Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-lfk5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-22T17:50:30.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Procedural Justice Policing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2019

Edited by
David Weisburd  and
Anthony A. Braga
David Weisburd
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Get access

Summary

The goal of procedural justice policing is to promote long-term crime reduction through creating and maintaining widespread popular legitimacy among the people in policed communities. This trust in the police has a set of desirable consequences. First, it lowers the rate of crime because those who view the law as legitimate are less likely to break it. Second, it transforms the relationship between the police and the public from coercive to consensual, with people more likely to willingly accept and defer to police authority. Third, it promotes voluntary cooperation, facilitating police efforts to manage social order. And finally, it promotes community development by creating a climate of reassurance within which people more willingly engage with others, leading to economic, social, and political vibrancy. This climate helps communities to develop out of the conditions promoting crime, rather than trying to arrest their way forward.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Police Innovation
Contrasting Perspectives
 , pp. 69 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Abuwala, R., & Farole, D. J. (2008). The Effects of the Harlem Housing Court on Tenant Perceptions of Justice. New York: Center for Court Innovation.Google Scholar
Bradford, B. (2014). Policing and social identity: procedural justice, inclusion and cooperation between police and public. Policing & Society, 24, 22–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradford, B., Hohl, K., Jackson, J., & MacQueen, S. (2015). Obeying the rules of the road: Procedural justice, social identity and normative conflict.  Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 3(2), 171–191.Google Scholar
Bradford, B., & Quinton, P. (2014). Self-legitimacy, police culture and support for democratic policing in an English constabulary. British Journal of Criminology, 54, 1023–1046.Google Scholar
Bradford, B., Quinton, P., Myhill, A., & Porter, G. (2014). Why do “the law” comply? Procedural justice, group identification and officer motivations in police organizations. European Journal of Criminology, 11(1), 110–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canada, K. E., & Hiday, V. A. (2014). Procedural justice in mental health court: An investigation of the relation of perception of procedural justice to non-adherence and termination. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 25(3), 321–340.Google Scholar
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D .E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 199–236.Google Scholar
Dai, M., Frank, J., & Sun, I. (2011). Procedural justice during police–citizen encounters. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 159–168.Google Scholar
Damaska, M. (1975). Presentation of evidence and fact finding precision. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 123(5), 1083–1106.Google Scholar
De Angelis, J., & Kupchik, A. (2007). Citizen oversight, procedural justice, and officer perceptions of the complaint investigation process. Policing, 30, 651–671.Google Scholar
De Angelis, J., & Kupchik, A. (2009). Ethnicity, trust, and acceptance of authority among police officers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 273–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donner, C., Maskaly, J., Fridell, L., & Jennings, W. G. (2015). Policing and procedural justice. Policing, 38, 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunford, B., & Devine, D. (1998). Employment at-will and employee discharge: A justice perspective on legal action following termination. Personnel Psychology, 51(4), 903–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earley, P. C., & Lind, E. A. (1987). Procedural justice and participation in task selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1148–1160.Google Scholar
Elliott, I., Thomas, S. D., & Ogloff, J. R. (2011). Procedural justice in contacts with the police: Testing a relational model of authority in a mixed methods study. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 592–610.Google Scholar
Epp, C. R., Maynard-Moody, S., & Haider-Markel, D. P. (2014). Pulled Over: How Police Stops Define Race and Citizenship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Farmer, S. J., Beehr, T. A., & Love, K. G. (2003). Becoming an undercover police officer. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 373–387.Google Scholar
Farole, D. J. (2007). Public Perceptions of New York’s Courts. The NY State Residents Survey. New York: Center for Court Innovation.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B. W., Najaka, S. S., & Rocha, C. M. (2007). How drug treatment courts work. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44(1), 3–35.Google Scholar
Green, B., Thibaut, H., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). The social contagion of gunshot violence in co-offending networks. Journal of American Medical Association Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326–333.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 561–568.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1994). Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(2), 288–297.Google Scholar
Hagan, J., & Hans, V. P. (2017). Procedural justice theory and public policy. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 1–3.Google Scholar
Harris, C., & Worden, R. (2014). The effect of sanctions on police misconduct. Crime and Delinquency, 60, 1258–1288.Google Scholar
Hasisi, B., & Weisburd, D. (2011). Going beyond ascribed identities: The importance of procedural justice in airport security screening in Israel. Law and Society Review, 45, 867–892.Google Scholar
Hayden, R., & Anderson, J. (1979). On the evaluation of procedural systems in laboratory experiments. Law and Human Behavior, 3(1/2), 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinds, L. (2007). Building police–youth relationships: The importance of procedural justice. National Association Youth Justice, 7, 195–209.Google Scholar
Hinds, L., & Murphy, K. (2007). Public satisfaction with police: Using procedural justice to improve police legitimacy. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 40, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlden, P., LaTour, S., Walker, L., & Thibaut, J. (1978) Preference for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 13–30.Google Scholar
Huq, A., Tyler, T. R., & Schulhofer, S. J. (2011). Mechanisms for eliciting cooperation in counterterrorism policing: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 8, 728–761.Google Scholar
Jonathan-Zamir, T., & Weisburd, D. (2013). The effects of security threats on antecedents of police legitimacy: Findings from a quasi-experiment in Israel. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (1993). Procedural justice, attitudes, and subsidiary top management compliance with multinationals’ corporate strategic decisions. Academy of Management, 36(3), 502–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitzmann, K., & Emery, R. (1993). Procedural justice and parents’ satisfaction in a field study of child custody dispute resolution. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 553–567.Google Scholar
Kochel, T. R. (2012). Can police legitimacy promote collective efficacy? Justice Quarterly, 29, 384–419.Google Scholar
LaTour, S. (1978). Determinations of participant and observer satisfaction with adversary and inquisitorial modes of adjudication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1531–1545.Google Scholar
Lee, C. G., Cheesman, F., Rottman, D., Swaner, R., Lambson, S., Rempel, M., & Curtis, R. (2014). A Community Court Grows in Brooklyn: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Red Hook Community Justice Center Final Report. National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K., Greenberg, M., and Willis, R. (eds.), Social Exchange (pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Lind, E. A., Erickson, B. E., Friedland, N., & Dickenberger, M. (1978). Reactions to procedural models for adjudicative conflict resolution: A cross-national study. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 318–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A., Greenberg, J., Scott, K., & Welchans, T. D. (2000). The winding road from employee to complainant: Situational and psychological determinants of wrongful-termination claims. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 557–590.Google Scholar
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & de Vera Park, M. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A., Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1973). Discovery and presentation of evidence in adversary and non-adversary proceedings. Michigan Law Review, 71, 1129–1144.Google Scholar
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Lowrey, B., Maguire, E., & Bennett, R. (2016). Testing the effects of procedural justice and overaccommodation in traffic stops: A randomized experiment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(10), 1430–1449.Google Scholar
Ma, B., Liu, S., & Liu, D. (2014). The impact of organizational identification on the relationship between procedural justice and employee work outcomes. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(3), 437–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCoun, R. (2005). Voice, control, and belonging: The double-edged sword of procedural fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences, 1, 171–201.Google Scholar
MacCoun, R. J., Lind, E. A., Hensler, D. R., Bryant, D. L., & Ebener, P. A. (1988). Alternative Adjudication. Santa Monica, CA. Rand.Google Scholar
MacQueen, S., & Bradford, B. (2015), Enhancing public trust and police legitimacy during road traffic encounters: Results from a randomised controlled trial in Scotland. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 419–443.Google Scholar
Mastrofski, S., Snipes, B., & Supina, A. E. (1996). Compliance on demand: The public’s response to specific police requests. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 33, 269–305.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, 33–64.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Davis, J., Sargeant, E., & Dunning, M. (2013). Procedural justice and police legitimacy. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9, 245–274.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Antrobus, E., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51, 1–31.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Sargeant, E., Cherney, A., Bennett, S., Murphy, K., Antrobus, E., & Martin, P. (2014). Procedural Justice and Legitimacy in Policing. Springer.Google Scholar
Meares, T. (2014). The law and social science of stop and frisk. American Review of Law and Social Sciences, 10, 335–342.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2001). Disrespect and the experience of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muir, W Jr. (1977). Police: Streetcorner Politicians. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. (2004). Procedural justice, shame and tax compliance. Working paper 50. Center for Tax System Integrity. Australian National University. Canberra.Google Scholar
Myhill, A., & Bradford, B. (2012). Can police enhance confidence in improving quality of service? Policing and Society, 22, 397–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagin, D. S., & Telep, C. W. (2017). Procedural justice and legal compliance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 5–28.Google Scholar
Petrosino, A., Guckenburg, S., & Turpin-Petrosino, C. (2010) Formal System Processing of Juveniles: Effects on Delinquency. Oslo, Norway: Campbell Collaboration.Google Scholar
PEW. Polls, 11/ 26/2014.Google Scholar
PEW. Polls, 8/18/2014.Google Scholar
Poythress, N. (1994). Procedural preferences, perceptions of fairness, and compliance with outcomes: A study of alternatives to the standard adversary trial procedure. Law and Human Behavior, 18(4), 361–376.Google Scholar
President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (Katzenbach Commission). (1967). US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Reicher, S., Stott, C., Cronin, P., & Adang, O. (2004). An integrated approach to crowd psychology and public order policing. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 27(4), 558–572.Google Scholar
Reisig, M. D., Mays, R. D., & Telep, C. W. (2017). The effects of procedural injustice during police-citizen encounters: A factorial vignette study. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14, 49–58.Google Scholar
Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (Kerner Commission). (1968). New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Robbins, J., Ford, M. T., & Tetrick, L. E. (2012). Perceived unfairness and employee health: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 235–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sahin, N., Braga, A., Apel, R., & Brunson, R. (2016). The impact of procedurally-just policing on citizen perceptions of police during traffic stops: The Adana Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1–26.Google Scholar
Schneider, B. (January 15, 2015). Do Americans trust their cops to be fair and just? New poll contains surprises. Reuters US edition.Google Scholar
Sierra-Arevalo, M., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Social Networks and Gang Violence Reduction. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 373–393.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taxman, F. S., & Gordon, J. A. (2009). Do fairness and equity matter? An examination of organizational justice among correctional officers in adult prisons. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 695–711.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J., Walker, L., LaTour, S., & Houlden, P. (1974). Procedural justice as fairness. Stanford Law Review, 26, 1271–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thibaut, J., Walker, L., & Lind., E. A. (1972). Adversary presentation and bias in legal decision-making. Harvard Law Review, 86, 386–401.Google Scholar
Tor, A., Gazal-Ayal, O., & Garcia, S. M. (2010). Fairness and the willingness to accept plea bargain offers. Journal of Experimental Legal Studies, 7, 97–116.Google Scholar
Trinkner, R., Tyler, T. R., & Goff, P. A. (2016). Justice from within: The relations between a procedurally just organizational climate and police organizational efficiency, endorsement of democratic policing, and officer well-being. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 22, 158–172.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22, 103–135.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., (2001). Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and minority group members want from the law and legal institutions? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 215–235.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2006a). Why People Obey the Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2006b). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 375–400.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2011). Why People Cooperate: The Role of Social Motivations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2016). Police contact and legitimacy. Unpublished manuscript, Yale Law School.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2017a). Can the police enhance their popular legitimacy through their conduct? University of Illinois Law Review, 2017, 1971–2008.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2017b). From harm reduction to community engagement: Redefining the goals of American policing in the twenty-first century. Northwestern University Law Review, 111, 1537–1564.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2017c). Procedural justice and policing: A rush to judgment. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. (2000). Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., Callahan, P. E., & Frost, J. (2007). Armed, and dangerous (?): Motivating rule adherence among agents of social control. Law & Society Review, 41(2), 457–492.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and cooperation: Why do people help the police fight crime in their communities? Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 6, 230–274.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., Fagan, J., & Geller, A. (2014). Street stops and police legitimacy. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11(4), 751–785.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, 75–109.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the Law. Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: 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, 78–95.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In Zanna, M. (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 25, pp. 115–191). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Vainio, A. (2011). Why are forest owners satisfied with forest police decisions? Legitimacy, procedural justice, and perceived uncertainty. Social Justice Research, 24, 239.Google Scholar
Wales, H. W., Virginia, A., & Bradley, R. (2010). Procedural justice and the mental health court judge’s role in reducing recidivism. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 265–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, L., LaTour, S., Lind, A., & Thibaut, J. (1974). Reactions of participants and observers to modes of adjudication. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4, 295–310.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., & Majmundar, M. K. (2018). Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities. National Academies of Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wemmers, J. M. (1996). Victims in the criminal justice system: A study into the treatment of victims and its effect on their attitudes and behavior (Doctoral dissertation).Google Scholar
Wemmers, J. M. (2013). Victims’ experiences in the criminal justice system and their recovery from crime. International Review of Victimology, 19, 221–233.Google Scholar
Wenzel, M. (2002). The impact of outcome orientation and justice concerns on tax compliance: The role of taxpayers’ identity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 629–645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolfe, S. E., Nix, J., Kaminski, R., & Rojek, J. (2016). Is the effect of procedural justice on police legitimacy invariant? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32, 253–282.Google Scholar
Wolfe, S. E., & Piquero, A. R. (2011). Organizational justice and police misconduct. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 332–353.Google Scholar
Worden, R. E., & McLean, S. J. (2014). Assessing Police Performance in Citizen Encounters: Police Legitimacy and Management Accountability. Albany, NY: John Finn Institute for Public Safety.Google Scholar
Worden, R. E., & McLean, S. J. (2016). Measuring, managing, and enhancing procedural justice in policing. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29(2), 149–171.Google Scholar

References

ACLU of Illinois (2015). Stop and Frisk in Chicago.Google Scholar
Baker, A. (2010). Selling the “Stop” in “Stop and Frisk,” The New York Times, Sept. 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Beetham, D. (1991). The Legitimation of Power. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bell, M. (2017) Police reform & the dismantling of legal estrangement. Yale Law Journal, 126, 2054–2150.Google Scholar
Bittner, E. (1990). Aspects of Police Work. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, P. (2010). Let’s Get Free: A Hip Hop Theory of Justice. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Butler, P. (2017). Chokehold: Policing Black Men. New York, The New Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-Based Policy: Doing It Better. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cera, J., & Coleman, A. (n.d.). City of Milwaukee Citizen Satisfaction Survey, Center for Urban Initiatives and Research.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., & Sabel, C. (1997). Directly deliberative polyarchy. European Law Journal, 3, 313–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, K. C. (1975). Police Discretion. St. Paul: West Publishing.Google Scholar
Davis v. New York, 10 Civ. 0699 (S.D.N.Y.) (SAS) (2015). Stipulation of Settlement and Order.Google Scholar
Dorf, M., & Sabel, C. (1998). A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Colombia Law Review, 98, 267–473.Google Scholar
Epp, C., Maynard-Moody, S., & Haider-Markel, D. (2014). Pulled Over: How Police Stops Define Race and Citizenship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, C. (2014). Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: The New Orleans Case Study. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Friedman, B. (2017). Unwarranted: Policing without Permission. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.Google Scholar
Futterman, C., Hunt, C., & Kalven, J. (2016). Youth/police encounters on Chicago’s South Side: Acknowledging the realities. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 125–211.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D., Wakeling, S., & Crandall, V. (2015). Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: Using Training as a Foundation for Strengthening Police-Community Relationships. Oakland: California Partnership for Safe Communities.Google Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1967). Police policy formulation: A proposal for improving police performance. Michigan Law Review, 65, 1123–46.Google Scholar
Gould, J., & Mastrofski, S. (2004) Suspect searches: Assessing police behavior. Criminology & Public Policy, 3, 315–362.Google Scholar
Hager, E. (2017). The seismic change in police interrogations. The Marshall Project, March 7, 2017.Google Scholar
Harmon, R. (2012). The problem of policing. Michigan Law Review, 110, 768–818.Google Scholar
Harmon, R. (2016). Why arrest? Michigan Law Review, 115, 307–64.Google Scholar
Ignatieff, M. (1979). Police and the people: The birth of Mr. Peel’s “Blue Locusts.” New Society, 443–446.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. (1999). Broken Windows and Police Discretion. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. (2008). Deterrence and Crime Prevention. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
King, M. L. Jr. (1964). Letter from a Birmingham Jail. In Why We Can’t Wait. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. (1988). The rhetoric of community policing. In Greene, J. & Mastrofski, S. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality (pp. 239–258). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. (1996). A theory of excessive force and its control. In Geller, W. & Toch, H. (eds.), Police Violence: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force (pp. 1–22). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kunard, L., & Moe, C. (2015). Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement: An Overview. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
Lachman, P., La Vigne, N., & Matthews, A. (2012). Examining law enforcement use of pedestrian stops and searches. In La Vigne, N., Lachman, P., Matthews, A., & Neusteter, S. R. (eds.), Key Issues in the Police Use of Pedestrian Stops and Searches (pp. 1–11). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Larmore, C. (1987). Patterns of Moral Complexity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lind, A., & Tyler, T. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
MacQueen, S., & Bradford, B. (2015). Enhancing public trust and police legitimacy during road traffic encounters: Results from a randomized controlled trial in Scotland. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 419–443.Google Scholar
Mastrofski, S., Snipes, J., & Supina, A. (1996). Compliance on demand: The public’s response to specific police requests. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33, 269–305.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler, T. (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51, 33–63.Google Scholar
McCarthy, G. (2012). Using stop and frisk powers responsibly. In La Vigne, N., Lachman, P., Matthews, A., & Neusteter, S. R. (eds.), Key Issues in the Police Use of Pedestrian Stops and Searches (pp. 37–43). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Meares, T. (2015). Rightful Policing. New Perspectives in Policing Bulletin. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 2015.Google Scholar
Meares, T., Tyler, T., & Gardener, J. (2015). Lawful or fair? How cops and laypeople perceive good policing. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 105, 297–344.Google Scholar
Meares, T. (2017). This land is my land? Harvard Law Review, 130, 1877–1900.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1859/1978). On Liberty. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Miller, E. (2016). Encountering resistance: Contesting policing and procedural justice, University Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 295–368.Google Scholar
Miller, W. (1977). Cops and Bobbies: Police Authority in New York and London, 1830–1870. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miller, W. (1991). Revenuers and Moonshiners: Enforcing Federal Liquor Law in the Mountain South, 1865–1900. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Milwaukee Police. (2017). Milwaukee Police Chief Refutes Claims Made in Lawsuit, Feb. 22, www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mVHfR-aF70&feature=youtu.be.Google Scholar
Nagin, D., & Telep, C. (2017). Procedural justice and legal compliance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 5–28.Google Scholar
Palmer, S. (1988). Police and Protest in England and Ireland, 1780–1850. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Phippen, J. W. (2016). What’s wrong with the police department in Calexico, California? The Atlantic, May 19.Google Scholar
Pitkin, H. (1973). Wittgenstein and Justice. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
Ramos, E. (2013). Poor data keeps Chicago’s stop and frisk hidden from scrutiny, WBEZ News, September 12, 2013.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1993). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rein, M., & Winship, C. (1999). The dangers of strong causal reasoning. Society, 36, 38–46.Google Scholar
Reisig, M., Bratton, J., & Gertz, M. (2007). The construct validity and refinement of process-based policing measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1005–1028.Google Scholar
Reith, C. (1943). The British Police and the Democratic Ideal. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schauer, F. (2015). The Force of Law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, S., Tyler, T., & Huq, A. (2011). American policing at a crossroads: Unsustainable policies and the procedural justice alternative. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 101, 335–374.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. (2017). Stop-and-frisk and trust in police in Chicago. In Oberwittler, D. & Roché, S. (eds.), Police-Citizen Relations: A Comparative Investigation of Sources and Impediments of Legitimacy around the World (pp. 247–265). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. (2017). La méthode du « stop-and-frisk » en tant que stratégie organisationnelle : leçons tirées à partir des exemples des villes de New York et Chicago. Stop and frisk as an organizational strategy: Lessons from New York and Chicago. Cahiers de la Sécurité et de la Justice, 40, 54–62.Google Scholar
Skogan, W., Van Craen, M., & Hennessy, C. (2015). Training police for procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, R. (1975). The plague of blue locusts: Police reform and popular resistance in Northern England, 1840–57. International Review of Social History, 20, 61–90.Google Scholar
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law and Society Review, 37, 513–548.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. (1995). Incompletely theorized agreements. Harvard Law Review, 108, 1733–1772.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. (2016). The Ethics of Influence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tankebe, J. (2009). Public Cooperation with the Police in Ghana: Does Procedural Fairness Matter? Criminology, 47, 1265–1293.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. 2004. Order maintenance reconsidered. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94, 381–414.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2015a). Olmsted’s police. Law and History Review, 33, 577–620.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2015b). Perils of value neutrality. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 44, 317–352.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2016). Channeling police discretion: The hidden potential of focused deterrence. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 533–578.Google Scholar
Tyler, T.(2000). Multiculturalism and the willingness of citizens to defer to law and to legal authorities. Law and Social Inquiry, 25, 983–1019.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2006). Why People Obey the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., ed. (2007). Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2014). What are legitimacy and procedural justice in policing? and why are they becoming key elements of police leadership? In Fischer, C. (ed.), Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: A New Element of Police Leadership. Washington: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2016). Understanding the force of law, Tulsa Law Review, 51, 507–519.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2017). Procedural justice and policing: A rush to judgment?, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 29–53.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Blader, S. (2000). Cooperation in Groups. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the Law. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., Fagan, J., & Geller, A. (2014). Street stops and police legitimacy. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11, 751–785.Google Scholar
United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (2014). Investigation of the Newark Police Department, July 22.Google Scholar
van den Bos, K., Lind, A., & Wilke, H. (2001). The psychology of procedural and distributive justice viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic theory. In Cropanzano, R. (ed.), Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice (vol. 2, pp. 49–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Vitale, A. (2017). The myth of liberal policing, The New Inquiry, April 5.Google Scholar
Walker, S., & Archbold, C. (2014). The New World of Police Accountability. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., and Majmundar, M. K., eds. (2018). Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Wildeboer, R. (2013). 8,000 Chicago cops now a little friendlier. WBEZ-News, Dec. 21.Google Scholar
Worden, R., & McLean, S. (2017). The Mirage of Police Reform: Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×