Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London.
Department of Methodology, LSE.
Law Hum Behav. 2022 Feb;46(1):1-14. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000465. Epub 2021 Dec 23.
We conducted an exploratory study testing procedural justice theory with a novel population. We assessed the extent to which police procedural justice, effectiveness, legitimacy, and perceived risk of sanction predict compliance with the law among people experiencing homelessness.
We did not develop formal a priori hypotheses but examined five general research questions. First, are there positive associations between police procedural justice, police legitimacy, and compliance? Second, do procedural justice and legitimacy differentially predict compliance, depending on the particular type of offending? Third, are there positive associations between police effectiveness, perceived risk of sanction, and compliance? Fourth, does the perceived risk of sanction differentially predict compliance, depending on the particular type of offending? And fifth, are there positive associations between moral judgments about different offending behaviors and compliance?
Two hundred people (87% male, 49% aged 45-64, 37% White British) experiencing homelessness on the streets of an inner London borough completed a survey that included measures of procedural justice, police legitimacy, perceived risk of sanction, morality, and compliance with the law.
Procedural justice and police legitimacy were only weakly (and not significantly) associated with any of the three types of compliance (compliance with laws prohibiting low-level crimes, behaviors specific to the street population, and high-level crimes). Police effectiveness positively predicted compliance via perceived risk of sanction, but only for street-population-specific offenses that can be important for survival on the streets, such as begging and sleeping in certain localities. Morality was positively associated with all three types of compliance behaviors. Supplementary analyses suggested a small amount of instability in the results, however, possibly because of the relatively small sample size.
The lack of relevant relational connections to legal authority may explain why procedural fairness and perceptions of police legitimacy were not particularly important predictors of compliance in this context. More research is needed into the types of marginalized communities for whom structural factors of alienation and lack of access to resources may serve to reduce normative group connections. Future work should test whether the need to survive on the streets leads people to discount some social and relational constraints to behavior, making people (almost by definition) more instrumental in relation to law and law enforcement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
我们进行了一项探索性研究,用一种新的人群来检验程序正义理论。我们评估了警察程序正义、警察效力、合法性和对制裁风险的感知在无家可归者中对遵守法律的影响程度。
我们没有制定正式的先验假设,但考察了五个一般研究问题。首先,警察程序正义、警察合法性与遵守之间是否存在正相关关系?其次,程序正义和合法性是否根据特定的犯罪类型不同,对遵守产生不同的预测作用?第三,警察效力和对制裁风险的感知与遵守之间是否存在正相关关系?第四,制裁风险是否根据特定的犯罪类型不同,对遵守产生不同的预测作用?第五,对不同犯罪行为的道德判断与遵守之间是否存在正相关关系?
200 名在伦敦市中心一个内城区街头无家可归的人(87%为男性,49%年龄在 45-64 岁之间,37%为白种英国人)完成了一项调查,其中包括程序正义、警察合法性、对制裁风险的感知、道德和对法律的遵守等方面的衡量。
程序正义和警察合法性仅与三种类型的遵守行为(遵守禁止低级犯罪的法律、街头人群特有的行为和高级犯罪)中的任何一种都有微弱(且无统计学意义)的关联。警察效力通过对制裁风险的感知对遵守产生积极影响,但仅对那些对街头生存至关重要的街头人群特有的违法行为有影响,例如乞讨和在特定地点睡觉。道德与所有三种类型的遵守行为都呈正相关。然而,补充分析表明,结果存在一定程度的不稳定性,这可能是由于样本量相对较小。
对法律权威缺乏相关的关系联系可能解释了为什么在这种情况下,程序公正性和对警察合法性的看法不是特别重要的遵守预测因素。需要对那些边缘化社区进行更多的研究,这些社区的结构性因素可能导致疏远和缺乏获取资源的机会,从而减少规范群体的联系。未来的工作应该测试在街头生存的需要是否会导致人们对某些社会和关系约束的忽视,从而使人们(几乎可以定义为)在与法律和执法相关的方面更加工具化。