were combined into a singular outcome. Legitimacy was measured in four studies consisting of seven evaluations, procedural justice was measured in six studies consisting of 14 evaluations, compliance/cooperation was measured in five studies consisting of eight evaluations, and satisfaction/confidence was measured in 15 studies consisting of 29 evaluations. Effect sizes were calculated for each outcome in each study, as well as mean effect sizes for each outcome reported as odds ratios (ORs). Overall results indicated that the weighted mean OR for the legitimacy measures was not significant, however, the weighted mean ORs for the remaining three outcomes were all positive and statistically significant (procedural justice (OR=1.47, p<0.01), compliance/cooperation (OR=1.62, p<0.01), satisfaction/confidence (OR=1.75, p<0.001)). These findings are representative of the fact that the majority of interventions evaluated improved community members perceptions of procedural justice, willingness to be compliant or cooperative, and satisfaction or confidence in police. The results indicate that police-led interventions seeking to enhance citizen perceptions of police legitimacy are often successful and that success (evinced by statistically significant effect sizes) is not limited to a certain type of intervention, as a wide range of interventions were evaluated in the included studies. Therefore, the authors conclude that it is the “procedurally just features” of a given intervention which enhance citizen perceptions of legitimacy, not a specific intervention itself. It is suggested that procedural justice dialogue be encouraged and implemented as a means of improving citizen-police interactions and relationships.

Lane Kirkland GillespieBoise State University