IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jcjust/v39yi1p67-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of low self-control on perceived police legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Wolfe, Scott E.

Abstract

Objective The process-based model has influenced policing research for a number of years, but the role of individual differences on procedural justice judgments and perceived police legitimacy has received limited attention. The current study fills a void in the literature by examining the effect of low self-control on individuals' procedural justice judgments and perceptions of police legitimacy.Materials and Methods The study uses a sample of young adults and estimates a series of OLS regression models to determine the effect of low self-control on the process-based model of policing.Results The findings demonstrate that low self-control is associated with unfavorable procedural justice judgments. In turn, procedural justice mediates the effect of low self-control on perceived police legitimacy. Low self-control, however, is also shown to condition the effect of procedural justice on legitimacy. Specifically, the effect of procedural justice on legitimacy becomes weaker with reduced levels of self-control.Conclusions These findings suggest that studies should account for self-control in process-based policing research and police policy should consider the impact of individual differences when implementing process-based strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolfe, Scott E., 2011. "The effect of low self-control on perceived police legitimacy," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 67-74, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jcjust:v:39:y::i:1:p:67-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047-2352(10)00195-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. DeLisi, Matt & Vaughn, Michael G., 2014. "Foundation for a temperament-based theory of antisocial behavior and criminal justice system involvement," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 10-25.
    2. Augustyn, Megan Bears & Ray, James V., 2016. "Psychopathy and perceptions of procedural justice," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 170-183.
    3. Ferdik, Frank V., 2014. "The influence of strain on law enforcement legitimacy evaluations," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 443-451.
    4. Gau, Jacinta M., 2011. "The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: An Empirical Test of Core Theoretical Propositions," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 489-498.
    5. Peacock, Robert P., 2022. "The generalizability of public judgments of procedural justice across police interaction and demographic variables," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan, 2022. "Trust in the Police during the Pro-Democracy Movement in Hong Kong: Psychosocial Factors of Perceived Procedural and Distributive Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    7. Gau, Jacinta M. & Corsaro, Nicholas & Stewart, Eric A. & Brunson, Rod K., 2012. "Examining macro-level impacts on procedural justice and police legitimacy," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 333-343.
    8. Colin Bolger, P. & Walters, Glenn D., 2019. "The relationship between police procedural justice, police legitimacy, and people's willingness to cooperate with law enforcement: A meta-analysis," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 93-99.
    9. Jackson, Dylan B. & Testa, Alexander & Vaughn, Michael G., 2020. "Low self-control and the adolescent police stop: Intrusiveness, emotional response, and psychological well-being," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    10. Moule, Richard K. & Burruss, George W. & Gifford, Faith E. & Parry, Megan M. & Fox, Bryanna, 2019. "Legal socialization and subcultural norms: Examining linkages between perceptions of procedural justice, legal cynicism, and the code of the street," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 26-39.
    11. Harris, Jacob W. & Jones, Melissa S., 2020. "Shaping youths' perceptions and attitudes toward the police: Differences in direct and vicarious encounters with police," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jcjust:v:39:y::i:1:p:67-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jcrimjus .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.