Status influences on perceptions of procedural justice: a test of the group value model among intimate partner violence arrestees

Maxwell, Christopher D.; Moore, Alice E.; Fontaine, Jocelyn; Smith, Jaclyn

doi:10.1080/01924036.2019.1575253

Cited by 5 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance of distributive fairness, and its relationship with procedural fairness, found here is supported by research from McLean (2018, 2019 ) and Maxwell et al . (2020) .…”

Section: The Role Of Distributive and Procedural (In)justice In (Non-supporting

confidence: 84%

Policing Social Distancing: Gaining and Maintaining Compliance in the Age of Coronavirus

Grace

2020

Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on motivational posturing theory (MPT) and procedural justice theory (PJT), this article makes recommendations for how best to secure compliance with social distancing regulations. Applying those theories to—mostly observational—data from a study on the use and impact of penalty notices for disorder, the influences on cooperation during police–citizen encounters are explored. Whilst focusing on the English data/regulations, as both MPT and PJT have been tested internationally, the conclusions have relevance beyond these shores. The article proposes a sixth posture—compulsion, a form of resistant compliance—to the five set out by MPT. Focusing attention not just on whether compliance is achieved but how recognizes the risk to future legitimacy posed by only achieving compliance through coercion or the threat thereof. Lessons from the research are applied to policing social distancing, with regards to: securing compliance during interactions, self-regulation and enforcement action, and how to preserve police legitimacy.

show abstract

“…The importance of distributive fairness, and its relationship with procedural fairness, found here is supported by research from McLean (2018, 2019 ) and Maxwell et al . (2020) .…”

Section: The Role Of Distributive and Procedural (In)justice In (Non-supporting

confidence: 84%

Policing Social Distancing: Gaining and Maintaining Compliance in the Age of Coronavirus

Grace

2020

Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subsequent work has provided nuance to this broad argument, and has identified a wide variety of more or less discrete constructs linked via a smaller but still noteworthy variety of mechanisms. Thus, although the fairness of processes used by law enforcement is typically thought of as the critical element of both personal and vicarious interactions with the police, evaluations of effectiveness (Tankebe, 2009;Wietzer & Tuch, 2005), the fairness of outcomes (McLean, 2019;Reisig, Bratton, & Gertz, 2007), and misconduct (Chermak, McGarrell, & Gruenewald, 2006;Dowler, 2003) also matter for reasons that may include group value, group engagement, and uncertainty management (e.g., Maxwell, Moore, Fontaine, & Smith, 2020;Murphy, Cherney, & Teston, 2019;Sargeant, Davoren, & Murphy, 2020). To integrate this scholarship, Hamm et al (2017) proposed the Integrated Framework of (Audience) Legitimacy which uses a stage model to outline a process by which the objective context influences acquiescence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

(Re)Organizing legitimacy theory

Hamm

Wolfe

Cavanagh

et al. 2022

Legal Criminol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Despite a common conceptual root, research applying legitimacy theory addresses any number of more or less distinct behaviours, attitudes, and processes. Although this variety in approaches has complicated theoretical development, we argue that it is critical to addressing the breadth of the construct. To address this state of affairs, we offer the Concentric Diagram of Legitimacy as an organizing tool for the literature. The diagram roots itself in the dialogue of legitimacy, and argues that legitimacy theory is fundamentally comprised of five key theoretical propositions. Proposition 1 addresses the link between authority and acquiescence directly while the remaining propositions link organizational support (Proposition 2) and public approval (Proposition 3) with authority, and interactions (Proposition 4) and the social context (Proposition 5) with acquiescence.

show abstract

“…Procedural justice may not necessarily create more positive interactions or compliance with authorities amongst socially and culturally marginalised (perpetrator) populations who are frequently subject to over-policing (Murphy, 2013). However, existing research evidence suggests that positive police–citizen encounters can shape compliance amongst perpetrators, regardless of social status (Maxwell et al., 2019) or cultural heritage (Murphy & Mazerolle, 2018). While this study does not directly test legitimacy perceptions, overall findings spotlight a need for future research to better understand the role and applicability of procedural justice across diverse victim and perpetrator populations.…”

Section: Implications and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Komter, 2019). Some research has acknowledged that factors beyond citizen–police encounters may moderate the impact of procedural justice in predicting future behaviour (Huo, 2003; Maxwell et al., 2019). However, most procedural justice studies do not examine its role in the context of intersectionality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, this study takes one step back to identify the factors associated with positive and negative perceptions of procedural justice in DFV-specific court proceedings. Identifying these factors is important given the significant value placed on procedural justice to increase victim confidence and reduce recidivism in other research (Maxwell et al., 2019; Murphy & Barkworth, 2014; Paternoster et al., 1997). Elliott et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

General and specific perceptions of procedural justice: Factors associated with perceptions of police and court responses to domestic and family violence

Meyer

Williamson

2020

Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving criminal justice responses to domestic and family violence is a key focus within many policy and practice reforms. The efficacy of police and court responses to domestic and family violence is central because of the role of police as first responders and courts in issuing protection orders, imposing sanctions and ensuring perpetrator cooperation and accountability. To promote compliance and satisfaction with criminal justice outcomes, a large body of research points to the role of procedural justice. This study draws on survey and administrative data from an Australian jurisdiction to examine perceptions of procedural justice in specific domestic and family violence-related encounters. Findings and implications for policy and practice are discussed.

show abstract

Status influences on perceptions of procedural justice: a test of the group value model among intimate partner violence arrestees

Cited by 5 publications

References 81 publications

Policing Social Distancing: Gaining and Maintaining Compliance in the Age of Coronavirus

Policing Social Distancing: Gaining and Maintaining Compliance in the Age of Coronavirus

(Re)Organizing legitimacy theory

General and specific perceptions of procedural justice: Factors associated with perceptions of police and court responses to domestic and family violence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About