Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The city is bisected by a river that has historically served as a natural separation point for more affluent and white residents and less affluent minority neighborhoods. For instance, the 2015 ACS 5-year estimates identified the less affluent side of the river was nearly 65 percent Black with roughly 28 percent of households in poverty, while the more affluent side of the river was 23 percent Black with 22 percent of households in poverty.

  2. Had this been a simple random sample of 829 households with no noncoverage and no nonresponse, the margin of sampling error (MOSE) on a dichotomous variable (0/1) distributed 50%/50% at the 95% degree of confidence would have been ± 3.3 percentage points.

  3. Had this been a simple random sample of 844 households with no noncoverage and no nonresponse, the margin of sampling error (MOSE) on a dichotomous variable (0/1) distributed 50%/50% at the 95% degree of confidence would have been ± 3.4 percentage points.

  4. Had this been a simple random sample of 1,166 households with no noncoverage and no nonresponse, the margin of sampling error (MOSE) on a dichotomous variable (0/1) distributed 50%/50% at the 95% degree of confidence would have been ± 2.8 percentage points.

  5. Listwise deletion of cases with missing data was used in multivariable analyses. Analysis of missing data was conducted using Little’s test of missing completely at random (MCAR) through Li’s mcartest function in Stata 17 (Li, 2013). The dependent and independent variables were found to be MCAR when equal variances were assumed (chi2 = 11.18 [df = 9], p = .26), but not when variances were assumed unequal (chi2 = 41.78 [df = 21], p = .005). Given this, we ran a test of covariate-dependent missing (CDM) to determine if covariate adjustment can help satisfy the MCAR assumption. The CDM test suggested that under the unequal variance assumption, data can be treated as MCAR in models including our model covariates (chi2 = 81.04 [df = 112], p = .99).

  6. There are no observations of procedural justice at two standard deviations above the mean.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2016). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (Report No. 9).

  • Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 102, 119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Hough, M. (2013). Police legitimacy in action: Lessons for theory and practice. In M. Reisig & R. Kane (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of police and policing (pp. 551–570). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braga, A. A., Winship, C., Tyler, T. R., Fagan, J., & Meares, T. L. (2014). The salience of social contextual factors in appraisals of police interactions with citizens: A randomized factorial experiment. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(4), 599–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2015). American crime survey.  www.bjs.gov/ncvspilot.cfm. Accessed January 1, 2017.

  • Bursik, R. J., Jr., & Grasmick, H. G. (1999). Neighborhoods & crime. Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, L. (2015). Differentiating confidence in the police, trust in the police, and satisfaction with the police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 38(2), 239–249. 

  • Cao, L., Frank, J., & Cullen, F. T. (1996). Race, community context and confidence in the police. American Journal of Police, 15(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. J. (2003). The new parochialism: The implications of the Beltway case for arguments concerning informal social control. American Journal of Sociology, 108(6), 1249–1291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, T., Wolfe, S. E., Nam, Y., & Lawson, S. G. (2023). Front porch roll calls: An innovative approach to community-oriented policing in Saginaw, MI. Policing: An International Journal, 46(5/6), 766–779. 

  • Circo, G., Melde, C., & Mcgarrell, E. F. (2019). Fear, victimization, and community characteristics on citizen satisfaction with the police. Policing: An International Journal, 42(2), 179–194. 

  • Cobbina, J. E. (2019). Hands up, don’t shoot: Why the protests in Ferguson and Baltimore matter, and how they changed America. NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. A., Inagami, S., & Finch, B. (2008). The built environment and collective efficacy. Health & Place, 14(2), 198–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, M., Hu, X., & Time, V. (2019). Understanding public satisfaction with the police: Military background and interactions between higher education and prior contact with the police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 42(4), 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R., Swift, K., Kohrell, J., Berck, J., & Messer, B. L. (2009). Response rate and measurement differences in mixed-mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice response (IVR) and the internet. Social Science Research, 38(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowler, K., & Sparks, R. (2008). Victimization, contact with police, and neighborhood conditions: Reconsidering African American and Hispanic attitudes toward the police. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 9(5), 395–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine, A. D., Amemiya, J., Frick, P., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2021). Perceptions of police legitimacy and bias from ages 13 to 22 among Black, Latino, and White justice-involved males. Law and Human Behavior, 45(3), 243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M. (2014). Unpacking collective efficacy: The relationship between social cohesion and informal social control. Criminal Justice Studies, 27(2), 210–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M. (2015). Procedural justice, police legitimacy, and legal cynicism: A test for mediation effects. Police Practice and Research, 16(5), 402–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M., Corsaro, N., Stewart, E. A., & Brunson, R. K. (2012). Examining macro-level impacts on procedural justice and police legitimacy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(4), 333–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. L., Zhao, J., Lovrich, N. P., & Gaffney, M. J. (2002). Social integration, individual perceptions of collective efficacy, and fear of crime in three cities. Justice Quarterly, 19(3), 537–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, B. R., & Hunt, J. (2016). Collective efficacy: Taking action to improve neighborhoods. NIJ Journal, 277, 18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., & McMurray, I. (2004). SPSS explained. Psychology Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & Van de Schoot, R. (2017). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1051–1071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, L. (1989). Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochel, T. R. (2019). Explaining racial differences in Ferguson’s impact on local residents’ trust and perceived legitimacy: Policy implications for police. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 30(3), 374–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kochel, T. R., & Weisburd, D. (2019). The impact of hot spots policing on collective efficacy: Findings from a randomized field trial. Justice Quarterly, 36(5), 900–928.

  • Li, C. (2013). Little's test of missing completely at random. The Stata Journal, 13(4), 795–809. 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Madon, N. S., Murphy, K., & Sargeant, E. (2017). Promoting police legitimacy among disengaged minority groups: Does procedural justice matter more? Criminology & Criminal Justice, 17(5), 624–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler, T. R. (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51(1), 33–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcgarrell, E. F., Melde, C., Pizarro, J., & Rivers, L. (2012). Lansing neighborhood stabilization and youth violence initiative: Smart policing initiative. U.S. Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean, K., Wolfe, S. E., & Pratt, T. C. (2019). Legitimacy and the life course: An age-graded examination of changes in legitimacy attitudes over time. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 56(1), 42–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merola, L. M., Lum, C., & Murphy, R. P. (2019). The impact of license plate recognition technology (LPR) on trust in law enforcement: A survey-experiment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(1), 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D. S., & Telep, C. W. (2020). Procedural justice and legal compliance: A revisionist perspective. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 761–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nalla, M. K., & Nam, Y. (2020). Explaining citizen support for women police in India. Police Practice and Research, 21(5), 491–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nalla, M. K., & Nam, Y. (2021). Corruption and trust in police: Investigating the moderating effect of procedural justice. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 65(6–7), 715–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nam, Y., Wolfe, S. E., & Nix, J. (2022). Does procedural justice reduce the harmful effects of perceived ineffectiveness on police legitimacy?. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 61(1), 124–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224278221121622

  • Nam, Y., Maskály, J., Ivković, S. K., & Neyroud, P. (2023). Exploring trust in the police in South Korea during the COVID-19 pandemic: Does fear of the COVID-19 matter?. Criminal Justice Review, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/07340168231194618

  • Nix, J., Wolfe, S. E., Rojek, J., & Kaminski, R. J. (2015). Trust in the police: The influence of procedural justice and perceived collective efficacy. Crime & Delinquency, 61(4), 610–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, J., Cullen, F., Bushway, S. D., Chiricos, T., & Alpert, G. (2018). The response rate test: Nonresponse bias and the future of survey research in criminology and criminal justice. The Criminologist, 43, 7–11.

  • Pina-Sánchez, J., & Brunton-Smith, I. (2020). Reassessing the relationship between procedural justice and police legitimacy. Law and Human Behavior, 44(5), 377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prussia, G. E., & Kinicki, A. J. (1996). A motivational investigation of group effectiveness using social-cognitive theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M. D., & Parks, R. B. (2000). Experience, quality of life, and neighborhood context: A hierarchical analysis of satisfaction with police. Justice Quarterly, 17(3), 607–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M. D., & Parks, R. B. (2003). Neighborhood context, police behavior and satisfaction with police. Justice Research and Policy, 5(1), 37–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Bartusch, D. J. (1998). Legal cynicism and (subcultural?) tolerance of deviance: The neighborhood context of racial differences. Law and Society Review, 32(4), 777–804.

  • Sampson, R. J. (2006). Collective efficacy theory: Lessons learned and directions for future inquiry. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Write, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (Vol. 15, pp. 149–168). Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. G. (1987). Disorder and community decline. Grant report from the Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, to the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.

  • Sun, I. Y., Li, L., Wu, Y., & Hu, R. (2018). Police legitimacy and citizen cooperation in China: Testing an alternative model. Asian Journal of Criminology, 13(4), 275–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swatt, M. L., Varano, S. P., Uchida, C. D., & Solomon, S. E. (2013). Fear of crime, incivilities, and collective efficacy in four Miami neighborhoods. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J. (2009). Public cooperation with the police in Ghana: Does procedural fairness matter? Criminology, 47(4), 1265–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J., Reisig, M. D., & Wang, X. (2016). A multidimensional model of police legitimacy: A cross-cultural assessment. Law and Human Behavior, 40(1), 11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thibault, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and cooperation. In Race, ethnicity, and policing (pp. 84–117). New York University Press.

  • Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(3), 75–109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 115–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Schulhofer, S., & Huq, A. Z. (2010). Legitimacy and deterrence effects in counterterrorism policing: A study of Muslim Americans. Law & Society Review, 44(2), 365–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts. (2019). Education survey. U.S. census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts. Accessed on January 18, 2022.

  • Uchida, C. D., Swatt, M. L., Solomon, S. E., & Varano, S. (2013). Data-driven crime prevention: New tools for community involvement and crime control. Justice & Security Strategies, Incorporated.

  • Warner, B. D. (2007). Directly intervene or call the authorities? A study of forms of neighborhood social control within a social disorganization framework. Criminology, 45(1), 99–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, C. B., Chemers, M. M., & Preiser, N. (2001). Collective efficacy: A multilevel analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(8), 1057–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisburd, D., Davis, M., & Gill, C. (2015). Increasing collective efficacy and social capital at crime hot spots: New crime control tools for police. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 9(3), 265–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows. Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, S. E., & Lawson, S. G. (2020). The organizational justice effect among criminal justice employees: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 58(4), 619–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, S. E., Nix, J., Kaminski, R., & Rojek, J. (2016). Is the effect of procedural justice on police legitimacy invariant? Testing the generality of procedural justice and competing antecedents of legitimacy. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32(2), 253–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, S., Rojek, J., McLean, K., & Alpert, G. (2020). Social interaction training to reduce police use of force. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 687(1), 124–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This project was supported by Grant Numbers 2014-MU-CX-K037, 2015-BJ-CX-K022, and 2016-BJ-CX-K026 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, and U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, The University of Texas at San Antonio, 501 W. Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard, San Antonio, TX, 78207, USA

    Yongjae Nam

  2. School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

    Chris Melde

Authors
  1. Yongjae Nam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris Melde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yongjae Nam.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Pearson’s Correlation Table

Table 3

Table 3 Pearson’s correlation coefficients of study variables
Full size table

Appendix 2 – Measures

figure a

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nam, Y., Melde, C. Does Procedural Justice Moderate the Effect of Collective Efficacy on Police Legitimacy?. Am J Crim Just (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-024-09753-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-024-09753-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation