Advancing a Social Identity Model of System Attitudes

Abstract

The connection between social identity and attitudes toward the criminal justice system (CJS) is an area of interest among criminologists and legitimacy scholars. Previous work has proposed a social identity theory of legitimation, positing that individuals categorize CJS officials as either in-group (i.e. legitimate authority) or out-group (i.e. illegitimate enforcer). Subsequently, how individuals perceive their CJS – including the sincerity of its commitment to the rule of law – is tied to this relationship. Those viewing the government as an out-group oppressor are less likely to accept its legitimacy. This article explores this thesis. From the perspective of system justification theory, how the CJS is categorized should depend on how strongly an individual identifies as belonging to a group disadvantaged by the CJS. System justification theorists hypothesize that system justification (including acceptance of system legitimacy) is more likely when members of disadvantaged groups believe that group interests are less important. Alternative models that explain attitudes toward the system by using social identity theory suggest the opposite: Those who identify more strongly with disadvantaged groups and hold their interests to be more important nonetheless justify oppositional systems and view them legitimately. The present study uses a sample of Black Americans (a disadvantaged group in the American CJS) to determine whether group identification predicts system justification.

Exploring a Social Identity Theory of Shared Narrative: Insights from Resident Stories of Police Contact in Newark, New Jersey, and Cleveland, Ohio

“…Legitimacy theorists within criminal justice have only recently re-emphasized early foundations in social identity (e.g., O'Brien & Tyler, 2019Radburn et al, 2018Radburn et al, , 2020Radburn & Stott, 2019), but narrative themes invoking social identity in these respondents suggests its continued salience. That said, current criminal justice theorists should familiarize themselves with the nuances of identity theories (e.g., differences in Tajfel's (1972) work and Stryker's (1980) structural symbolic interactionism or "identity theory"), and should be part of contemporary debates and developments in the field (e.g., critiques of the theory by system justification theorists and notable rebuttals; see Blount-Hill, 2020a). The trouble this causes for policymakers is that master narratives not only provide a template for story structure, but they also provide an interpretive lens to discern the meaning of the story.…”

“…Procedural injustice can instead show that the authority does not consider the individual an ingroup member, removing ingroup-based incentives to defer. These two social identity models are critically important as explanations linking procedural justice to legitimation (Blount-Hill, 2020a;Radburn et al, 2018;Radburn & Stott, 2019). 2 However, both models describe processes shaped by series of distinct encounters, or vicarious exposure to such encounters, as opposed to attitudes arising in response to an overarching narrative constructed over time.…”

“…Legitimation has been described as a dialogic process, comprised of communication in reaction to others (Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012). Claims to legitimacy initiate a cycle of response between authorities and their audiences wherein the former claim a right to deference and the latter evaluate and accept or reject those claims (Blount-Hill, 2020a;Nix et al, 2020). Central to the discursive process is meaning making, how an individual interprets and comprehends the external world both sensorially and semiotically, and questions of this sort are the core of narrative study (Adler et al, 2017;Bauer et al, 2008).…”

The Effects of Justice Judgments on Police Legitimacy Across Urban Neighborhoods: A Test of the Invariance Thesis

“…In contrast, when members of a social group (e.g., racial minority members and immigrants) fail to identify with the social norms and values that the law represents and the police charged to enforce them, legitimacy perceptions will be driven more by instrumental concerns. Put differently, these citizens will feel “othered” and view the police as out-group enforcers (Blount-Hill, 2020). This supersession of instrumental concerns punctuates the importance of social identity, particularly the absence of conferred identity, in influencing police legitimacy beliefs.…”

“…Inherent to this antagonistic association is the likely rejection of in-group inclusion for both the police and the citizen. Residents of these locales and the police who patrol them likely view each other as out-group enforcers and suspicious ruffians (Blount-Hill, 2020; Weber, 2013). With this out-group membership conveyed across the neighborhood, instrumental concerns are likely to supplant those that are relational in nature among the group.…”