1 / 28

Procedural Justice: Why Trust & Confidence in Police Matter

Procedural Justice: Why Trust & Confidence in Police Matter. By Lorraine Mazerolle University of Queensland SIPR Conference November 14 th 2013. What is Legitimacy Policing?. Legitimacy Policing is crucial for maintaining social order within communities….

neith
Download Presentation

Procedural Justice: Why Trust & Confidence in Police Matter

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Procedural Justice:Why Trust & Confidence in Police Matter By Lorraine Mazerolle University of Queensland SIPR Conference November 14th 2013

  2. What is Legitimacy Policing? Legitimacy Policing is crucial for maintaining social order within communities…. Promotes a sense of public trust in police Facilitates law abiding behavior Fosters compliance and cooperation Increases reporting of crimes to police When police promote feelings of fairness and trust within the community -> increased compliance ->decreased crime and disorder

  3. Legitimacy Policing DIRECT OUTCOMES • Cooperation • Compliance • Satisfaction • Trust PJ PRINCIPLES • Neutrality in Decisions • Citizen Participation • Dignity & Respect • Trustworthy Motives Perceptions of Police Legitimacy Enhanced Police Effectiveness INDIRECT OUTCOMES • Decreases in… • Reoffending • Crime • Social Disorder

  4. Importance of Procedural Justice • Procedural justice considered an important antecedent of police legitimacy and is shaped by the following ingredients: (Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Tyler, 2004; Mastrofski, 2009) • Citizen participation during a police-citizen encounter • Perceived neutrality during the encounter • Police showing dignity and respect during encounter • Trustworthy motives

  5. Systematic Search • Conducted for National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) in 2009 to create ‘bank’ of research literature on “legitimacy policing” • Method • 22 Keywords in 104 combinations (e.g. Police AND ‘Procedural justice’, Police AND Compliance AND Research) • 6 electronic databases and 2 library catalogues • Included literature from 1980 to 2009 • Inter-rater reliability and cross-checks of inclusions • Over 20,500 documents reviewed

  6. Keywords

  7. Searched Databases Proquest Dissertations, Theses, Psychological Journals, Social Science Journals, Legal Module Ovid PsycEXTRA National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Home Office Publications PsycINFO Web of Knowledge National Police Library via the NPIA Cambridge University Library and Dependent Libraries Catalogue • CSA Criminal Justice Abstracts Sociological Abstracts SAGE Criminology, Sociology, Political Science • Informit Australian Federal Police Digest, Australian Criminological Database (CINCH) Criminology • Ingenta Connect • Informaworld (Taylor and Francis journals) • Academic Press • Elsevier • Wiley Interscience (Blackwell Publishing)

  8. Growth in Legitimacy Literature

  9. Systematic Review Reviewed 794 documents for studies: • Year • 1980 to 2009 • Design • Experimental, quasi experimental, quasi experimental interrupted time-series, pre-post test • Statistical data • Descriptive data (means and standard deviations), significance test results (ANOVA, t-tests), p values etc. to enable calculation of effect sizes • Language and geographic region • No exclusions on geographic location • Written in English, French or German • Publication status • Published or unpublished

  10. Interventions Types of interventions had to include: • Training, directive or organizational innovation led by police explicitly designed to encourage, foster or facilitate legitimacy in policing OR • Training, directive or organizational innovation led by police that included at least one of the following core ingredients of procedural justice: • Citizen participation • Perceived neutrality of the authority • Dignity and respect • Trustworthy motives and Legitimacy outcome (e.g. compliance)

  11. Measured Outcomes • Direct Outcomes • Legitimacy • Procedural Justice • Cooperation with police • Trust/Confidence in police • Social ties • Compliance • Satisfaction With or without… • Indirect Outcomes • Reoffending • Crime • Social disorder

  12. Coding Direct Outcomes • Perceived Legitimacy • Procedural Fairness (or perceived procedural fairness), including citizen perceptions of fairness, opportunity to express views before decisions are made, neutrality, decisions based on fact (not personal biases or opinions), trust, respect, dignity and politeness • Willingness to cooperate with police (or perceived willingness to cooperate), including willingness to report crimes or suspicious activity, provide information • Trust/Confidence in police (or perceived trust/confidence in police) • Compliance or intentions to comply • Satisfaction with police

  13. Coding Indirect Outcomes • Reduction in reoffending • Reduction in crime • Reduction in social disorder

  14. 794 Excluded Not police led Not legitimacy / PJ intervention No comparison group 22 Excluded Not able to calculate effect size No comparative data No data on direct outcomes Data from same sample 11 Attrition of Studies

  15. The Studies

  16. Intervention Details • Restorative Justice Conferences • Police facilitated meeting to repair the harm that a specific criminal event has caused • When processes of procedural justice are effectively engaged, people develop values that support long-term compliance with the law. • Community Policing • Emphasis on quantity and quality of police-citizen interaction to reduce crime • Community policing articulated as as a form of procedural justice • Perceptions of legitimacy impact on neighborhood cohesion, feelings of safety and citizen cooperation • Informal contact • Young people who view police as more legitimate will be more willing to assist police • Young people’s willingness to assist police can be enhanced by informal contact

  17. Calculation of Effect Sizes • Random Effects Model for the 5 outcomes, including an adjustment for variation between studies’ methodology and intervention characteristics • Hedges’ adjusted g = Hedges’ d • Used for outcomes that were measured as mean scores per group (e.g. mean reoffending rates in treatment and control groups) • Included data: means and standard deviations, t values • Odds ratios • Used for outcomes that were measured as a percentage (e.g. percentage of people that complied with police directions in treatment and control groups) • Included data: difference in percentage scores, beta values from logistic regression

  18. Legitimacy Overall effect, odds ratio = 1.58, but CI includes 1, therefore no significant effect

  19. Procedural Justice Overall effect, odds ratio = 1.47, CI did not include 1

  20. Compliance and Cooperation Overall effect, odds ratio = 1.62, CI did not include 1

  21. Satisfaction and Confidence Overall effect , odds ratio = 1.75, CI did not include 1

  22. Queensland Community Engagement Trial • University and police partnership to explore legitimacy policing around a specific high volume police-citizen encounter • 3 million Random Breath Test (RBTs) conducted each year by police in Queensland; 400,000 in Metro South each year • High volume and regularity of the RBT police-citizen encounter offers an experimental opportunity to test the impact of procedural justice “active ingredients” on police legitimacy • Site: Metropolitan South Region of Brisbane • Timing: December 2009 to June 2010 • Units of Random Assignment: 60 RBT stationary operations • 21,000 police-citizen contacts

  23. QCET Process Flow Chart RBT OPERATIONS N = 60 21,000 drivers RANDOM ASSIGNMENT CONTROL N = 30 Operations 30 Operations x 400 surveys = 12,000 EXPERIMENTAL N = 30 Operations 30 Operations x 300 surveys = 9,000 NEW INTERVENTION →RBT Script with 4 PJ principles →Community Engagement →Survey of drivers and police STANDARD INTERVENTION →Usual RBT procedure →Survey of drivers and police Random Allocation

  24. Perceptions of Police

  25. Changed Views Survey Question: Has your recent RBT experience changed your view on drinking and driving? χ2 (1) = 4.22, p < .05 Experimental group is 1.25 times more likely to respond “yes” to this question than control group N = 2657

  26. Changed Way Drivers View Police Survey Question: Has your recent RBT experience changed the way you view police? χ2 (1) = 12.14, p < .0001 Experimental group 1.49 times more likely to have responded “yes” to changed views than control group N = 2611

  27. Concluding Comments • Police interventions that set out to treat people “fairly” can • increase citizen compliance, • increase their satisfaction with police • build citizen perceptions of police legitimacy (but evidence of this impact differs according to how legitimacy is measured) • How “legitimacy policing” ultimately influences reoffending is less clear • Very limited type of interventions and number of studies included in the meta analysis – conferences, community policing, and informal contacts • Can POP, hotspots policing, patrols etc increase legitimacy??? • Our Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET) – RCT conducted at the point of random breath test (RBT) traffic stops….amazing results

More Related