Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: A Test of Measurement and Structure

The procedural justice theory of police legitimacy has received substantial empirical support, yet too little attention has been paid to the operationalization and measurement of these important theoretical constructs. In particular, it is unclear whether the items used to represent procedural justice and police legitimacy possess convergent and discriminant validity. The current study uses confirmatory factor analysis to test for the measurement properties of these constructs and expands upon prior research by also including a measure of encounter-based procedural justice in addition to a scale tapping into global beliefs. The results provide mixed support for discriminant and convergent validity between legitimacy and global procedural justice. Full structural equation models test an alternative specification of one of the popular measurement methods for legitimacy, and compare the relative impact of each type of procedural justice. The findings indicate that while specific procedural justice predicts legitimacy, global procedural justice has a stronger influence. Implications for measurement and police policy are discussed.     

The Generalizability of Police Legitimacy: Procedural Justice,Legitimacy, and Speeding Intention of South Korean Drivers

Asian Journal of Criminology - Empirical support for procedural justice theory in criminology is robust in the developed Western countries, whereas the results are mixed for non-Western or...     

The Role of Procedural Justice and Legitimacy in Shaping Public Support for Policing

This study explores two issues about police legitimacy. The first issue is the relative importance of police legitimacy in shaping public support of the police and policing activities, compared to the importance of instrumental judgments about (1) the risk that people will be caught and sanctioned for wrongdoing, (2) the performance of the police in fighting crime, and/or (3) the fairness of the distribution of police services. Three aspects of public support for the police are examined: public compliance with the law, public cooperation with the police, and public willingness to support policies that empower the police. The second issue is which judgments about police activity determine people's views about the legitimacy of the police. This study compares the influence of people's judgments about the procedural justice of the manner in which the police exercise their authority to the influence of three instrumental judgments: risk, performance, and distributive fairness. Findings of two surveys of New Yorkers show that, first, legitimacy has a strong influence on the public's reactions to the police, and second, the key antecedent of legitimacy is the fairness of the procedures used by the police. This model applies to both white and minority group residents.     

The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: An Empirical Test of Core Theoretical Propositions

Purpose

Procedural justice and police legitimacy have been recognized as important antecedents to people's willingness to cooperate with police officers and obey the law. What existing literature lacks, however, is a thorough psychometric examination of procedural justice and police legitimacy with respect to convergent and discriminant validity.

Methods

The present study employs confirmatory factor analysis to examine convergent and discriminant validity and ordinary least squares regression to assess whether revised scales operate similarly to ones used in past research.

Results

Results suggest that the legitimacy construct is not internally consistent and that one of its subscales loads with the procedural justice items to form a single scale composed of both procedural justice and legitimacy items. Regression analyses indicate that the modified measures operate similarly to traditional ones.

Conclusion

It is urged that researchers pursue the theoretical and empirical development of procedural justice and police legitimacy in order to further the study of the normative model of policing.     

Introduction: Procedural Justice, Law and Policy

Over the last few years, procedural justice has become one of the most debated fields in social science and law. Modern thinking about law, democracy and public policy inevitably leads to a consideration of appropriate procedures. Images of such procedures are culturally bound and also formed by individual cognition. The word "fair" seems to encompass the most desired features of procedures.     

程序公正的价值——兼议实体公正与程序公正冲突的解决

实现公正是法哲学的核心问题。在我国推进法治建设的今天,尤其是目前正处在转型时期,各种利益纠缠在一起,在这样一个价值观剧烈冲突、客观标准剧烈变动,对于实体是否公正不好判断的情况下,程序上的公正就尤为重要了。实体公正与程序公正发生冲突时,应有正确的价值选择以期实现司法公正,实现我国社会主义法治。     

程序正义论——一种法社会学的反思

本文旨在从社会学的视角分析论证程序正义在我国的可适用性问题。通过分析程序正义在我国的价值,及对社会现状的剖析,揭示程序正义的形成障碍,进而对存在的问题探索较为稳妥的解决,建构了程序正义从观念到制度的立体体系。     

论程序法治与税收正义

一、税收正义与税收程序:概念诠释 正义是政治文明与法律制度的最高理想和共遵价值理念,是判断一种法律制度是否具有正当根据的价值标准,"正义的许多原则--各得其所,黄金规则,绝对命令,公平原则,宽容要求,以及其他等等,被认为超越了一切历史经验".①作为以税收负担分配为规制对象的税法必须遵从正义理念而为正义之法.在现代法治国家,税收仅当符合宪法价值秩序下的正义要求时,才具有正当化基础.因此,税收正义是宪法层面的基本原则,为税法的核心价值和最高精神,税收文明应奉正义为圭臬.     

《圣经》中的程序正义

宗教和法律密切相关,作为世界三大宗教之一的基督教,对西方法律的产生和发展也起着极其重要的作用。而基督教的经典之作——《圣经》中也包涵着大量的法律思想,特别是《圣经》中的程序正义观念对于法律体系中实体法和程序法的建构产生了重大的影响。     

民商法在公安执法中的地位研究

民商法的平等、权利保护、诚信等基本原则对树立人民警察的执法理念具有重要作用,对维护人民警察自身合法利益也具有重要意义。现在,公安机关在具体执法工作中愈来愈多地应用民商法知识。因此,研究民商法在公安执法工作中的地位,有助于扭转以往公安工作重刑轻民的传统观念,提高警察的素质,更好地发挥人民警察的作用。     

程序主义法律范式:哈贝马斯解决法律合法性问题的一个尝试

通过对古典“资产阶级形式法”与当代“福利国家实质法”两大主流法律范式的分析、解剖,哈贝马斯指出,在当前社会条件下,法的合法性问题的解决,必须用交往理性取代传统的实践理性。在交往行动理论的基础上,通过一个合理的民主程序即沟通程序的建构,建立起平等自由的对话空间,通过平等的交往对话,实现法的事实性与有效性的统一。     

Procedural Justice and Identification with Virtual Teams: The Moderating Role of Face-to-Face Meetings and Geographical Dispersion

We investigated the previously unstudied relationship between procedural justice and identification within virtual teams, with a particular focus on how two features of virtual teams, namely frequency of face-to-face meetings and geographical dispersion, moderate that relationship. We argue that these two variables are sources of uncertainty, which in turn makes virtual team members more sensitive to perceptions of procedural fairness as essential cues in the identification process. In this study, we used cross-sectional survey methodology and data aggregated to the team level (N = 39). As predicted, our results showed that the link between procedural justice and identification was stronger when there were few face-to-face meetings and when teams were highly dispersed.     

Self-Help, Policing, and Procedural Justice: Ghanaian Vigilantism and the Rule of Law

Public recourse to vigilante self-help has often been attributed to a lack of effective state intervention; less attention has been given to the character of this intervention. Using the Tylerian procedural justice perspective, I argue in this article that perceived procedural injustice contributes to increased public support for violent self-help mechanisms such as vigilante violence. The current study tests this theoretical argument using survey data of 374 residents of Accra, Ghana. The results show that age, education, and police trustworthiness were the most significant predictors of support for vigilante self-help. The impacts of procedural fairness were found to be embraced within police trustworthiness, but perceptions of police effectiveness and experience of police corruption were not statistically significant predictors of vigilante support.     

经营者薪酬:正当性危机与程序控制

对经营者实行年薪制已是大势所趋,但经营者自定高薪,已引发了正当性危机,而程序公正对于经营者薪酬的正当性具有决定性意义。建立以公司价值最大化为价值取向,具有独立性、公平性和透明度的薪酬程序规范,以遏制经营者自定高薪,使其具有公信力。     

Legitimacy in a Postcolonial Legal System: Public Perception of Procedural Justice and Moral Alignment Toward the Courts in Hong Kong

Legitimacy is said to be comprised of two underlying constructs: obligation to obey and moral alignment. However, legitimacy studies are mainly derived from contexts where the legal system has evolved naturally and is said to reflect the values of society. There is a paucity of research measuring public perceptions of legitimacy in postcolonial settings such as Hong Kong where the legal system was initially transplanted and many of its values may not reflect those of the local population. Procedural justice has been asserted to be a primary antecedent by which legal authorities improve their legitimacy and moral alignment. This study examines whether procedural justice is positively associated with legitimacy and moral alignment with the courts. Moreover, this study tests whether legitimacy is positively associated with cooperation with the courts. Using a random survey of the Hong Kong general population, both questions are answered in the affirmative. Implications are discussed.     

Procedural Justice and the Assessment of Civil Justice in Japan

In analyzing the data from a structured interview survey with Japanese litigants of civil trials, we examined the relationships between their perceptions of outcomes and process of the trials, responses to the trials, and evaluation of the judicial system. The results showed that both favorability of trial outcomes and procedural fairness of trials increased satisfaction with the trial outcomes and evaluation of the judicial system. Satisfaction was largely determined by perceived favorability, while the evaluation of the judicial system was largely determined by perceived procedural fairness, suggesting a justice bond effect that justice fortifies people's societal commitment. Consistent with procedural justice theories, the perception of procedural fairness was increased by the sense of control and the appraisal of relational factors, though both were affected by favorability.     

程序正义的哲学基础

一程序一词,顾名思义,指的是:事情发展的过程和次序.但是过程和次序有主观和客观之分.所谓主观的过程和次序指的是人为安排的过程和次序,如会议程序、缔约手续、办事仪式等,都是根据人们的主观需要、方便和习惯自主安排的;而客观的过程和次序……     

量刑公正之程序进路

作为刑事审判所追求的重要目标,量刑公正在实践中面临着极大的挑战。对此,从实体上限制个罪的量刑幅度的实体进路,无论在理论上还是在实践中都存在着诸多的局限。而量刑公正的程序进路,对于实现量刑公正的目标却有着非常重要的意义。因此。我们应该在量刑公正程序进路的载体和量刑公正程序进路的核心两方面共同着力,在促使量刑阶段相对独立化的同时,使量刑程序正当化,以达致量刑公正的目标。     

The Roberts Court and Police Practices: The Impact of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito in Police Practices Cases

In police practices cases, the Supreme Court decides issues that determine when the law enforcement interest in solving crimes must give way to the interest of individuals to be left alone by the government. The replacement of Chief Justice Rehnquist with John Roberts and Justice Sandra Day O’Connor with Samuel Alito has now been in place for more than four terms. The time is appropriate to assess the likely impact of these two new members of the Court on police practices cases. This article examines that question by analyzing both the police practices opinions written by Roberts and Alito while they served on U.S. Courts of Appeals and their opinions while on the Supreme Court through the 2008-09 term. The conclusion is that the previous pattern of the police prevailing in the vast majority of these cases is unlikely to change. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest that Chief Justice Roberts is aligning himself closely with Justice Scalia in these cases and may be setting the stage for a significant modification or even elimination of the exclusionary rule.