Police Effectiveness and Procedural Justice as Competing Public Values: Moving Beyond the Instrumental-Versus-Normative Model of Police Legitimacy

Author:

Na Chongmin1ORCID,Lee Seulki2ORCID,Kang Inkyu3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Seoul National University , South Korea

2. Singapore Management University , Singapore

3. University of Georgia , USA

Abstract

Abstract This study argues that the dichotomy of instrumental-versus-normative motives in mainstream policing literature can mislead the ways in which police effectiveness and procedural justice shape people’s judgments about the police. Effective policing may be important even for individuals who do not directly benefit from it, while procedurally just policing can bring instrumental benefits, particularly for underprivileged social groups. We propose an alternative framework that characterizes police effectiveness and procedural justice as competing public values, of which the salience depends on political dynamics that vary across time and space. We explored the South Korean case where advocates for effective crime control and procedural justice are vying without one side decisively outweighing the other. Analysis of a representative cross-sectional survey shows that people’s perceptions of police effectiveness and procedural justice are both positively associated with trust in the police which, in turn, is positively associated with willingness for voluntary compliance and cooperation. Broader implications for theory and policy are discussed.

Funder

Creative-Pioneering Researchers Program through Seoul National University

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Law

Reference101 articles.

1. ‘Relationships Between Agency-Specific Contact, Victimization Type, and Trust and Confidence in the Police and Courts.’;Berthelot;American Journal of Criminal Justice,2018

2. ‘Media and Public Perceptions of the Police: Examining the Impact of Race and Personal Experience.’;Callanan;Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy,2011

3. ‘Input without Influence: The Silence and Scripts of Police and Community Relations.’;Cheng;Social Problems,2020

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3